Aristotelian rhetoric and Facebook success in Israel's 2013 election campaign

Purpose – To contribute to the mapping of the social media discourse involving politicians and their followers during election campaigns, we examined Israeli politicians’ Aristotelian rhetoric on Facebook and its reception during the 2013 election campaign. D ow nl oa de d by U N IV E R SI T Y O F H A IF A A t 0 0: 49 3 0 M ar ch 2 01 5 (P T ) Design/methodology/approach – We examined the Aristotelian rhetorical strategies used by Israeli politicians on their Facebook walls during the 2013 elections and their popularity with social media users. Findings – Ethos was the most prevalent rhetorical strategy used, while pathos-based appeals attracted the most “likes”. The results point to some discrepancy between politicians’ campaign messages and the rhetoric that actually gains social media users’ attention. Research implications – The findings indicate that Israel’s multi-party political system encourages emphasis on candidates’ credibility (ethos) in contrast to the prevalence of emotion (pathos) in typical election campaigns in two-party systems such as that of the United States. One possible explanation is the competitive nature of elections in a multi-party system, where candidates need to emphasise their character and distinct leadership abilities. Practical implications – Politicians and campaign managers are advised to attend to the potential discrepancy between politicians’ output and social media users’ preferences, and to the effectiveness of logos-based appeals. Originality/value – The study highlights the possible effect of the party system on politicians’ online rhetoric in social media election campaigns. Future studies should extend the analysis to other countries and political systems to determine the factors that correspond with online rhetoric during election campaigns.