1 The Political Impacts of Livestreaming Technology [Redacted] [Redacted] [Redacted] [Redacted] December 7, 2022 2 Abstract Dating from the first presidential webcast in 1999, live online video broadcasts and politics have been inextricably connected. Livestreaming as a technology enables anybody with common household technology to broadcast themselves live. Politicians including Donald Trump and Joe Biden have used this technology to reach audiences that would be otherwise difficult to capture with traditional broadcast media. Social livestreaming services are websites that allow livestream audiences to interact with the broadcaster in real-time. This presents the opportunity for ‘livestreamers’ to foster communities of like-minded and politically-motivated viewers to affect viewers’ engagement with democratic processes and activist causes. Introduction Livestreaming has become an integral part of many consumers’ social media diets. Livestreaming technology allows users to broadcast video over the internet as it is created. Using the internet to live broadcast video is an idea that has been around for almost as long as the internet itself, with the first live broadcast over the internet happening in 1995 (Zambelli, 2013), just five years after the world wide web was made available to the public in 1990 (Pew Research Center, 2014). Furthermore, the relationship between livestreaming and politics has existed since Bill Clinton hosted the first presidential webcast in 1999 (CBS News, 1999). Although live broadcast over television had existed for decades before the internet was invented, the lower barrier to entry for internet broadcasting makes it more accessible to the general population. In 2007, Justin Kan, an American entrepreneur began livestreaming his life twenty-four hours a day on his website, Justin.tv (Ask et al., 2019). Later that year, Kan opened his website to other users, allowing them anyone to stream. Kan’s website is the first known site to incorporate a live text chat alongside the live broadcast, allowing users to interact with the broadcaster in real-time; this style of livestream is often used more similarly to social media than traditional broadcasting. Justin.tv would later rebrand to Twitch.tv before being acquired by 3 Amazon (Ask et al., 2019). Many of the large social livestreaming services are owned and operated by large tech conglomerates including Alphabet’s Youtube Live, Meta’s Facebook Live and Microsoft’s now-defunct Mixer (Yang & Kang, 2021). Online livestreaming acts as both a replacement for traditional broadcast media and as a social media site with a strong emphasis on engaging, long-form content, both uses of livestreaming technology make it a strong tool for political influence. A Replacement for Traditional Media Livestreaming can be very similar to traditional television broadcast, so similar that many mainstream, traditional broadcast news organizations also stream their broadcast live on youtube (Nashmi et al., 2017). These organizations broadcast on youtube as it represents another possible audience with little opportunity cost. Traditional media, however, are not the only ones interested in receiving additional viewership at minimal cost; both incumbent politicians and candidates have used livestreaming as a tool for reaching otherwise inaccessible audiences. Former president of the United States of America, Donald Trump used Facebook Live to broadcast his third presidential debate (Yu & Chen, 2020). Furthermore, some have used livestreaming to share parts of their campaign that are less predisposed to traditional media, such as when former US congressional representative, Beto O'Rourke, livestreamed a haircut during one of his campaigns (Yang & Kang, 2021), or when American congresswoman, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Canadian NDP leader, Jagmeet Singh played the popular videogame “Among Us” together on Twitch (CBC, 2020). The use of livestreaming in politics is not limited to North America, Taiwanese president, Tsai Ing-wen used collaborations with popular Taiwanese livestreamers to target younger voters and appear more approachable in her 2020 campaign (Yang & Kang, 2021). Livestreaming has become so pervasive in politics that Joe Biden’s inauguration as president of the United States of America was broadcast live on Twitch (Riddick & Shivener, 2022). Livestreaming appears to be an unquestionably effective 4 supplement to traditional media for constituents and politicians alike. To the viewer, livestreaming represents an easily accessible replacement for traditional broadcast media, and for traditional media figures and politicians, it’s a way to reach new audiences. Social Media Influencers and Community Building Livestreaming not only mimics traditional broadcast media, but also acts as a form of social media. Although online political activity and offline political activity are correlated, research suggests that the pathway from online activity to offline activity is not statistically significant (Kahne & Bowyer, 2018). However, the same study finds that friendship-driven and