SOCIAL MEDIA IN THE BRUSSELS BUBBLE: WHY IT MATTERS TO PUBLIC AFFAIRS PROFESSIONALS

Author: Mr. Emmanouil Patavos, Public Affairs Professional- Article published 2012 and reposted here

" The 'Brussels bubble' is expanding rapidly. Not in the literal sense, the physical borders circling Brussels remain steadfast. However, the actors and activities which define the essence of the 'Brussels bubble' have started to become more prevalent on line.

Social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter, have created a new paradigm of communication. EU stakeholders have come to appreciate these social media platforms for their ability to facilitate direct communications amongst each other and the general public.

Circumventing traditional media platforms and adopting new methods of communication have attracted the 'Brussels bubble' for a number of reasons. Most important of which is that it provides stakeholders the ability to spread their message to a target audience unfiltered. EU public affairs professionals, the ever-present interlocutors between industry and EU policy makers, should therefore master these new platforms of communication if they wish to remain relevant.

Today all three of the EU’s legislative bodies – the Commission, the Parliament and the Council – are present on Twitter and Facebook. Some are more active online than others. The Parliament and the Commission are arguably more active and transparent, whereas the Council is not. Parliamentarians and Commission officials are eager to showcase their work and are more receptive to online dialogues with their constituents.

The Council on the other hand is less active and more ‘cautious’ when communicating online (i.e. Berlusconi incident) . The vigor by which these institutions have embraced social media is reflective of their inherent nature. The Parliament has 751 parliamentarians; the Commission has 27 Commissioners, one President and numerous heads of directorates that the general public can recognise and communicate with. The Council has one President an a rotating presidency. Therefore it is only understandable that the Council's online footprint is limited by the lack of 'personalities' which can be represented online. 

Although still in their social media infancy, it is clear that the institutions’ presence and activity online is growing. The number of followers and likes they have is growing as well. And as long as the EU remains relevant to the general public, the more attention the public will give to its institutions. Similarly, the more attention policy makers receive online, the more likely they will be to stay online. It is an upward spiral that has no limits. No matter the theoretical argument questioning the value of a Facebook 'like' or a Twitter follow, policy makers will continue to grow their presence online. They will always strive to be liked by their audience. After all, they are politicians.

No matter the theoretical argument questioning the value of a Facebook‘like’ or a Twitter follow, policy makers will continue to grow their presence online. They will always strive to be liked by their audience. Having social media capabilities will no longer become a novelty selling point for public affairs consultancies. It will soon become a mandatory staple in a consultancy’s client services.

Having social media capabilities will no longer become a novelty selling point for public affairs consultancies. It will soon become a mandatory staple in a consultancy's client services. In Brussels, public affairs professionals compete vigorously for the valuable time and attention of a policy maker. Their added value derives from their ability to communicate effectively their client’s message to the relevant policy maker. Unless they are able to ‘speak’ the same language as their target audience and make themselves heard, their effectiveness would be severely undermined. If they want to be effective, they have to follow the policy maker online."