Is the message the medium? How politicians’ Twitter blunders affect perceived authenticity of Twitter communication

As politicians worldwide increasingly adopt social media as a channel for (ostensibly) direct communication with the public, much scholarly attention has been devoted to examining when and how carefully designed social media campaigns advance politicians’ electoral and policy goals. However, it is increasingly common to witness politicians’ seemingly counter-productive social media blunders, with little empirical research on their effects. Two experiments investigated how politicians’ Twitter blunders might affect individuals’ beliefs about the nature of Twitter communication, and subsequently, their reactions to other politicians’ tweets. In Study 1 (n = 450), those who read politicians’ real-life Twitter blunders rated politicians’ general Twitter communication to be more authentic than those who read about politicians’ typical Twitter usage. Heightened authenticity of Twitter communication, in turn, induced more positive reactions to a fictitious politician’s tweets. Such effects, however, were more likely for people who attributed the blunders to the medium, rather than the involved politicians’ personal dispositions. Study 2 (n = 646) replicated and extended Study 1, employing perceived authenticity of Twitter communication in general. Results suggest that politicians’ social media blunders may ironically further the effectiveness of social media campaigns by creating the look and feel of authentic communication.