Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article
Open access

A Tale of Three Technologies: A Survival Analysis of Municipal Adoption of Websites, Twitter, and YouTube

Published: 14 October 2022 Publication History

Abstract

This study addresses and compares the adoption rate of three technologies by Dutch municipalities: the adoption of websites between 1994 and 2000, the adoption of Twitter between 2008 and 2018, and the adoption of YouTube between 2006 and 2018. It analyses the municipal adoption curves of websites, Twitter, and YouTube, relating to DOI theory. Survival analysis is conducted of Twitter and YouTube adoption by municipalities, assessing the relationship between technology adoption and organizational and environmental factors. Additional survival analysis is conducted of the relationship between municipal adoption, media coverage of the technology, and user engagement with the technology. Media coverage appears to be a strong predictor for municipal adoption of websites, Twitter, and YouTube, as well as the level of user engagement. Twitter was adopted the fastest by municipalities, followed at a greater distance by website and YouTube adoption. Other findings include that municipalities already using YouTube were quicker to adopt Twitter, but not the other way around. Recently amalgamated municipalities were slower to adopt Twitter, as well as municipalities with a relatively larger presence of IT professionals.

1 Introduction

Online social networks now take a prominent role in responding proactively and efficiently to stakeholder needs [1]. As omnipresent as these digital communication channels are today, they emerged from a period in which they first had to be adopted by organizations. The drivers of the adoption of these channels by public sector organizations has been the subject of research for a longer period, among others considering website adoption [2, 3], Twitter adoption [4, 5], and YouTube adoption [6, 7, 79]. However, comparisons between the adoption patterns of different technologies are rarely conducted. As such, many adoption studies address only one part of “an increasingly complex media ecology” ([8], p. 85). Next to this, the importance of context wherein different technologies arose has only received limited attention. However, excessive reliance on one specific theory would exclude how technology evolves inside and outside the organization, and not assess the motivations of adoption as it happens [9].
Moreover, it is observed that longitudinal and time-to-event data analyses have been under-used in the e-government adoption literature ([10], exceptions include [2, 11, 12]). Survival or time-to-event data analysis is a statistical method that considers both the event (whether it occurred) and the time to the event (when the event occurred) [13]. Most other statistical methods, such as proportions, risk/odds ratios, and logistic regressions, do not take into consideration time-to-event conditions (when the event occurred). Ordinary multiple regression, on the other hand, takes time-to-event as an outcome variable, but not whether the event occurred [14]. As technology adoption is a complex process wherein many organizations constantly make adoption or non-adoption decisions, survival analysis could provide new insights and additions to the existent research.
The present study aims to address these gaps and comprehensively assesses the adoption phase of three technologies in the context of Dutch municipalities: the adoption of websites between 1994–2000, the adoption of Twitter between 2008–2018, and the adoption of YouTube between 2006–2018. Using survival analysis, this study provides unique insights into how technology perceptions have changed over the course of time, as well as other technological, organizational, and environmental drivers of technology adoption. Furthermore, the juxtaposition of the more news-oriented Twitter and video-oriented YouTube allows us to show that not only do social media platforms come with their own characteristics, but that these characteristics might also lead to different municipal adoption patterns. The context of Dutch local governments is suitable for research due to its variety in terms of organization and environment. First, while the central government delegated numerous tasks to municipalities, they are free to organize them in their own way, including their social media strategy. Likewise, the demographic structure of Dutch municipalities can be variable in terms of age, education level, and income.
The remainder of this article is organized as follows. After describing literature on the adoption of websites and social media by municipalities, hypotheses are developed in line with the Technology-Organization-Environment Framework. This is followed by an account of the materials and methods that were used. The findings are presented, and the discussion section examines the findings considering the existing literature. It concludes with theoretical and practical implications, in addition to limitations and possibilities for future research.

2 The Adoption of Websites, Twitter, and YouTube by Public Sector Organizations

In order to better understand the historical context of the emergence of the three technologies analyzed in this study, this section addresses the discourse according to the literature, specifically focusing on the perceived relative advantage for public sector organizations. Whereas there is a clear separation between websites – which belong to the realm of Web 1.0 –, and social media – which came to be known as Web 2.0 (see e.g., [82]) –, the focus on Twitter and YouTube is interesting for several reasons. First, both social media platforms are employed very much by local authorities, which is evidenced by international literature [5, 7] as well as in the local context of the Netherlands [37, 62]. Second, both social media platforms are highly relevant for the context of the Dutch userbase, although it could be observed that Twitter use seems to be declining. A longitudinal survey [64] finds that daily use of Twitter by individuals aged 15 years and older decreased from 12% in 2013 to 9% in 2021, and the daily use of YouTube in the same period increased from 8% to 22%. Finally, the registration dates of Twitter and YouTube accounts are publicly available, which will prove especially relevant for conducting survival analysis.
During the 1990s, the knowledge and use of the Internet spread quickly across industries, regardless of size, location, or product [15]. The same observation has been made in contemporary literature on local government ICT adoption [16, 17]. At the same time, well into the early 2000s, the discussion on the merits of technology-based participation was still ongoing [18, 19]. This sentiment changed during the 2000s, when the functionalities of websites for municipalities to deliver information and services, communicate with and among citizens, and allow citizens to interact with government officials were institutionalized and standardized [20].
From 2006 onwards, a similar shift in sentiment toward social media can be observed [66]. Furthermore, with the advent of social media during the 2000s, Internet use had already become embedded in everyday life practices and routines [21]. In a time when public administration is facing resource constraints, social media have the potential to fulfill multiple functions with limited resources [22]. In particular, Twitter is a primary example of a platform that rapidly gained popularity, and is presently embedded in the existent media landscape, as a significant driver of agenda setting in traditional news sources [23]. In the context of its use by local governments, Twitter has proven to be an important communication tool for government-related issues and responding to stakeholder needs [5, 8].
YouTube is a social media platform that has been growing at a similar rate. Early literature describes this platform as a symbol of participatory media culture [74], and lately it has also become a more popular news source for young people [24], making it an important place for organizations seeking to engage with a large group of stakeholders. Some literature points to its effectiveness for municipalities on the terrain of engaging citizens [6, 77]. At the same time, it has been suggested that video content creation for YouTube by local governments might be more costly and elaborate than more text-based platforms such as Twitter and Facebook [7].

