Prof. Terri L. Towner
Professor of Political Science at Oakland University. Her research examines the role of social media in campaigns and elections. She has co-edited two books, The Internet and the 2020 Campaign (Lexington Books 2021) and The Internet and the 2016 Presidential Campaign (Lexington Books 2017).
X: @townert
Email: towner@oakland.edu
Prof. Caroline Muñoz
Professor of Marketing at the University of North Georgia. Her research interests include social media, marketing pedagogy, and political marketing. She has co-authored a book, #Share: Building Social Media Word of Mouth (sWOM) (Business Expert Press, 2022).
X: @carriemunoz
Email: caroline.munoz@ung.edu
U.S. Election 2024
64. Reversion to the meme: A return to grassroots content (Dr Jessica Baldwin-Philippi)
65. From platform politics to partisan platforms (Prof Philip M. Napoli, Talia Goodman)
66. The fragmented social media landscape in the 2024 U.S. election (Dr Michael A. Beam, Dr Myiah J. Hutchens, Dr Jay D. Hmielowski)
67. Outside organization advertising on Meta platforms: Coordination and duplicity (Prof Jennifer Stromer-Galley)
68. Prejudice and priming in the online political sphere (Prof Richard Perloff)
69. Perceptions of social media in the 2024 presidential election (Dr Daniel Lane, Dr Prateekshit “Kanu” Pandey)
70. Modeling public Facebook comments on the attempted assassination of President Trump (Dr Justin Phillips, Prof Andrea Carson)
71. The memes of production: Grassroots-made digital content and the presidential campaign (Dr Rosalynd Southern, Dr Caroline Leicht)
72. The gendered dynamics of presidential campaign tweets in 2024 (Prof Heather K. Evans, Dr Jennifer Hayes Clark)
73. Threads and TikTok adoption among 2024 congressional candidates in battleground states (Prof Terri L. Towner, Prof Caroline Muñoz)
74. Who would extraterrestrials side with if they were watching us on social media? (Taewoo Kang, Prof Kjerstin Thorson)
75. AI and voter suppression in the 2024 election (Prof Diana Owen)
76. News from AI: ChatGPT and political information (Dr Caroline Leicht, Dr Peter Finn, Dr Lauren C. Bell, Dr Amy Tatum)
77. Analyzing the perceived humanness of AI-generated social media content around the presidential debate (Dr Tiago Ventura, Rebecca Ansell, Dr Sejin Paik, Autumn Toney, Prof Leticia Bode, Prof Lisa Singh)
Social media platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter (now X), Instagram, and YouTube, have become essential communication tools for most politicians. It is no longer a question of whether to use these platforms, but, rather, how much advertising money to spend, how frequently to post, and, ultimately, which social media platforms to adopt (or abandon). The 2024 congressional election season brought with it new platforms to consider adopting (e.g., Threads and TikTok) and concerns regarding data security, foreign influence, content political bias, and mental health. In fact, numerous U.S. states (Republican-leaning majority) have banned the use of TikTok on government devices, and Montana attempted to ban its citizens’ TikTok use entirely. So, do the benefits of these platforms outweigh the concerns of U.S. Congress members?
Understanding which politicians will be early adopters of social media platforms allows us to better predict who might influence political communication. These individuals will have an advantage in crafting a political narrative. Our research applies Rogers’ diffusion of innovation framework to better understand predictors of early adoption among congressional candidate. It is also informed by previous scholarship on both U.S. and international elections, drawing upon research conducted on Facebook, Twitter (X), YouTube, and Instagram. No political adoption research has yet been conducted on Threads or TikTok.
Both social media technology affordances and characteristics of politician’s influence adoption decisions. TikTok and Threads provide potential users with numerous innovative features, such as relative advantage, trialability, observability, low complexity, and compatibility, that encourage faster adoption. Previous research provides varying and sometimes inconsistent demographic and party characteristics adoption predictors depending on the social media platform. To illustrate, studies addressing gender have found women more likely to adopt Twitter (X) and Instagram, whereas other studies found no significant gender differences between platforms. Politicians in leadership positions and incumbents may make more extensive use of Facebook, Twitter (X), and YouTube; however, they may not be the first to adopt them. Party affiliation differences can be found between Republicans adopting Twitter (X) and YouTube earlier, compared to Democrats on Facebook. Although some studies found no significant party differences. These conflicting findings illuminate the differences between social media platforms and election cycles. Hence, there is a need to examine Threads and TikTok.
We examine the adoption of emerging social media platforms, Threads and TikTok, among major party candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives in seven battleground states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) during the 2024 election cycle. We explore how adoption rates on these newer platforms might vary based on candidates’ political and demographic characteristics, including party affiliation, incumbency, race, and gender. We also examine if candidates who are more likely to engage online are more likely to adopt Threads and TikTok. We assessed this propensity by counting the number of candidates who already use all four established social platforms—Facebook, Twitter (X), Instagram, and YouTube.
From August to October 2024, we tracked 156 congressional candidates and found widespread use of established social media platforms. Facebook and (Twitter) X were used by 99% of the candidates, followed by Instagram (94%) and YouTube (82%). By contrast, less than half of the candidates had adopted Threads (42%), and only 22% had incorporated TikTok into their campaign strategies. Almost 80% of candidates have adopted all four established social media platforms.
Among candidates who adopted Threads (N = 65), Democrats were notably more likely to adopt, with 74% adopting compared to 26% of Republicans. Additionally, incumbents were slightly more inclined to adopt Threads (54%), suggesting that established candidates have more resources to invest in emerging and untested digital platforms. Demographic patterns also emerged: White candidates (68%) adopted Threads more than non-white (32%) candidates, and men (62%) were more likely than women (39%) to engage with the platform. Nearly half of the candidates (45%) who have adopted all four established social media have added Threads to their digital repertoire.
TikTok adoption was lower across the board, with only 22% of candidates (N = 35) utilizing the video-sharing platform. Democratic candidates were more likely to adopt TikTok (77%) than Republicans. Seven of those using TikTok were incumbents, while no challengers had adopted the platform. Like Threads, White candidates adopted TikTok at a slightly higher rate (54%) than non-whites (46%), and more men adopted TikTok (63%) than women (37%). Women and minority candidates may be less inclined to adopt newer platforms, as established platforms may offer more predictable returns on their resources or the established platforms already reach the audiences they need. Only 26% of candidates who have adopted all four established social media have added TikTok to their digital toolbox. The relatively low adoption of TikTok reflects its controversial status.
Adoption trends reveal that congressional candidates who are highly engaged online, Democrats, incumbents, Whites, and males are more likely to adopt emerging platforms. These findings contrast with some earlier adoption research and highlight the need to approach communication strategies on varying social media strategies differently. These data also capture a growing pushback to social media adoption with implications for future political communication.