Introduction to Studying 2012 Egyptian Election

  • Dalia Elsheikh
Part of the Political Campaigning and Communication book series (PCC)


This chapter explains the importance of the 2012 Egyptian elections and gives an overview for the whole book. The chapter highlights why it’s important to study campaigns in order to understand the outcome of the 2012 election as well as the longer-term political situation in Egypt. The chapter explains this by highlighting literature on campaign functions in elections and campaign professionalism (mainly what it means and how to measure it). In addition, it highlights the validity of using the professionalisation index in studying campaign professionalism. The chapter also discusses the relationship between professionalisation and democracy.


  1. Ansolabehere, S. and Iyengar, S., 1995. Going negative: how political advertisements shrink and polarize the electorate. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bartels, L., 1996. Uninformed votes: information effects in presidential elections. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 194–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bartels, L., 2006. Priming and persuasion in presidential campaigns. In: Brady, H. and Richard, J., eds. Capturing campaign effects. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 78–114.Google Scholar
  4. Bennett, W. and Entman, R., eds., 2001. Mediated politics: communication in the future of democracy. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Berg-Schlosser, D., 2009. Long waves and conjunctures of democratization. In: Haerpfer, C., Bernhagen, P., Inglehart, R. and Welzel, C., eds. Democratization. New York: Oxford University Press, 41–51.Google Scholar
  6. Bernhagen, P., 2009. Measuring democracy and democratization. In: Haerpfer, C., Bernhagen, P., Inglehart, R. and Welzel, C., eds. Democratization. New York: Oxford University Press, 24–40.Google Scholar
  7. Boulianne, S., 2009. Does internet use affect engagement? A meta-analysis of research. Political Communication, 26, 193–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buss, T., Stevens Redburn, F. and Guo, K., eds., 2006. Modernizing democracy: innovations in citizen participation (transformational trends in governance and democracy). Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  9. Carnegie, P., 2010. The road from authoritarianism to democratization in Indonesia. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Catt, H., 1999. Democracy in practice. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cho, J., Shah, D., McLeod, J., McLeod, D., Scholl, R. and Gotlieb, M., 2009. Campaigns, reflection, and deliberation: advancing an O-S-R-O-R model of communication effects. Communication Theory, 19, 66–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Claassen, R., 2011. Political awareness and electoral campaigns: maximum effects for minimum citizens? Political Behavior, 33 (2), 203–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Coppedge, M. and Reinicke, W., 1990. Measuring polyarchy. Studies in Comparative International Development, 25 (1), 51–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Coppedge, M., Gerring, J., Altman, A., Bernhard, M., Fish, S., Hicken, A., Kroenig, M., Lindberg, S., McMann, K., Paxton, P., Semetko, H., Skaaning, S.-E., Staton, J. and Teorell, J., 2011. Conceptualizing and measuring democracy: a new approach. Perspectives on Politics, 9 (2), 247–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cutright, P., 1963. National political development: measurement and analysis. American Sociological Review [online], 28 (2), 253–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cwalina, W., Falkowski, A. and Newman, B., 2011. Political marketing: theoretical and strategic foundations. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  17. Dahl, R. A., 1998. Democracy and its critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Dahl, R., 1971. Polyarchy: participation and opposition. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Dahlgren, P., 2005. The internet, public spheres, and political communication: dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication, 22 (2), 147–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Diamond, L. 2009. Forward by Larry Diamond. In: Lindberg, S., ed. Democratization by elections: a new mode of transition. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, xiii–xix.Google Scholar
  21. Diamond, L. and Myers, R., eds., 2001. Elections and democracy in greater China. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Dimitrova, D., Shehata, A., Strömback, J. and Nord, L., 2014. The effects of digital media on political knowledge and participation in election campaigns: evidence from panel data. Communication Research, 41 (1), 95–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Elsheikh, D., 2011. New form of opposition in Egypt … from movements to revolution. Thesis (MA). SOAS, University of London, England.Google Scholar
  24. Erickson, R. and Wlezien, C., 2012. The timeline of presidential elections: how campaigns do and do not matter. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  25. Farrell, D. and Schmitt-Beck, R., eds., 2002. Do political campaigns matter?: campaign effects in elections and referendums. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Farrell, D., 1996. Campaign strategies and tactics. In: LeDuc, L., Niemi, R. and Norris, P., eds. Comparing democracies: elections and voting in global perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 160–183.Google Scholar
  27. Fishkin, J., 1991. Democracy and deliberation: new directions for democratic reform. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Freedom House, 2015. Methodology. Freedom in the World 2012 [online]. Washington, DC: Freedom House. Available from: [Accessed 10 October 2016].