3 Hypothesis Development

3.1 Technological Context

The advent of the Internet and other ICT components have been critical to the deployment and spread of e-government [25]. In this respect, the implementation of ICT communication can be thought of as a series of innovations adopted by service providers over time [26]. For this reason, the adoption of newer tools for communication in an e-government context has frequently been connected to the diffusion of innovations (DOI) theory [27]. According to DOI theory, organizations can be classified into five adopter categories based on when they adopt the innovation in relation to other organizations in their social system [67, 78]:
(1)
Innovators can be seen as entrepreneurial organizations and bear the greatest risk in initiating the diffusion process, as they deal with the uncertainties of creation and the potential ratio of innovation use.
(2)
Early adopters are social and organizational leaders, with increased capacity for opinion and judgment about new ideas and help trigger “the critical mass when they adopt the innovation” ([27], p. 283).
(3)
Third comes the early majority, which is heavily influenced by the early adopters.
(4)
The late majority is part of a “second” critical mass of innovation [78], shaped by a more skeptical point of view. They differ from the early majority in that they are much more cautious, waiting for the product to be thoroughly tested.
(5)
Finally, Laggards generally considered to be wary of new ideas, and frequently lack the resources for implementation.
Organizations adopt at different times, and organizations in each of the adopter categories are thought to have different perceptions of the innovation's general organizational attributes. One element of this is that adoption is influenced by the innovation's relative advantage over current practice [28]. The previous section describes how the benefits of the website format were not yet clearly outlined up to the early 2000s. Therefore, it seems acceptable to expect a slow adoption pattern for websites in the 1990s. On the other hand, as in the period when social media were on the rise, the benefits of using Internet tools for communication and interaction with stakeholders were already much more visible. The perceived benefits of engaging in timely and direct end-consumer contact at a low cost thus might have resonated easier with organizations than with websites [1], suggesting a comparatively faster adoption rate.
In terms of compatibility, a technology is more likely to be used when it is consistent with the existing infrastructure, culture, values, and preferred work practices of the organization [27]. During the early stages of website adoption, not all municipalities possessed the infrastructure to facilitate website use. This was not the case prior to the adoption of free social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, which allow organizations to reach stakeholders more easily than websites [76], resulting in lower start-up costs for municipalities.
Due to Twitter's responsive characteristics, local governments are expected to adopt this platform earlier than YouTube [5, 22]. YouTube is geared toward multimedia exchange and allows users to share, comment on, and rate videos [76]. Although some research points toward different demographic groups represented on YouTube [29], municipalities might be quicker to adopt Twitter, as YouTube adoption entails video content creation, which requires more resources than text-based messaging that are less compatible with existing work practices [7]. Therefore, I formulate the first hypothesis as follows:
Hypothesis 1.
Municipalities have …
(a)
A slower adoption rate of the website than DOI theory suggests.
(b)
A faster adoption rate of Twitter than DOI theory suggests.
(c)
A slower adoption rate of YouTube than DOI theory suggests.

3.2 Organizational Context

In the organizational context, prior experience with different social media might be an important driver. Top management is primarily viewed in the literature on innovation adoption as the agency responsible for transforming norms, values, and culture, allowing other organizational members to adapt to the new technical artifact [1, 30]. Proclivity to engage in projects with uncertain outcomes or high profits and losses is linked to the risk-taking element [31]. In line with this, a municipality's willingness to adopt innovations can be a stimulus for social media adoption. Preexisting capabilities could also constitute resources that organizations can mobilize in pursuit of goals of facilitating online corporate dialog, as suggested by resource mobilization theory [32, 33].
At the same time, path dependence and soft determinism suggest that “one historical event did not rigidly prescribe certain subsequent technological developments, but at least made sequences of technological improvements in one direction easier” ([34], p. 19, see also [35]). In the context of social media adoption, it could be argued that as soon as an organization perceives presence on one online social network as sufficient in terms of outcome, this might limit the possibility of adopting other forms of social media.
Translating this to our context, YouTube adoption before Twitter adoption could indicate options for resource mobilization, as well as an organizational propensity for innovation and risk-taking, stimulating adoption of alternative social media. However, Twitter adoption prior to YouTube adoption could point more toward path dependency and soft determinism, especially given the higher entry costs of adopting YouTube (i.e., the needed resources and skills to make video content). I thus formulate the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 2.
If a municipality has already adopted YouTube, this has a positive effect on the adoption of Twitter.
Hypothesis 3.  If a municipality has already adopted Twitter, this has a negative effect on the adoption of YouTube.
[36] argue that even if a company lacks the financial resources to invest in a variety of advertising or public relations strategies, it can still reach a large audience by making effective use of its web technologies. This has recently expanded to include social media [5, 33]. Conversely, several authors claim that while creating social media accounts is free, effective management and monitoring of those accounts necessitates time and well-trained employees, emphasizing the need for resources before adopting an innovation [7, 37]. In light of this mixed evidence, I put forward the following hypothesis for both platforms:
Hypothesis 4.
If a municipality is in a better financial position, this has no effect on social media adoption.
Another requirement for e-government adoption could be a willingness to change [38]. Municipal amalgamations could be an example of a momentum in which e-government innovations could be implemented, as they are frequently designed to take advantage of economies of scale, as well as a chance for a quality impulse in public service delivery [37, 39, 73]. At the same time, some authors note that the positive effect of amalgamations does not result in more efficient management, and that they generate an increase in coordination and management costs due to more complex bureaucratic structures [40, 41, 71]. The existing evidence thus suggests that it is appropriate to expect a null hypothesis for both platforms:
Hypothesis 5.
If a municipality has recently been subject to an amalgamation, this has no effect on social media adoption.

3.3 Environmental Context

As public organizations must be politically legitimate, this necessitates that they follow social norms regarding organizational structure and function [14, 42, 43]. These norms could be grouped under the environmental context of e-government adoption.
Most literature on the digital divide assumes that people of a higher age are less digitally engaged, less likely to trust e-government services, and thus less likely to adopt forms of e-government [44, 45]. The reverse is said of people of a younger age. At the same time, contradictory evidence exists that digital skills do not predict or relate to channel choice, implying that the assumed digital divide has changed in recent days [46]. Furthermore, despite the fact that social media is said to be a universal platform for social interaction for adolescents and young adults [47, 48], no relationship has been observed with municipal adoption of e-government for a larger presence of this group, as they are less likely to use municipal products [73]. I align with the observed mixed results of the digital divide with the following hypothesis for both platforms:
Hypothesis 6.
There is no relationship between social media adoption and (a) the presence of adolescents and young adults and (b) the presence of people aged 65 or older.
According to research, stakeholders with a better socioeconomic position are more inclined to support ICT advances because they use the Internet more frequently and seek higher-quality public services [49, 50]. Recent studies also show that sophisticated social media use is likely to be found in municipalities with a larger presence of people with higher education levels [37, 48, 51]. For this reason, I will put forward the following hypothesis for both platforms:
Hypothesis 7.
If relatively more people in the municipality are higher educated, this has a positive effect on social media adoption.
Because of their professional background, IT professionals may have more positive intentions toward using e-government services, as new innovations are easily compatible with existing values, beliefs, experiences, and needs [37, 52, 69, 75]. IT professionals are already accustomed to using digital devices and incorporating technology into their daily routines. This familiarity can be viewed as a beneficial prerequisite for using e-government. Therefore, I formulated the following hypothesis for both platforms:
Hypothesis 8.
If a municipality has relatively more IT professionals, this has a positive effect on social media adoption.
Finally, as the general number of technology adopters among citizens grows, expectations for organizational practices begin to emerge, and lagging organizations feel compelled to adopt to avoid losing legitimacy [65]. In line with the relative advantage of technologies, a larger online community encourages organizations to make better use of content that allows them to reach a larger share of their constituency through social media [1, 5]. Next to this, trust in e-government generally comes with trust in ICT tools in general [53], which suggests that as particular communication technologies become more trusted, communication with local governments through these technologies becomes more trusted as well.
A particular dynamic in this context is media coverage, which lends legitimacy to the voices, frames, and subjects that are chosen to be featured [54, 68]. Furthermore, media coverage of a particular topic increases user engagement with that topic [55]. In this respect, I propose the final hypothesis:
Hypothesis 9.
Municipal adoption of new technologies is determined by (a) increased media coverage of the technology and (b) increased user engagement with the technology.

