The National newspaper’s Ninian Wilson asked for my opinion on the influence of Twitter and the potential impact of its potential demise on the Yes movement and independence campaigning.
What insight can you offer into how important Twitter has been for organising the Yes movement, especially in and around the first indyref?
Twitter continues to be a vital channel for the Yes movement. It is used by political parties and grassroots campaigns to inform, engage and mobilise members, activists and voters. And as one of the world's online town halls, it's given voice to many people from disenfranchised and minority groups that otherwise would not be heard.
To give you an idea of how effective it was during the 2014 independence referendum, when we organised #YesBecause day - a social media event designed to encourage people to explain why they are voting Yes in 140 characters on Twitter and demonstrate the unfettered reality of the Yes movement - it trended in Scotland, UK and in the top 3 Worldwide, reaching over 10,000,000 people across the planet with 101,238 tweets.
There is a huge number of stories of people turning from No to Yes because they’ve been exposed to new ideas and arguments on Twitter that they might not have been otherwise, is Twitter still a key battleground for winning over voters?
Twitter remains a key battleground for the independence debate. Although there are now a number of online platforms that Yes campaigners should also communicate on such as Instagram, YouTube, TikTok, and private messenger apps like Whatsapp. Social media is always changing and we need to remain ahead of the curve.
You tend to find that the type of people that use Twitter come from all kinds of background, and that's healthy, because it means people who have power and influence can share key messages about independence and get real-time feedback. This helps us to inform voters and give activists some of the arguments that they can take offline when they speak to their friends and family.
Outwith the SNP and the Greens, fringe and unofficial indy blogs and groups have had the platform to effectively contribute to the indy debate because of Twitter, for better or worse, what value has this added to the Yes movement?
Peer to peer campaigning is the most effective type of political campaigning. You are more likely to trust and listen to people who are like you. In 2014, groups like Women for independence, National Collective and Radical Independence utilised Twitter to help them to organise and to speak to audiences that were less represented in the mainstream debate - such as women, younger people and minority groups. This is invaluable in terms of reaching sections of society who feel underrepresented. If social media is used effectively, you can mobilise people who otherwise might not turn out to vote for independence.
An example of this recently was how the SNP used TikTok during the last Scottish election. We gave TikTok users from various backgrounds access to the First Minister to ask questions about the work of the Scottish Government and the issues in the upcoming election. They then shared footage of the online Q&A with their social media followers. In some instances this was around 2 million people, many of which based in Scotland. Collectively, we ended up increasing support amongst younger voters, according to analysis by Professor John Curtice.
What fears, if any, do you have that the decline of Twitter could limit the Yes movement’s ability to win the case for Indy?
There are many legitimate criticisms of social media and its impact on the world, however, we should not underestimate the impact of losing Twitter. It would mean less plurality of opinion in the media landscape and less disenfranchised and minority voices having their voices heard. For the independence movement, this would mean one less open channel to get our positive message and vision out there. But that said, if we need to adapt, adapt we will.