Skip to main content

“Hashjacking” the Debate: Polarisation Strategies of Germany’s Political Far-Right on Twitter

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNISA,volume 11864)


Twitter is a digital forum for political discourse. The emergence of phenomena like fake news and hate speech has shown that political discourse on micro-blogging can become strongly polarised by algorithmic enforcement of selective perception. Recent findings suggest that some political actors might employ strategies to actively facilitate polarisation on Twitter. With a network approach, we examine the case of the German far-right party Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) and their potential use of a “hashjacking” strategy (The use of someone else’s hashtag in order to promote one’s own social media agenda.). Our findings suggest that right-wing politicians (and their supporters/retweeters) actively and effectively polarise the discourse not just by using their own party hashtags, but also by “hashjacking” the political party hashtags of other established parties. The results underline the necessity to understand the success of right-wing parties, online and in elections, not entirely as a result of external effects (e.g. migration), but as a direct consequence of their digital political communication strategy.


  • Hashtags
  • Networks
  • Political communication strategies

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions


  1. Blondel, V.D., Guillaume, J.L., Lambiotte, R., Lefebvre, E.: Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. J. Stat. Mech: Theory Exp. 2008(10), P10008 (2008)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  2. Bode, L., Hanna, A., Yang, J., Shah, D.V.: Candidate networks, citizen clusters, and political expression: strategic hashtag use in the 2010 midterms. Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 659(1), 149–165 (2015).

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  3. Colleoni, E., Rozza, A., Arvidsson, A.: Echo chamber or public sphere? predicting political orientation and measuring political homophily in Twitter using big data. J. Commun. 64(2), 317–332 (2014)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  4. Conover, M.D., Ratkiewicz, J., Francisco, M., Goncalves, B., Flammini, A., Menczer, F.: Political Polarization on Twitter, p. 8 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dahlgren, P.: The Internet, public spheres, and political communication: dispersion and deliberation. Polit. Commun. 22(2), 147–162 (2005).

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Engesser, S., Ernst, N., Esser, F., Büchel, F.: Populism and social media: how politicians spread a fragmented ideology. Inf. Commun. Soc. 20(8), 1109–1126 (2017).

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  7. Enli, G., Simonsen, C.A.: ‘Social media logic’ meets professional norms: Twitter hashtags usage by journalists and politicians. Inf. Commun. Soc. 21(8), 1081–1096 (2018).

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  8. Frees, B., Koch, W.: Internetnutzung: frequenz und vielfalt nehmen in allen altersgruppen zu. Media Perspektiven 9(2015), 366–377 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Grinberg, N., Joseph, K., Friedland, L., Swire-Thompson, B., Lazer, D.: Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Science 363(6425), 374–378 (2019).

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  10. Jacomy, M., Venturini, T., Heymann, S., Bastian, M.: ForceAtlas2, a continuous graph layout algorithm for handy network visualization designed for the Gephi software. PLoS ONE 9(6), e98679 (2014)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. Keller, T.R., Klinger, U.: Social bots in election campaigns: theoretical, empirical, and methodological implications. Polit. Commun. 36(1), 171–189 (2019).

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  12. Krämer, B.: Populist online practices: the function of the Internet in right-wing populism. Infor. Commun. Soc. 20(9), 1293–1309 (2017).

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  13. Neuendorf, K.A.: The Content Analysis Guidebook. 2nd edn. SAGE, Los Angeles (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Stier, S., et al.: Systematically Monitoring Social Media: the case of the German federal election 2017. GESIS Papers 2018/4 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Stier, S., Posch, L., Bleier, A., Strohmaier, M.: When populists become popular: comparing Facebook use by the right-wing movement Pegida and German political parties. Inf. Commun. Soc. 20(9), 1365–1388 (2017).

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philipp Darius .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

A Appendix

A Appendix

Table 2. Contra AfD
Table 3. Contra CDU
Table 4. Contra CSU
Table 5. Contra FDP
Table 6. Contra Gruene
Table 7. Contra Linke
Table 8. Contra SPD

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Darius, P., Stephany, F. (2019). “Hashjacking” the Debate: Polarisation Strategies of Germany’s Political Far-Right on Twitter. In: Weber, I., et al. Social Informatics. SocInfo 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11864. Springer, Cham.

Download citation

  • DOI:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-34970-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-34971-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)