4 Materials and Method

The information for this study was gathered between January and May of 2018. Dates of registration for websites, Twitter, and YouTube accounts were gathered manually via the website of NL Domain Registry (Stichting Internet Domeinregistratie Nederland, www.sidn.nl), which maintains a searchable database of all Dutch websites, including registration dates. As the number of municipalities decreased from 548 in 1998 to 380 in 2018, website registration data could only be collected for the proportion of municipalities that were still existent in the period of data collection. Twitter and YouTube were chosen as online social networks for further analysis, as the registration dates of accounts on Twitter and YouTube are publicly available. This allowed for a direct comparison with website registration dates. In order to illustrate the diffusion of websites and social media in Dutch municipalities, this study uses the first and last observed registrations as a timespan for each communication tool. Accordingly, the adoption timespans in our dataset are 6 years for websites, 9 years for Twitter, and 12 years for YouTube (see Table 1).
Table 1.
 WebsiteTwitterYouTube
 N = 342N = 378N = 339
First observed registration25 January 19941 March 200811 November 2006
Last observed registration6 May 20001 June 20171 March 2018
Table 1. Timespan of the Historical Analysis of Municipal Adoption of Websites and Social Media
Earlier research on the topic of website adoption [56, 67] proposed assessing the diffusion of innovations by dividing website adoption by companies using the five DOI adoption categories of Innovators, Early adopters, Early majority, Late majority, and Laggards [27]. Inspired by this research approach, the first part of this study divides the timespans for the three technologies into quintiles in accordance with these five categories, taking the first and last observed registration as a starting and end point. The proportion of the sample that falls into the first quintile was referred to as Innovator, while the proportion in the second quintile was an Early adopter, and so on. For all variables, Pearson's chi-squared tests were used to look at statistically significant differences between expected and observed proportions of adoption. Additional Mann-Whitney tests were run to check robustness of the results, which highly resembled the results of the chi-squared tests.2

4.1 Independent Variables

In order to test the hypotheses from the organizational and environmental context, a dataset was constructed which covered the adoption timespans of Twitter and YouTube.3 Table 2 provides an overview of the independent variables, their sources, and the time period for which the data could be retrieved. Subsequently, Table 3 provides the descriptive statistics of the independent variables. Due to the evidence for population size and population density in digital government contexts [5, 12, 44], these were entered as control variables in the models.
Table 2.
VariableOperationalizationSourceTime period
Organizational context
Prior social media useMunicipality already registered on (a) YouTube during Twitter adoption, (b) Twitter during YouTube adoption (dichotomous)Self-collected2006–2018
Financial healthLevel of debt per inhabitant per 1 January[57]2008–2018
AmalgamationMunicipality amalgamated in the eight years prior to first adoption4 (dichotomous)[58]2002–2018
    
Environmental context   
Age distributionAge structure of the population older than 10 years[58]2006–2018
Higher EducationShare of higher educated people[58]2006–2018
IT professionalsNumber of ICT businesses per 1,000 inhabitants[58]2007–2018
    
Control variables   
Population sizeNumber of inhabitants[58]1994–2018
Population densityNumber of inhabitants per km2[58]1994–2018
Table 2. Overview of Assessed Independent Variables
Table 3.
 NMeanSDMinMaxSkew.Kurt.
Organizational context    
Prior YouTube use1,1340.100.30012.634.92
Prior Twitter use2,7440.460.50010.18−1.97
Financial health3,6023,632.932,624.040.0092.01−0.60−1.17
Amalgamation3,8780.120.32012.383.66
        
Environmental context       
People aged 10−253,87842.542.4929.4258.641.275.29
People aged 25−653,87853.972.2143.1060.52−0.851.99
People aged 65+3,87816.281.226.8230.880.560.94
Higher Education3,87821.981.355.4279.840.962.84
IT professionals3,8787.695.050.1190.022.177.35
        
Control variables       
Population size5,14634,36351,130932799,2788.4594.18
Population density5,146748.73861.25216,4622.426.77
Table 3. Descriptive Statistics of the Independent Variables

4.2 Media Coverage and User Engagement

LexisNexis Academic was used to measure media coverage. This database performs full-text searches on thousands of news articles, and it searches national sources and local newspapers across the country for news articles. Time-based media coverage measurements using LexisNexis Academic have been employed in other contexts [54, 66]. Accordingly, the search strings “website,” “Twitter,” and “YouTube” were used to find articles that were published in every month of the respective timespans. One study [66] has analyzed the amount of press coverage of the social media platform Twitter between 2006 and 2009. Based on this methodology, I restrict the search results for this study to coverage in newspapers and magazines from Netherlands-based sources during the adoption timeframes.5 Our dataset included a total of 10,581 news articles using “website” during the time periods of interest; 208,688 news articles using “Twitter,” and 80,567 news articles using “YouTube”. In order to verify that a later moment in time would not by definition yield more search results (due to possible higher data availability in the database over the years), the control search term “newspaper” was checked for all timespans of adoption. As this did not lead to possible issues, I used the results for the original search terms as a reference. The highest number of news articles per month for each search term was used as a benchmark for all other observations, generating a value between 0 (no media coverage of the technology) and 100 (maximum media coverage of the technology).
Google Trends was used in order to measure user engagement. Google Trends sends website traffic data to the analytics server via a tracking code embedded on the website that is activated when a visitor views a page on a website [72]. Accordingly, it presents the monthly volume of Google searches for a given keyword, providing a normalized value as an output similar to the output that was used for LexisNexis Academic. [59] was followed and the search terms “Twitter” and “YouTube” were entered into Google Trends in the Dutch territory between 2006 and 2018.6 The level of interest is expressed as a percentage, with 100 being assigned to the month with the most searches for a given term. All other values are ranked in order of importance in relation to that date. No numerical data is available on the absolute number of searches. For the survival model, media coverage and user engagement were converted to variables expressing three-month moving averages during the month of adoption by a municipality.7