  29. Fukuyama, F., 1992. The end of history and the last man. New York: Avon Books.Google Scholar
  30. Gamson, W., 2001. Promoting political engagement. In: Bennett, W. and Entman, R., eds. Mediated politics: communication in the future of democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press, 56–74.Google Scholar
  31. Gasiorowski, M., 1996. An overview of the political regime change dataset. Comparative Political Studies, 29 (4), 469–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gibson, R. and Römmele, A., 2001. Changing campaign communications: a party-centered theory of professionalized campaigning. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 6 (4), 31–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gibson, R. and Römmele, A., 2009. Measuring the professionlisation of political campaigning. Party Politics, 15 (3), 321–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gibson, R., 2010. ‘Open source campaigning?’: UK party organisations and the use of the new media in the 2010 general election [online]. Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC 2010. Available from: [Accessed 1 June 2016].
  35. Gidengil, E., Blais, A., Nevitte, A. and Nadeau, R., 2002. Priming and campaign context: evidence from recent Canadian elections. In: Farrell, D. and Schmitt-Beck, R., eds. Do political campaigns matter: campaign effects in elections and referendums. New York: Routledge, 76–91.Google Scholar
  36. Gil de Zúñiga, H., Veenstra, A., Vraga, E. and Shah, D., 2010. Digital democracy: reimagining pathways to political participation. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 7 (1), 36–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Green, D., 2016. Citizen activism and civil society. In how change happens. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Gronbeck, B., 1978. The functions of presidential campaigning. Communication Monographs, 45 (4), 268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hamelink, C., 2007. The professionalisation of political communication: democracy at stake? In: Negrine, R., Mancini, P., Holtz-Bacha, C. and Pappathanassopoulos eds. The professionalisation of political communication. Bristol: Intellect, 179–188.Google Scholar
  40. Hendricks, J. and Denton, R., 2010. Communicator-in-chief: how Barack Obama used new media technology to win the White House. Lanham, MD: Lexington.Google Scholar
  41. Herkman, J., 2010. Re-evaluating the relationship between politics and popular media. Media, Culture and Society, 32 (4), 701–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hermet, G., Rose, R. and Rouquie, A., eds., 1978. Elections without choice. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  43. Holbrook, T., 1996. Do campaigns matter? Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  44. Howard, P., 2006. New media campaigns and the managed citizen. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Huntington, S., 1991. The third wave: democratization in the late twentieth century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
  46. Iyengar, S. and Kinder, D., 1987. News that matters. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  47. Iyengar, S. and Simon, A., 2000. New perspectives and evidence on political communication and campaign effects. Annual Review of Psychology, 51 (1), 149–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Katz, R., 1997. Democracy and elections. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kekic, L., 2007. The economist intelligence unit’s index of democracy. Democracy index 2007 [online]. Available from: [Accessed 10 September 2015].
  50. Koch, T., 2011. The professionlisation of political marketing – a detriment to the democratic process? Department of Media and Communication, University of Leicester. ResearchGate [online]. Available from: [Accessed 1 June 2016].
