The eastern German state of Brandenburg held its state elections on Sunday. The centre-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), which governs Brandenburg and leads a weak coalition at the federal level, eked out a first-place spot taking just under 31% of the vote. The far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) followed closely with around 29%. Both parties saw a single digit rise in support since the 2019 election.
Brandenburg was the third of this year's state elections in Germany, which are seen as a bellwether of general elections in 2025. The other two, in Saxony and Thuringia earlier this month, also saw the AfD perform well. Since no other party will work with the AfD, which Germany's domestic intelligence classifies partly as a far-right extremist group, it may be difficult to put together stable governing coalitions in these states.
The success of extremist parties and weakness of mainstream ones have led to a reckoning in the German political establishment. One aspect to look at: How the AfD has effectively used social media to capture voters.
Richard Kuchta is a digital analyst at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a German research group that specialises in disinformation and extremism. He spoke to The Parliament on the role social media play in shaping political narratives.
The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.
How significant was social media in influencing the outcomes of state elections this year?
It’s not so much about gaining new voters but rather maintaining existing support. Social media played a role, but it didn’t necessarily radicalise new people during the campaign. Many voters who supported the AfD in previous elections stayed loyal. The party’s growing strength in the region creates a snowball effect, making it easier to attract new voters. Social media was important in keeping their existing base engaged, but it’s not the only explanation for their success. Their language has become more extreme, and the AfD in Thuringia and Saxony has even been labelled as extremist by federal authorities. The topic of migration was heavily used in their messaging, both online and offline.
Which social media platforms played the biggest role in shaping public opinion during these elections?
Facebook was the most widely used platform by AfD candidates in Saxony and Thuringia. X was also used, but Telegram, which is more popular on a federal level, wasn’t as dominant in these state elections. Most of the activity was centred on Facebook and X.
How strongly can we draw a causal relationship between social media activity and the election results?
It’s hard to say definitively without more data. Social media was a key part of both the online and offline campaigns. To reach as many voters as possible, parties had to remain active on both fronts. But it's important not to overstate the impact of social media alone.
What role did misinformation or disinformation play in shaping voter perceptions during the campaigns?
Misinformation is becoming more nuanced and complicated; it’s not as clear-cut as before. There were instances of misrepresented facts during the campaign, especially on issues like migration and the Ukraine war. The AfD frequently mentioned these topics, often pushing for peace or ending the conflict. Whether or not disinformation was actively used, constantly fuelling these topics was enough to sway voter perception.
Do you think AfD social media strategy targeted specific demographics, such as younger voters?
The AfD has a strong presence on Telegram and TikTok, engaging with younger voters. In these elections, a noticeable portion of younger voters, especially in comparison to older generations, supported the AfD. However, on the regional level, AfD candidates primarily used mainstream platforms like Facebook and X, which aren’t as popular among young people. The strategy seems more prominent on a federal level, with TikTok being one of the platforms they use to target younger demographics.
The AfD has used more harsh language in their messaging. They often push the boundaries of what’s considered acceptable language, walking a fine line to avoid violating platform rules. Their approach resonates more with disillusioned voters and those already leaning towards their views.
How did social media shape the public’s perception of key issues during these state elections, such as immigration or economic policy?
Social media played a key role in amplifying the AfD’s messaging, especially on immigration. We don't have the data to say how exactly it impacted. But what we can generally see is public sentiment on migration has been increasingly negative in Germany, which the AfD has capitalised on. They’ve been able to fuel fear around migrants, especially regarding the increased number of incidents and attacks in Germany, allowing them to gain more political support.
How well are you able to assess the role of social media on political discourse?
The main issue is that there is a lack of data access. We could take the data from Facebook only until mid-August because Meta closed the Crowdtangle tool in August, making it harder for researchers to track social media trends. Without this data, it’s difficult to analyse these differences accurately.
What lessons should the German political establishment take from these elections in terms of digital and social media engagement?
What is really important is that the extreme language and extremism won't be mainstreamed even more. Because this is when it becomes much more dangerous and suddenly extreme language will become normalised and will be used by all political actors and in the wider society. And terms which were not used before because they are problematic will suddenly be used normally in everyday conversation. Fuelling and contributing to the mainstreaming of extreme language should be avoided.
What else is there to take into consideration when evaluating these electoral results?
These elections took place against the backdrop of two major conflicts — the war between Russia and Ukraine and the Israel-Hamas conflict. While the Ukraine war was a major topic, especially in eastern Germany, the Israel-Hamas conflict wasn’t as prominent in the campaigns. The AfD focused more on migration and the Ukraine war, avoiding significant discussion of the Middle East. This was likely a strategic choice, as migration and Ukraine are more resonant issues with their base in these regions.