4.3 Survival Analyses

A multiple-record survival dataset was constructed. The month of the first registration of the website domain, Twitter account, and YouTube account were treated as the first month of adoption of the innovation, and all other dates were offset against the first adoption month. One yearly observation was generated for every municipality, including the data for the independent variables in the adoption timespan, assessing if the municipality had ‘survived’ (0) or if it adopted the technology (1). If the municipality had adopted the technology, the exact month of adoption set against ‘patient zero’ (i.e., the first adopter of the technology) was recorded, and also regarded as the final observation for the specific municipality in the dataset.
First, Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to investigate variations in adoption rates. To account for multiple predictor variables at the same time, Cox Proportional Hazards models and parametric survival models were used [13, 60]. All variables were tested in order to see if the proportionality assumption was met, which is a requirement for Cox Proportional Hazards. Media coverage and user engagement did not meet the proportionality assumption, but they did meet the exponential distribution assumption. Therefore, separate exponential proportional hazard models were computed for these variables.
After conducting normality tests, all variables except the dichotomous variables were converted into their natural log form. In order to rule out multicollinearity, correlation coefficients were scrutinized, which led to no possible issues. Model fit for all models was evaluated by conducting Wald \(\chi\) 2 tests. Furthermore, robust variance estimators were used for all survival models [61], which use the efficient score residual for each subject in the data for the variance calculation.

5 Findings

The findings section consists of three parts. The first part looks at the municipal adoption curves and relates them to the expectations from DOI theory and earlier literature. The second part concentrates on Twitter and YouTube and assesses associations with a set of organizational and environmental factors. The third part considers all three technologies and assesses the evolving connection between municipal adoption, media coverage of the technology, and user engagement with the technology.

5.1 Adoption Curves

Two earlier studies [56, 67] have analyzed corporate website adoption by classifying their observations into the five adopter categories based on the number of months that their organization had an operational website. Inspired by this methodology, Figure 1 and Table 4 compare the DOI distribution as suggested by [27] with the Dutch municipal adoption of websites and social media.
Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. Graphical presentation of the theoretical DOI distribution according to [27] (dotted line) and the municipal adoption of (a) websites, (b) Twitter, and (c) YouTube.
Table 4.
  TheoryWebsiteTwitterYouTube
  (%)N (%)N (%)N (%)
Innovators 2.51 (0.3)1 (0.3)1 (0.3)
Early adopters 13.50 (0.0)6 (1.5)20 (5.9)
Early majority 34.045 (13.2)302 (79.9)178 (52.5)
Late majority 34.0191 (55.8)64 (17.0)116 (34.3)
Laggards 16.0105 (30.7)5 (1.2)24 (7.1)
Total 100.0342 (100.0)378 (100.0)339 (100.0)
Pearson's Χ2 (DOI)120.36***182.05***42.76*** 
Pearson's Χ2 (Full)400.80 ***   
Table 4. Chi-squared Tests of Differences between Theoretical DOI Distribution [27] and Municipal Adoption of Websites, Twitter, and YouTube
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. Kaplan-Meier survivor estimates of municipalities’ adoption of Websites, Twitter, and YouTube (months).8
This suggests that the three adoption patterns differ significantly from what DOI theory suggests. First, website adopters are relatively overrepresented in the Late majority and Laggards categories, in support of H1a. Twitter has a very large proportion of the municipalities falling into the Early majority category and few municipalities in the remaining categories, providing support for H1b. To a lesser degree, YouTube is overrepresented in the Early majority category, in support of H1c.
In order to gain more insight into municipal adoption of the technologies, Figure 2 and Table 5 show the results of the Kaplan-Meier estimates for the municipal adoption rates. In Figure 2, the X-axis represents the ‘survival duration’ for the particular interval. The cumulative probability of adoption during a given time is visible on the Y-axis.
Table 5.
TechnologyAnalysis timeIncidence rateNSurvival time
    25%50%75%
Website17,3010.018320465566
Twitter10,7360.034364212935
YouTube28,0090.0123704867103
Table 5. Summary Statistics of Survival Time Data of Dutch Municipalities
The incidence rate – i.e., the ratio of the number of municipalities adopting the technology during the study period to the analysis time – confirms a relatively fast adoption rate for Twitter by Dutch municipalities (H1a). Although website adoption takes longer than Twitter adoption (supporting H1b), it also shows that the YouTube adoption rate is even slower than the municipal adoption rate for websites, providing support for H1c.

5.2 What Drives Municipal Social Media Adoption?

Table 6 shows the results of the Cox regression models for municipal Twitter and YouTube adoption.
Table 6.
 TwitterYouTube
 zHR (RSE)zHR (RSE)
Organizational context
Prior YouTube use1.73*1.200 (0.126)  
Prior Twitter use  −1.91*0.679 (0.137)
Financial health−0.290.983 (0.058)0.381.033 (0.089)
Amalgamation−2.59***0.649 (0.108)−0.110.977 (0.206)
     
Environmental context
People aged 10–25−0.330.589 (0.943)−1.270.064 (0.139)
People aged 65+−1.230.403 (0.298)0.231.223 (1.079)
Higher Education0.941.287 (0.345)0.231.077 (0.353)
IT professionals−1.89*0.725 (0.123)−1.510.700 (0.165)
     
Control variables
Population size5.03***1.835 (0.221)5.53***2.374 (0.371)
Population density0.631.048 (0.079)1.131.117 (0.109)
Wald \(\chi\) 267.86***57.13***
N9911,858
Table 6. Hazard Ratios for Municipal Social Media Adoption
* p < 0.10, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01. Constants not reported.
A negative effect was observed with respect to prior Twitter use in the YouTube model, and prior YouTube use in the Twitter model was positively significant, providing support for H2 and H3. Strong negative significance could be observed for recently amalgamated municipalities in the Twitter model, not in support of H5. Negative significance could be observed in the Twitter model for IT professionals, not supporting H8. No results were found for financial health, age, and higher education, supporting H4 and H6ab but providing no support for H7. Finally, the strongest significance and effects could be observed for the control variable population size.