  51. Lazarsfeld, P., Berelson, B. and Gaudet, H., 1944. The people’s choice: how the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign. New York: Duell, Sloan, & Pearce.Google Scholar
  52. Li, Q. and Reuveny, F., 2006. Democracy and environmental degradation. International Studies Quarterly, 50 (4), 935–956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lijphart, A., 1999. Patterns of democracy: government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Lilleker, D. G. and Negrine, R., 2002. Professionalisation: of what? Since when? By whom? Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 7 (4), 98–103.Google Scholar
  55. Lilleker, D. G., Tenscher, J. and Stetka, V., 2015. Towards hypermedia campaigning? Perceptions of new media’s importance for campaigning by party strategists in comparative perspective. Information, Communication & Society, 18 (7), 747–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lindberg, S., 2009. Democratization by elections: a new mode of transition. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Linz, J., 1978. Non-competitive elections in Europe. In: Hermet, G., Rose, R. and Rouquie, A., eds. Elections without choice. New York: Wiley, 36–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Linz, Juan J., and Stepan, A. C., 1996. Problems of democratic transition and consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and post-communist Europe. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Lustokar, E., 2009. Reinforcing informal institutions through authoritarian elections: insights from Jordan. Middle East Law and Governance, 1 (1), 3–37. [Accessed 8 October 2015].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Mancini, P., 1999. New frontiers in political professionalism. Political Communication, 16 (3), 231–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Marshall, M. G. and Cole, B. R., 2011. Global report 2011: conflict, governance, and state fragility [online]. Vienna, VA: Center for Systematic Peace. Available from: [Accessed 12 September 2014].
  62. Medvic, S., 2010. Campaigns and elections, players and processes. Boston: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  63. Mykkänen, J. and Tenscher, J., 2014. Adding or weighting? Alternatives to measure parties’ campaign professionalism [online]. European Consortium for Political Research General Conference, Glasgow 5 September 2014. Available from: [Accessed 1 June 2016].
  64. Negrine, R., Mancini, P., Holtz-Bacha, C. and Pappathanassopoulos eds., 2007. The professionalisation of political communication. Bristol: IntellectGoogle Scholar
  65. Nie, N., 2001. Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the internet: reconciling conflicting findings. American Behavioral Scientist, 45, 420–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Norris, P., 2000. A virtuous circle: political communications in postindustrial societies. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Norris, P., 2001. Digital divide: civic engagement, information poverty and the internet worldwide. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Norris, P., 2002. Democratic phoenix: reinventing political activism. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Norris, P., 2004a. The evolution of election campaigns: eroding political engagement? Conference on Political Communications in the 21st Century, University of Otago, New Zealand, January 2004.Google Scholar
  70. Norris, P., 2004b. Political communications and democratic politics. In: Bartle, J. and Griffiths, D., eds. Political communication transformed: from Morrison to Mandelson. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 163–180.Google Scholar
  71. Norris, P., 2005. Did the media matter? Persuasion, priming and mobilization effects in the 2005 British general election campaign [online]. Conference of the Elections, Parties and Public Opinion Group of the PSA (EPOP). University of Essex, September 2005. Available from: [Accessed 12 October 2015].
