First Thing, Daily Maverick's flagship newsletter

Join the 230 000 South Africans who read First Thing newsletter.

We'd like our readers to start paying for Daily Maverick

More specifically, we'd like those who can afford to pay to start paying. What it comes down to is whether or not you value Daily Maverick. Think of us in terms of your daily cappuccino from your favourite coffee shop. It costs around R35. That’s R1,050 per month on frothy milk. Don’t get us wrong, we’re almost exclusively fuelled by coffee. BUT maybe R200 of that R1,050 could go to the journalism that’s fighting for the country?

We don’t dictate how much we’d like our readers to contribute. After all, how much you value our work is subjective (and frankly, every amount helps). At R200, you get it back in Uber Eats and ride vouchers every month, but that’s just a suggestion. A little less than a week’s worth of cappuccinos.

We can't survive on hope and our own determination. Our country is going to be considerably worse off if we don’t have a strong, sustainable news media. If you’re rejigging your budgets, and it comes to choosing between frothy milk and Daily Maverick, we hope you might reconsider that cappuccino.

We need your help. And we’re not ashamed to ask for it.

Our mission is to Defend Truth. Join Maverick Insider.

Support Daily Maverick→
Payment options

Twitter not reliable predictor of election outcomes: st...

Newsdeck

Newsdeck

Twitter not reliable predictor of election outcomes: study

By Reuters
17 Feb 2016 0

In politics, it is said that all press is good press. But that does not necessarily apply to tweets, according to a study released this week.

In fact, it is difficult to predict the outcome of an election based on the amount of Twitter buzz a candidate gets, according to the study from the Social Science Computer Review.

The study, whose relevance to this year’s U.S. election was sharply disputed by Twitter, focused on the 2013 German federal election and found that Twitter data was a more accurate measure of the level of interest in candidates rather than the level of support they will receive.

“Negative events, such as political scandals, as well as positively evaluated events, such as accomplishments, can (both)underlie attention for a party or candidate,” said the study, published on Monday.

Yet scandals and accomplishments affect the level of support for a candidate in completely different ways.

“The analysis does not support the simple ‘more tweets, more votes’ formula,” the study found.

For example, a video clip of a candidate’s campaign gaffe broadcast on the nightly news might lead to a spike in Twitter attention, but likely not result in more overall political support, according to the study.

“The daily volume of Twitter messages referring to candidates or parties fluctuates heavily depending on the events of the day – such as televised leaders’ debates, high-profile interviews with candidates – or the coverage of political controversies and scandals,” the study said.

The data also showed that Twitter users did not necessarily reflect the demographics of the population as a whole. In the United States, social media platforms like Twitter and Yik Yak are often more popular among millennial voters.

A Twitter spokesman argued the study was not relevant to the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

“I’d advise passing the next time someone sends along German Twitter data from three years ago in the context of the 2016 U.S. election,” said Nick Pacilio, a spokesman for the social media site’s government and news department.

Pacilio cited a Time magazine website report that showed Twitter chatter favored the winning candidates, Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump, in the Iowa caucuses this month.

Republican and Democratic contenders are vying for their parties’ nominations for the Nov. 8 election to succeed President Barack Obama.

(Reporting by Amy Tennery; Editing by Peter Cooney)

SAP is the sponsor of this content. It was independently created by Reuters’ editorial staff and funded in part by SAP, which otherwise has no role in this coverage.

Gallery

Please peer review 3 community comments before your comment can be posted