5.3 Assessing the Relationship between Municipal Adoption, Media Coverage, and User Engagement

In this section, I assess the relation between the municipal adoption of the technologies and media coverage of the technologies, as well as user engagement with the technologies. Figure 3 illustrates how adoption rates, media coverage, and (for Twitter and YouTube) user engagement with the topic have changed over time. The adoption rates correlated highly with the assessed variables for all three technologies, although for Twitter and YouTube it could be noticed that user engagement correlated somewhat higher than media coverage (see Appendix A).9
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3. Graphical representation of the municipal adoption rates of (a) websites, (b) Twitter, and (c) YouTube, compared to media coverage and user engagement.
In order to test the effects of media coverage, Table 7 shows the regression models for municipal platform adoption with media coverage and user engagement, controlling for population size and population density. All models show strong significance for media coverage, and its effects outperform those of the control variables. The strongest effect can be observed with website adoption, followed by Twitter and YouTube. The same is true for user engagement, which for both Twitter and YouTube appears to show an even stronger effect than media coverage, in line with the correlation coefficients. This provides strong support for H9ab.
Table 7.
 Media coverage modelsUser engagement models
 WebsiteTwitterYouTubeTwitterYouTube
 zHR (RSE)zHR (RSE)zHR (RSE)zHR (RSE)zHR (RSE)
Intercept−12.94***0.000 (0.000)−16.97***0.000 (0.000)−13.40***0.000 (0.000)−17.46***0.000 (0.000)−13.31***0.000 (0.000)
Media coverage20.98***1.886 (0.057)14.01***1.632 (0.057)8.61***3.491 (0.507)    
User engagement      14.78***2.059 (0.101)8.57***5.624 (1.133)
           
Control variables
Population size4.67***1.438 (0.111)6.47***1.470 (0.088)5.42***1.665 (0.157)6.48***1.466 (0.086)5.44***1.649 (0.152)
Population density2.52**1.223 (0.000)1.091.043 (0.040)0.181.012 (0.066)1.001.040 (0.041)0.041.002 (0.057)
Wald \(\chi\) 2449.07***257.37***97.69***280.98***100.27***
N9741,1332,7451,1332,745
Table 7. Hazard Ratios for Municipal Social Media Adoption with Media Coverage and User Engagement
* p < 0.10, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01.

6 Discussion

The aim of this article is to add to the existing body of research on e-government adoption by comparing the adoption patterns by Dutch municipalities of three distinct technologies: websites, Twitter, and YouTube. Comparing different communication technologies is essential in order to understand the different components of our “increasingly complex media ecology” ([8], p. 85, see also [62]). In line with this, the importance of the context in which different technologies arose has been addressed only to a limited extent. Only relying on one specific theory dismisses how technology evolves inside and outside the organization and leaves out the motivations of adoption as it occurs [9].
Table 8 summarizes the hypotheses and if they were supported by the findings. First, in the technological context, it was observed that municipalities adopted Twitter relatively fast, followed at a greater distance by website adoption and YouTube adoption. The unclear relative advantage of adopting websites in the 1990s is mirrored in its relatively slow adoption pattern (cf., [18]). The relatively fast adoption of Twitter could be ascribed to its emergence in a period where the Internet had already become embedded in existing routines, and the benefits of using Internet tools for stakeholder interaction were much more tangible [20]. This could have been furthered by Twitter's responsive characteristics, which are said to help local authorities contact stakeholders more efficiently and cost-effectively than before (cf., [5]). The comparatively slow adoption of YouTube could be due to its demand for specific resources (i.e., creating video content), which are less compatible with the existing work practices of municipalities than text-based messaging through Twitter [7, 27].
Table 8.
HypothesisSupport
Technological context
Municipalities have …
H1aA slower adoption rate of the website than DOI theory suggests.Yes
H1bA faster adoption rate of Twitter than DOI theory suggests.Yes
H1cA slower adoption rate of YouTube than DOI theory suggests.Yes
   
Organizational context
H2If a municipality has already adopted YouTube, this has a positive effect on the adoption of Twitter.Yes
H3If a municipality has already adopted Twitter, this has a negative effect on the adoption of YouTube.Yes
H4If a municipality is in a better financial position, this has no effect on social media adoption.No
H5If a municipality has recently been subject to an amalgamation, this has no effect on social media adoption.No
   
Environmental context
 There is no relationship between social media adoption and … 
H6aThe presence of adolescents and young adults.No
H6bThe presence of people aged 65 or older.No
H7If relatively more people in the municipality are higher educated, this has a positive effect on social media adoption.No
H8If a municipality has relatively more IT professionals, this has a positive effect on social media adoption.No
 Municipal adoption of new technologies is determined by …
H9aIncreased media coverage of the technology.Yes
H9bIncreased user engagement with the technology.Yes
Table 8. Overview of Hypotheses and Empirical Support in the Findings
In the organizational context, it emerged that municipalities that already used YouTube were quicker to adopt Twitter. This could confirm the risk-taking element of these organizations [31], evidenced by their already having adopted a social media platform of which the costs and benefits were less evident at the time of adoption. It could also point toward resource availability that was mobilized in pursuit of the goal of facilitating online corporate dialog (cf., [33]). The opposite effect was visible for municipalities that had adopted Twitter prior to YouTube. Although this could be ascribed to compatibility issues discussed in the technological context, this could also be due to path dependence and soft determinism [35].
Additionally, it was observed that recently amalgamated municipalities were slower in adopting Twitter. This seems in line with literature claiming that amalgamations generate an increase in coordination and management costs due to more complex bureaucratic structures [40], potentially making social media adoption less of a priority for municipalities. Finally, the lack of results for municipalities in a better financial position matches the opposite effects described and observed in earlier literature [7, 37].
In the environmental context, the amount of media coverage for a particular technology appeared to be a strong predictor for municipal adoption, together with the level of user engagement with the technology. This aligns with the theory that suggests that as the number of users of a particular technology grows, expectations for organizational practices emerge, and lagging organizations feel compelled to adopt to avoid losing legitimacy [2]. In line with this, a larger online community encourages organizations to make better use of content that allows them to get the most out of social media [5].
Furthermore, it was observed that municipalities with a larger presence of IT professionals were slower to adopt Twitter. Although the observed effect was small, this suggests that although IT professionals may regularly consult social media in their daily routines, they are not inclined to expect this stance from the municipality where they do their work. One explanation could be that IT departments are not often involved in organizational social media initiatives [9], making IT professionals less involved in the issue of adopting social media. No results were observed for municipalities with more people with higher education levels, although this has been suggested by other scholars [51]. Finally, the lack of effects for age groups is consistent with more recent research on the digital divide [46].