  72. O’Donnell, G., 1994. Delegative democracy. Journal of Democracy, 5 (1), 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Papacharissi, Z., 2002. The virtual sphere: the internet as a public sphere. Online Media & Society, 4 (1), 9–27.Google Scholar
  74. Pateman, C., 1970. Participation and the democratic theory. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Petrocik, J., 1996. Issue ownership in presidential elections with a 1980 case study. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 825–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Pfau, M., Houston, J. and Semmler, S., 2005. Presidential election campaigns and American democracy. American Behavioural Scientist, 49 (1), 48–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Poe, S. and Tate, C., 1994. Repression of human rights to personal integrity in the 1980s: a global analysis. American Political Science Review, 88 (4), 853–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Popesco, M. and Toka, G., 2002. Campaign effects and media monopoly: the 1994 and 1998 parliamentary elections in Hungary. In: Farrell, D. and Schmitt-Beck, R., eds. Do political campaigns matter?: Campaign effects in elections and referendums. London: Routledge, 58–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Powell, G., 2000. Elections as instrument of democracy: majoritarian and proportional visions. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  80. Prezeworski, A., 1999. Minimalist conception of democracy: a defence. In: Shapiro, I. and Hacker Cordon, C., eds. Democracy’s value. Cambridge University Press, 23–55.Google Scholar
  81. Putnam, R., 2000. Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Rayner, J., 2014, What about winning? Looking into the blind spot of the theory of campaign professionlisation. Journal of Political Marketing, 13 (4), 334–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Rose, R. and Mossawir, H., 1967. Voting and elections: a functional analysis. Political Studies, 15 (2), 173–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Sadiki, L., 2009. Rethinking Arab democratization, democracy without elections. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Scammell, M., 1998. The wisdom of the war room: US campaigning and Americanization. Media, Culture and Society, 20 (2), 251–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Sen, A., 1999. Development as freedom. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  87. Schumpeter, J. A., 1943. Capitalism, socialism and democracy. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  88. Strömbäck, J., 2007. Political marketing and professionalized campaigning: a conceptual analysis. Journal of Political Marketing, 6 (2–3), 49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Strömbäck, J., 2009. Selective professionalisation of political campaigning. A test of the party-centered theory of professionalised campaigning in the context of the 2006 Swedish election. Political Studies, 57 (1), 95–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Swanson, D. and Mancini, P., 1996. Politics, media, and modern democracy: an international study of innovations in electoral campaigning and their consequences. Westport: Praeger.Google Scholar
  91. Tenscher, J., 2013. First- and second-order campaigning: Evidence from Germany. European Journal of Communication, 28 (3), 241–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Tenscher, J. and Mykkänen, J., 2014. Two levels of campaigning: an empirical test of the party-centred theory of professionalisation. Political Studies, 62 (S1), 20–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Tenscher, J., 2007. Professionalisierung nach Wahl: Ein Vergleich der Parteienkampagnen im Rahmen der jüngsten Bundestags- und Europawahlkämpfe in Deutschland. In: Brettschneider, F., Niedermayer, O. and Weßels, B., eds. Die Bundestagswahl 2005: Analysen des Wahlkampfes und der Wahlergebnisse. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 65–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Tenscher, J., Koc-Michalska, K., Lilleker, D., Mykkänen, J., Walter, A., Findor, A., Jalali, C. and Róka, J., 2016. The professionals speak: practitioners’ perspectives on professional election campaigning. European Journal of Communication, 31 (2), 95–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Tenscher, J., Mykkänen, J. and Moring, T., 2012. Modes of professional campaigning: a four-country comparison in the European parliamentary elections, 2009. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 17 (2), 145–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Thompson, D., 2002. Just elections: creating a fair electoral process in the United States. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  97. Vanhanen, T., 2000. A new data set for measuring democracy, 1810–1998. Journal of Peace Research, 37 (2), 251–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Vanhanen, T., 2003. Democratisation: a comparative analysis of 170 countries. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  99. Vavreck, L., 2000. How does it all ‘turn out’? Exposure to attack advertising, campaign interest, and participation in American presidential elections. In: Bartels, L. and Vavreck, L., eds. Campaign reform: insights and evidence. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 79–105.Google Scholar
  100. Verba, S., Schlozman, K. and Brady, H., 1995. Voice and equality: civic volunteerism in American politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  101. Way, L., 2005. Ukraine’s orange revolution: Kuchma’s failed authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy, 16 (2), 131–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Whitehead, L., 2002. Democratization: theory and experience. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Zaller, J., 1992. The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  104. Zihala, M., ed., 2003. Democracy: the greatest good for the greatest number. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dalia Elsheikh
    • 1
  1. 1.Bournemouth UniversityBournemouthUK

Personalised recommendations