How Dutch Politicians use Facebook for elections

18

October

2016

No ratings yet.

Who thinks advertising on Facebook is only useful for firms has it wrong: nowadays politicians are exploring the benefits of social media-advertising more and more. Though 2017 will be the year of Dutch elections, now it is already clear that the use of social media will become extremely important. This blog will give you a few examples of how Dutch politicians are using Facebook to connect effectively with their target groups.

If you didn’t know it yet: Facebook knows quite some things about you ;). This information can be used to adjust a message for its target group. GroenLinks (Dutch political party ed.), for instance, is using a different starting point of their video, depending on the gender of the person that views it. This is because research has shown that women tend to watch the video more frequently if the party leader of GroenLinks, Jesse Klaver, is in the center of the first shot. Men, on the other hand, like it more when they see Klaver into discussion with another politician. Hence, the starting point of the video has been adjusted to the gender of the viewer.

But political parties use Facebook for more than only advertising. When Diederik Samson (current party leader of PVDA ed.) announced his candidacy for the party leadership position, he did this via Facebook only. The traditional media followed a day later. In this way, politicians can completely determine the image they want to transmit: no difficult questions about other topics or the risk that you get wrongly cited. This will be the new norm for political parties during coming elections: decide yourself what message you would like to convey, to which group and via which medium. After the most recent political debate, this resulted in many campaign teams uploading asap parts of the debate, all in which their own political leader was the star of the shot, of course.

Another trend in politics regarding social media is the use of micro-campaigns: a small campaign, aimed very specially on niches of voters. Your neighbor will probably see a completely different video (of the same political party) than you do, all based on preferences Facebook ‘knows’ about you. Though this is still a relatively new concept in Dutch politics, its already quite normal in the US, as the New York Times is asking US voters to share the advertisements they see on their newsfeed. They do this to somewhat get an overview of the different campaigns, which otherwise would remain underneath the radar.

I’m very curious what I will get to see on my own newsfeed the coming months! Are you?

Source:
http://www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/op-facebook-is-de-verkiezingsstrijd-al-ontbrand~a4387173/

Please rate this

Instagram and Snapchat Stories: how much copying should be allowed?

3

October

2016

No ratings yet.

Should the intellectual property law also protect ideas?
A bit more than a month ago, photo-sharing social platform Instagram has launched a new feature for their application, called Instagram Stories (Nytimes.com, 2016). With this feature, it is possible to post a photo or a 10-seconds video for only twenty four hours. After this period of time, the content will be permanently deleted.

One can say a lot about this new feature, except one thing: that its original. This idea of 24-hour stories is already being used by social media application Snapchat, with their Snapchat Stories. What is interesting is that Instagram didn’t even take a little bit of effort to disguise their direct copying. Kevin Systrom, CEO of Instagram even literally stated in an interview that Snapchat “deserves all the credit” (Techcrunch.com,2016).

With this straight-forward copying, the immediate question arises whether this action of Instagram is legally allowed. It is important to realize that an idea on its own is not protected by copyright and trademark laws. As long as the expression of an idea is different, one is allowed to use other’s ideas without restrictions. Hence, because of its deviated interface, Instagram didn’t do anything wrong, legally speaking. Duke law professor Arti Rai, states that it is possible to patent an idea. However, those ideas “cannot be too abstract”. This is the problem with Snapchat, as it has patented its own execution of ‘ephemeral message galleries’, but cannot really patent its concept of Snapchat Stories. Ideas can be protected by patents as well, but those ideas cannot be too abstract. Moreover, if the expression of an idea is sufficiently different, one is legally allowed to use this idea, which is what happened with Snapchat Stories and Instagram Stories.

It has to be mentioned, though, that copying in the technology sector is nothing new. Think about Twitter’s hashtags and Facebook’s newsfeed, which are currently normal practice in almost every social media application (Volkskrant.nl, 2016).

My question to you is: what do you think about the current state of copyright protection in the techsector? Do you think ideas should be more easily (and broadly) protected? Where would you draw the line between what’s a common format and what’s intellectual property? Leave your comments below!

 

Sources:
-The New York Times, August 2016 (M. Isaac)

– Tech Crunch, August 2016 (J. Constine)

Instagram CEO on Stories: Snapchat deserves all the credit

-De Volkskrant, August 2016 (H. van Lier)

http://www.volkskrant.nl/media/instagrams-schaamteloze-kopie-van-snapchat-gek-of-geniaal~a4351070/

Please rate this