6.1 Theoretical Contribution

The findings in this study have several theoretical implications. First, despite context and adoption studies being mainstream for research in social media and government [81], the longitudinal nature of this study forms an addition to the literature on technology adoption by municipalities that consider a variety of points in time. Second, with respect to the diffusion of innovations (DOI) literature, the findings underline the importance of the temporal and the environmental context. The comparison of adoption patterns shows that although there are parallels (for example in terms of the importance of media coverage), the context of technology adoption has changed greatly overtime: website adoption happened during a period when the merits of the Internet were not yet clearly outlined, although this changed after the turn of the century. In the context of Twitter, many users already embedded the Internet into their daily web routines, creating a different playing field for local authorities to see the benefits of social media adoption – although the balance between costs and benefits was perceived differently for Twitter and YouTube. Finally, in terms of the e-governance of public organizations, the results in this study might point to the possible role of path dependence, which up to date has been addressed only to a limited extent in the perspective of social media adoption (one exception is [63]).

6.2 Practical Implications

At least two important implications for practice can be derived from the findings. First, the initial slow adoption rate of websites provides a clear illustration of how perceptions of the relative advantage of technology adoption change over time. This also ties into the risks of path dependence and soft determinism and underlines the importance of openness to new technologies by managers and the need to critically assess the potential benefits of adoption.
Second, the comparatively slow adoption of YouTube is understandable from the vantage point of local authorities in deciding on the limited relative advantage of adoption. At the same time, it could be important for municipalities to have an eye for the different demographic groups and how they could be reached. Looking at Twitter and YouTube, it seems clear that the Dutch userbase is considerably smaller on Twitter (9%) than on YouTube (20%) [64], although municipalities have been considerably quicker in adopting the former. There is value for local authorities to investigate different platforms and their specifics, in order to stay in touch with all their constituents as a service-providing organization.

6.3 Limitations and Future Research

The findings in this study are subject to some limitations. First, innovation adoption has only been studied in a Western-European country, and as such, it draws from a specific administrative tradition. More research is needed to see if these findings can be replicated in countries with different political-administrative contexts. Future research should also consider additional factors such as gender (see e.g., [80]), which were beyond the scope of this study. It could also be informative to conduct similar research with newer social media platforms such as Instagram, which is mainly focused on the sharing of pictures rather than videos, and whose adoption has grown steadily during the last few years (see e.g., [79]). Next to this, it remains an open question if the perceived relative advantage of Twitter and YouTube for local authorities is in line with the actual outcomes of their use. Therefore, it remains essential to supplement adoption-focused research with research that helps to understand how social media can be used effectively [5]. Finally, as important as it is to look at e-government adoption, it is becoming more important to also take into consideration abandonment, as social media platforms are no static entities and their userbase can collapse rapidly [70]. Future research needs to consider these limitations.

Footnotes

1
Twitter and YouTube only show the month of registration. In order to make observations comparable, the assumption was made that municipalities registered their social media accounts on the first day of the month.
2
Results of the additional Mann-Whitney tests are available on request.
3
Due to data limitations, only the control variables could be retrieved reliably and consistently for the entire timespan of website adoption. Therefore, the Cox regressions that assess the institutional and environmental context could not be conducted for website adoption.
4
This moment in time was chosen in order to account for time delay before the amalgamation's possible effects could be retraced, and in order to prevent a structural backlog for municipalities that amalgamated during the period of technology adoption.
5
Next to newspapers and magazines, [66] also consider blog posts in their analysis of press coverage. However, blog posts were not considered for this study, as they were not yet used during the period of website adoption, making a less valid comparison.
6
Unfortunately, the user engagement analysis could not be replicated for municipal websites registered between 1994 and 2000 because Google Trends only records search terms back until 2004.
7
For the statistical analysis, the units of media coverage and user engagement are expressed as the relative media coverage for/user engagement with the technology during the month of adoption of the technology.
8
Wilcoxon (Breslow) tests indicate that the differences in development of the three groups are statistically significant (p < 0.001).
9
Interestingly, opposite trends seem to exist in the attention for Twitter and YouTube in the Netherlands: media coverage of Twitter is generally higher than user engagement, whereas user engagement for YouTube seems generally higher than media coverage.

Appendix

A Pearson Correlations of Municipal Adoption Rate with Media Coverage and User Engagement During the Three Months Prior to Adoption

 WebsiteTwitterYouTube
 N = 342N = 378N = 339
Media coverage0.845***0.749***0.569***
User engagement 0.950***0.863***

Ackowledgments

I am grateful to Jurgen Sijbrandij and Rick van Hofwegen for their assistance with data collection, as well as three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions on earlier versions of this article.