interest-driven online political engagement do create significant pathways to offline action. Livestreaming, however, differs from other social media in the overwhelming sense of community (Hilvert-Bruce et al., 2018). Hilvert-Bruce et al. also claim that “live-streams serve as virtual ‘third places’ where communities form and grow, with viewers using chat rooms to converse, laugh, and joke with each other about content they are watching“ (2018). One study found that livestreamers have an elevated ability to influence e-commerce purchasing decisions through their ability to influence viewers’ emotions (Meng et al., 2021); if livestreamers have a greater ability to influence their viewers’ spending habits, a similar mechanism could mean that they have a stronger ability to influence their viewers’ political views. One case study is Steven Bonnell II, a streamer that goes by the online moniker “Destiny”, who mobilized his audience to do on-the-ground canvassing during the 2020 Georgia congressional runoff election, then again during the 2021 Omaha mayoral race (Johnson, 2021). Livestreamers have a unique opportunity for political effectiveness among social media influencers due to their ability to form strong communities within their audience and influence behaviour through direct calls to action. 5 Conclusion The ability for anybody with a camera, personal computer and internet connection to broadcast themselves live on the internet has created a powerful tool for political influence. Whether it is politicians using livestreaming technology to supplement traditional media campaigns, or individual influencers using social livestreaming services to build communities of like-minded political activists, livestreaming has had a profound influence on the politics of the digital age. As younger generations mature to voting age, the importance of livestreaming in politics will likely only grow. 6 References al Nashmi, E., North, M., Bloom, T., & Cleary, J. (2017). Promoting a global brand: A study of international news organisations’ YouTube channels. The Journal of International Communication , 23 (2), 165–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/13216597.2017.1300180 Ask, K., Spilker, H. S., & Hansen, M. (2019). The politics of user-platform relationships: Co-scripting live-streaming on Twitch.tv. First Monday https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v24i7.9648 CBC. (2020, November 27). Jagmeet Singh and Aoc crew up to find impostors in hit game Among Us. The Canadian Press https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/among-us-sing-aoc-1.5818907. Clinton Holds First Cyber-Chat. (1999). CBS News https://www.cbsnews.com/news/clinton-holds-first-cyber-chat/. Hilvert-Bruce, Z., Neill, J. T., Sjöblom, M., & Hamari, J. (2018). Social motivations of live-streaming viewer engagement on twitch. Computers in Human Behavior , 84 , 58–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.02.013 Johnson, A. (2021). The Gateway unpacks: How one creator is using streaming service Twitch to shape an Omaha mayoral candidate’s ‘Destiny.’ The Gateway https://www.unothegateway.com/the-gateway-unpacks-how-one-creator-is-using-streami ng-service-twitch-to-shape-an-omaha-mayoral-candidates-destiny/. Kahne, J., & Bowyer, B. (2018). The political significance of social media activity and social networks. Political Communication , 35 (3), 470–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2018.1426662 7 Meng, L. (M., Duan, S., Zhao, Y., Lü, K., & Chen, S. (2021). The impact of online celebrity in livestreaming e-commerce on purchase intention from the perspective of emotional contagion. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services , 63 , 102733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102733 Pew Research Center. (2020, May 30). World wide web timeline . Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2014/03/11/world-wide-web-timeline/ Riddick, S., & Shivener, R. (2022). Affective spamming on twitch: Rhetorics of an emote-only audience in a presidential inauguration livestream. Computers and Composition , 64 , 102711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2022.102711 Yang, K. C., & Kang, Y. (2021). Livestreaming influencers, influence types, and political participation: A case study of taiwan’s 2020 presidential election. Asiascape: Digital Asia , 8 (1-2), 92–118. https://doi.org/10.1163/22142312-12340133 Yu, T., & Chen, Y. (2020, August 10). Live streaming for political campaigns: Persuasive affordances, political mindfulness, and political participation [Paper Presentation]. Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS) . Human Computer Interaction. Salt Lake City; AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2020/sig_hci/sig_hci/1/?utm_source=aisel.aisnet.org%2Fam cis2020%2Fsig_hci%2Fsig_hci%2F1&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPa ges. Zambelli, A. (2013). A history of media streaming and the future of connected Tv. The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/media-network/media-network-blog/2013/mar/01/history-str eaming-future-connected-tv.