The title has been changed from “From Alpha- to Beta testing. Web 2.0 in the Norwegian 2007 and 2009 Campaigns” to avoid confusion with earlier papers and art icles.

This paper analyses how Norwegian polit ical part ies have handled t he appearance of Web 2.0. It focuses on t he campaign for t he local elect ions in Sept ember 2007 and t he development s up t o t he fort hcoming Parliament ary elect ions t wo years lat er.

By 2005 most parties had learned to use their Web sites as instruments for professional political marketing. In this process of streamlining party presence on the Web acquired t he charact erist ics of what now is concept ualized as Web 1.0. But in 2007 Facebook became t he most popular websit e in Norway, wit h YouTube rising t o number three. The political parties appeared bewildered by the Web 2.0 phenomenon, indicating a similar stage at which they were ten years earlier with Web 1.0.

All seven parliamentary parties and four smaller parties outside parliament are included in t he analysis. The dat a consist s of samples of part y act ivit y on Facebook, YouTube and politicians' blogs, as well as an overview of other types of Web 2.0 act ivit y. The dat a samples have been t aken at regular int ervals since spring 2007, up t o and including spring 2009. Hence, dat a from t he campaign for t he Parliament ary elections in September 2009 is somewhat limited in this paper. Furthermore, int erviews wit h all part y web managers were conduct ed in 2007 and will be supplied wit h new int erviews aft er t he campaign.

The dat a is discussed on t he background of an “ e-rupt ion hypot hesis” versus a “ Web 1.5 – hypothesis”. While the first hypothesis expects Web 2.0 to have at least potential for making changes in both internal party structure and party system structure, the latter hypothesis expects continuit y, rather than change. The central topics are whether the emergence of Web 2.0, with its potential for grassroots participation and networking, as well as multilat eral interactivity, was a catalyst of “ e-rupt ive” change t owards great er pluralism in t he part y syst em or more grassroot s part icipat ion. The dat a so far indicat e t hat in t erms of part y compet it ion Web 2.0 has had at best a weak pluralizing effect, as party visibility on Web 2.0 roughly reflects party share of votes. While Web 2.0 temporarily appeared to have enhanced participatory democracy in the sense of lowering the threshold for involvement of party grassroots and –sympathizers, data from 2009 indicates that the party organizat ions now are in t he process of get t ing more cont rol.

Changes in the media environment of political parties invite to speculations and claims about radical changes t o t he part ies and part y system. Howard Dean (2007) has for instance characterized the Internet “ as the most significant tool for building democracy since the invention of the printing press ..(where citizens) can network with like-minded individuals to create a technology-enabled global grassroots movement” . His conclusion is “ polit ical parties have to evolve with the times: If we don't, we lose”. In short, it works both on the vertical party dimension by empowering common citizens and on the horizontal party system dimension by changing t he t erms of part y compet it ion.

Web 2.0 is shorthand for a new breed of Internet applications for multilateral sharing, discussion and networking1. The collective of users becomes contents producers, in contrast to Web 1.0 representing an Internet based on unilaterality and a st rict separat ion bet ween cont ent producers and –users. This had led OECD t o use the term “the participative web” in their recent study Focus on Citizens, and “Participation 1.0” and “Participation 2.0” to differentiate between models of unilat eral and mult ilat eral communicat ion (OECD 2009, pp. 66ff). As such, web sit es may be hybrids containing Web 1.0 elements side by side with Web 2.0 elements and be t ilt ed more or less t owards one side or t he ot her. This art icle discusses t he Norwegian political parties’ adaption to the Web 2.0 phenomenon, focusing on elect ion campaigning.

In t he course of roughly a fift een year period these part ies have adapt ed t o the rise of the Internet and established their presence on the Web. By 2005 this presence had taken the form of party Web sites geared towards professional polit ical market ing, conforming t o a st andard resembling Web 1.0. If t his represent s a consolidation mirroring the standard business of polit ics, would it reasonable t o expect t hat a Web 2.0 might t rigger changes in how part ies and act ivist s operat e on t he World Wide Web (WWW) - or even how t hey operat e as act ual organizat ions?