References

[1]
F. P. Tajudeen, N. I. Jaafar, and S. Ainin. 2018. Understanding the impact of social media usage among organizations. Information & Management 55, 3 (2018), 308–321.
[2]
K. N. Jun and C. Weare. 2011. Institutional motivations in the adoption of innovations: The case of e-government. Journal of Public Administration: Research and Theory 21, 3 (2011), 495–519.
[3]
A. Manoharan. 2013. A study of the determinants of county E-Government in the United States. American Review of Public Administration 43, 2 (2013), 159–178.
[4]
E. Bonsón, D. Perea, and M. Bednárová. 2020. Environmental disclosure as a tool for public sector legitimacy. International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age 7, 3 (2020), 1–31.
[5]
M. Del Mar Galvez-Rodriguez, C. Caba-Pérez, and M. López-Godoy. 2016. Drivers of Twitter as a strategic communication tool for non-profit organizations. Internet Research 26, 5 (2016), 1052–1071.
[6]
A. Triantafillidou et al. 2016. Greek local E-Government 2.0: Drivers and outcomes of social media adoption. In Social Media and Local Governments, Public Administration and Information Technology, M. Sobaci (Eds.). Springer, Cham, vol. 15.
[7]
T. Silva, A. Tavares, and M. Lameiras. 2019. ‘Trendy’ Cities: Exploring the adoption of different types of social media by portuguese municipalities. In Electronic Participation. ePart (2019). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, P. Panagiotopoulos et al. (Eds.). Springer, Cham, vol 11686.
[8]
A. Jungherr. 2016. Twitter use in election campaigns: A systematic literature review. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 13, 1 (2016), 72–91.
[9]
I. Mergel and S. I. Bretschneider. 2013. A three-stage adoption process for social media use in government. Public Administration Review 73, 3 (2013), 390–400.
[10]
B. W. Wirtz and P. Daiser. 2018. A meta-analysis of empirical e-government research and its future research implications. International Review of Administrative Sciences 84, 1 (2018), 144–163.
[11]
L. Cingolani. 2021. The survival of open government platforms: Empirical insights from a global sample. Government Information Quarterly 38, 1 (2021), 101522.
[12]
E. Ferro, D. De Leonardis, and L. Dadayan. 2007. Broadband and e-government diffusion. In 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’07). IEEE. 109–109.
[13]
J. D. Singer and J. B. Willett. 2003. Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis: Modeling Change and Event Occurrence. Oxford University Press.
[14]
P. S. Tolbert and L. G. Zucker. 1983. Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: The diffusion of civil service reform 1880-1935. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22–39.
[15]
B. Wellman. 2001. Physical place and cyber place: The rise of networked individualism. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 25, 2 (2001), 227–252.
[16]
J. Steyaert. 2000. Local governments online and the role of the resident: Government shop versus electronic community. Social Science Computer Review 18, 1 (2000), 3–16.
[17]
J. Van Dijk. 1996. Models of democracy: Behind the design and use of new media in politics. Electronic Journal of Communication 6, 2 (1996).
[18]
J. W. Stanley. and C. Weare. 2004. The effects of Internet use on political participation: Evidence from an agency online discussion forum. Administration & Society 36, 5 (2004), 503–527.
[19]
C. Weare. 2002. The Internet and democracy: The causal links between technology and politics. International Journal of Public Administration 25, 5 (2002), 659–691.
[20]
G. Rooks, U. Matzat, and B. Sadowski. 2017. An empirical test of stage models of e-government development: Evidence from Dutch municipalities. The Information Society 33, 4 (2017), 215–225.
[21]
C. Haythornthwaite and B. Wellman. 2002. The Internet in everyday ife: An introduction. In The Internet in Everyday Life, 3–41.
[22]
M. Z. Sobaci. 2016. Social media and local governments: An overview, In Social Media and Local Governments. Public Administration and Information Technology, Sobaci M. (Eds.). Springer, Cham, vol. 15.
[23]
Y. Su and P. Borah. 2019. Who is the agenda setter? Examining the intermedia agenda-setting effect between Twitter and newspapers. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 16, 3 (2019), 236–249.
[24]
S. Van Kessel. 2019. The rise of the YouTube news consumer. Journalism 20, 5 (2019), 890–902.
[25]
R. Heeks. 2005. e-Government as a carrier of context. Journal of Public Policy 25, 1 (2005), 51–74.
[26]
S. Sang, J. D. Lee, and J. Lee. 2009. E-government adoption in ASEAN: The case of Cambodia. Internet Research 19, 5 (2009), 517–534.
[27]
E. M. Rogers. 1983. Diffusion of Innovations. London, Collier Macmillan.
[28]
V. Venkatesh et al. 2003. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 425–478.
[29]
L. Ricke. 2010. A new opportunity for democratic engagement: The CNN-YouTube presidential candidate debates. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 7, 2-3 (2010), 202–215.
[30]
R. L. Purvis, V. Sambamurthy, and R. W. Zmud. 2001. The assimilation of knowledge platforms in organizations: An empirical investigation. Organization Science 12, 2 (2011), 117–135.
[31]
G. T. Lumpkin and G. G. Dess. 1996. Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review 21, 1 (1996), 135–172.
[32]
J. D. McCarthy and M. N. Zald. 1977. Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American Journal of Sociology 82, 6 (1977), 1212–1241.
[33]
S. Nah and G. D. Saxton. 2013. Modeling the adoption and use of social media by nonprofit organizations. New Media & Society 15, 2 (2013), 294–313.
[34]
N. Rosenberg. 1994. Exploring the Black Box: Technology, Economics and History. New York, Cambridge University Press.
[35]
R. W. Rycroft and D. E. Kash. 2002. Path dependence in the innovation of complex technologies. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 14, 1 (2002), 21–35.
[36]
S. Kang and H. E. Norton. 2004. Nonprofit organizations’ use of the World Wide Web: Are they sufficiently fulfilling organizational goals? Public Relations Review 30, 3 (2004), 279–284.
[37]
A. S. C. Faber, T. Budding, and R. Gradus. 2020. Assessing social media use in Dutch municipalities: Political, institutional, and socio-economic determinants. Government Information Quarterly 37, 3 (2020), 101484.
[38]
A. Khan and S. Krishnan. 2021. Citizen engagement in co-creation of e-government services: A process theory view from a meta-synthesis approach. Internet Research 31, 4 (2021), 1318–1375.
[39]
R. Steiner and C. Kaiser. 2017. Effects of amalgamations: Evidence from Swiss municipalities. Public Management Review 19, 2 (2017), 232–252.
[40]
B. Denters et al. 2014. Size and Local Democracy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
[41]
A. F. Tavares. 2018. Municipal amalgamations and their effects. Miscellanea Geographica 22, 1 (2014), 5–15.
[42]
P. J. DiMaggio and W. W. Powell. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 147–160.
[43]
P. Frumkin and J. Galaskiewicz. 2004. Institutional isomorphism and public sector organizations. Journal of Public Administration: Research and Theory 14, 3 (2004), 283–307.
[44]
J. Ruano de la Fuente. 2014. E-Government strategies in Spanish local governments. Local Government Studies 40, 4 (2014), 600–620.
[45]
A. Van Deursen, J. Van Dijk, and W. Ebbers. 2006. Why e-government usage lags behind: Explaining the gap between potential and actual usage of electronic public services in the Netherlands. In International Conference on Electronic Government. Springer, Berlin, 269–280.
[46]
W. E. Ebbers, M. G. Jansen, and A. J. van Deursen. 2016. Impact of the digital divide on e-government: Expanding from channel choice to channel usage. Government Information Quarterly 33, 4 (2016), 685–692.
[47]
T. Hawes, M. J. Zimmer-Gembeck, and S. M. Campbell. 2020. Unique associations of social media use and online appearance preoccupation with depression, anxiety, and appearance rejection sensitivity. Body Image 33 (2020), 66–76.
[48]
C. Metallo, B. Gesuele, M. D. Guillamón, and A. M. Ríos. 2020. Determinants of public engagement on municipal Facebook pages. The Information Society 36, 3 (2020), 147–159.
[49]
C. Weare, J. A. Musso, and M. L. Hale. 1999. Electronic democracy and the diffusion of municipal web pages in California. Administration & Society 31, 1 (1999), 3–27.
[50]
A. Yera et al. 2020. Characterization of e-Government adoption in Europe. PloS One 15, 4 (2020), e0231585.
[51]
X. Gao and J. Lee. 2017. E-government services and social media adoption: Experience of small local governments in Nebraska state. Government Information Quarterly 34, 4 (2017), 627–634.
[52]
B. Detlor et al. 2013. Information quality and community municipal portal use. Government Information Quarterly 30, 1 (2013), 23–32.
[53]
R. W. Schwester. 2009. Examining the barriers to eGovernment adoption. Electronic Journal of e-government 7, 1 (2009), 113–122.
[54]
E. M. Kearns, A. E. Betus, and A. F. Lemieux. 2019. Why do some terrorist attacks receive more media attention than others? Justice Quarterly 36, 6 (2019), 985–1022.
[55]
G. King, B. Schneer, and A. White. 2017. How the news media activate public expression and influence national agendas. Science 358, 6364 (2017), 776–780.
[56]
T. Harrison and K. Waite. 2006. A time-based assessment of the influences, uses and benefits of intermediary website adoption. Information & Management 43, 8 (2006), 1002–1013.
[57]
Ministry of Interior Affairs and Kingdom. 2021. Data Financiën Decentrale Overheden. Available from https://findo.nl/jive, last accessed 14 December 2021.
[58]
Statistics Netherlands. 2021. Regionale kerncijfers Nederland. Available from https://opendata.cbs.nl/statline/, last accessed 14 December 2021.
[59]
P. Kostkova, D. Fowler, S. Wiseman, and J. R. Weinberg. 2013. Major infection events over 5 years: How is media coverage influencing online information needs of health care professionals and the public?. Journal of Medical Internet Research 15, 7 (2013), e2146.
[60]
D. Machin, Y. B. Cheung, and M. Parmar. 2006. Survival Analysis: A Practical Approach. John Wiley and Sons.
[61]
D. Y. Lin and L. J. Wei. 1989. The robust inference for the Cox proportional hazards model. Journal of the American Statistical Association 84, 408 (1989), 1074–1078.
[62]
A. S. C. Faber. 2021. Platforms as distinctive realms and the role of discretionary power: A cross-platform assessment of citizen engagement with Dutch municipalities on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Instagram, Local Government Studies, EPub Ahead of Print, DOI:
[63]
A. Meijer and M. Thaens. 2013. Social media strategies: Understanding the differences between North American police departments. Government Information Quarterly 30, 4 (2013), 343–350.
[64]
Newcom Research and Consultancy. 2021. Sociale Media Onderzoek 2021. Research report. Amsterdam: Newcom Research and Consultancy, 29 January.
[65]
E. Abrahamson and L. Rosenkopf. 1993. Institutional and competitive bandwagons: Using mathematical modeling as a tool to explore innovation diffusion. Academy of Management Review 18, 3 (1993), 487–517.
[66]
N. Arceneaux and A. Schmitz Weiss. 2010. Seems stupid until you try it: Press coverage of Twitter 2006-9. New Media & Society 12, 8 (2010), 1262–1279.
[67]
R. C. Beatty, J. P. Shim, and M. C. Jones. 2001. Factors influencing corporate web site adoption: A time-based assessment. Information & Management 38, 6 (2001), 337–354.
[68]
V. Bekkers et al. 2011. New media, micromobilization, and political agenda setting: Crossover effects in political mobilization and media usage. The Information Society 27, 4 (2011), 209–219.
[69]
F. Bélanger and L. Carter. 2008. Trust and risk in e-government adoption. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems 17, 2 (2008), 165–176.
[70]
I. Belik. 2020. Triggers of social network collapse. Information Systems Management 37, 2 (2020), 170–182.
[71]
S. Blesse and T. Baskaran. 2016. Do municipal amalgamations reduce costs? Evidence from a German federal state. Regional Science and Urban Economics 59 (2016), 54–74.
[72]
P. Boswell. 2011. Google analytics: Measuring content use and engagement. Society for Technical Communication Summit 41 (2011), 135–138.
[73]
T. Budding, B. Faber, and R. Gradus. 2018. Assessing electronic service delivery in municipalities: Determinants and financial consequences of e-government implementation. Local Government Studies 44, 5 (2018), 697–718.
[74]
J. Burgess and E. Green. 2009. The YouTube nation: The changing face of participatory culture. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 14, 4 (2009), 819–836.
[75]
L. Carter and F. Bélanger. 2005. The utilization of e-government services: Citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors. Information Systems Journal 15, 1 (2005), 5–25.
[76]
J. I. Criado and F. Rojas-Martín. 2016. Adopting social media in the local level of government: Towards a public administration 2.0? In Social Media and Local Governments. Public Administration and Information Technology, M. Sobaci (Eds.). Springer, Cham, vol. 15.
[77]
E. Bonsón and M. Bednárová. 2018. The use of YouTube in western European municipalities. Government Information Quarterly 35, 2 (2018), 223–232.
[78]
J. I. Criado, V. Pastor, and J. Villodre. 2018. Measuring social media diffusion in local governments from a longitudinal perspective: Adoption, barriers, and perceptions. In Sub-national Democracy and Politics through Social Media. Springer, Cham, 3–27.
[79]
D. Perea, E. Bonsón, and M. Bednárová. 2021. Citizen reactions to municipalities’ Instagram communication. Government Information Quarterly 38, 3 (2021), 101579.
[80]
L. Alzahrani, W. Al-Karaghouli, and V. Weerakkody. 2018. Investigating the impact of citizens’ trust toward the successful adoption of e-government: A multigroup analysis of gender, age, and internet experience. Information Systems Management 35, 2 (2018), 124–146.
[81]
R. Medaglia and L. Zheng. 2017. Mapping government social media research and moving it forward: A framework and a research agenda. Government Information Quarterly 34, 3 (2017), 496–510.
[82]
J. P. Zappen, T. M. Harrison, and D. Watson. 2008. A new paradigm for designing e-government: Web 2.0 and experience design. In Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Digital Government Research. 17–26.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Drivers of the use of digital platforms by Portuguese parishes – how small government entities struggle with the demand for transparencyOnline Information Review10.1108/OIR-04-2023-0171Online publication date: 10-Sep-2024
  • (2023)Scientometric and Wikipedia Pageview AnalysisTrends in Data Protection and Encryption Technologies10.1007/978-3-031-33386-6_39(243-252)Online publication date: 27-Apr-2023

Index Terms

  1. A Tale of Three Technologies: A Survival Analysis of Municipal Adoption of Websites, Twitter, and YouTube

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image Digital Government: Research and Practice
      Digital Government: Research and Practice  Volume 3, Issue 3
      July 2022
      94 pages
      EISSN:2639-0175
      DOI:10.1145/3561951
      Issue’s Table of Contents
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 14 October 2022
      Online AM: 25 August 2022
      Accepted: 07 August 2022
      Revised: 21 June 2022
      Received: 09 March 2022
      Published in DGOV Volume 3, Issue 3

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. Local government
      2. public sector
      3. websites
      4. Twitter
      5. YouTube

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article
      • Refereed

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)351
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)41
      Reflects downloads up to 12 Sep 2024

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)Drivers of the use of digital platforms by Portuguese parishes – how small government entities struggle with the demand for transparencyOnline Information Review10.1108/OIR-04-2023-0171Online publication date: 10-Sep-2024
      • (2023)Scientometric and Wikipedia Pageview AnalysisTrends in Data Protection and Encryption Technologies10.1007/978-3-031-33386-6_39(243-252)Online publication date: 27-Apr-2023

      View Options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format.

      HTML Format

      Get Access

      Login options

      Full Access

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media