Manuscript proposals: [email protected] / 0745 204 115 //// Tracking orders Individuals / Sales: 0745 200 357 / Orders Legal entities: 0721 722 783
EN 
Romana
6359.png "Editura Universitară")
Communication of European institutions through social media
![Communication of European institutions through social media [1]](https://gomagcdn.ro/domains/editurauniversitara.ro/files/product/original/comunicarea-institutiilor-europene-prin-social-media-895854.jpg "Communication of European institutions through social media [1]")
![Communication of European institutions through social media [2]](https://gomagcdn.ro/domains/editurauniversitara.ro/files/product/original/comunicarea-institutiilor-europene-prin-social-media-706743.jpg "Communication of European institutions through social media [2]")
![Communication of European institutions through social media [0]](https://gomagcdn.ro/domains/editurauniversitara.ro/files/product/medium/comunicarea-institutiilor-europene-prin-social-media-895854.jpg "Communication of European institutions through social media [0]")
![Communication of European institutions through social media [1]](https://gomagcdn.ro/domains/editurauniversitara.ro/files/product/medium/comunicarea-institutiilor-europene-prin-social-media-706743.jpg "Communication of European institutions through social media [1]")
Publisher: Editura Universitară
Author: Tănase Tasențe
Edition: I
Publisher year: 2025
ISBN: 978-606-28-1946-0
DOI: 10.5682/9786062819460
Pages: 228
Product Code:
9786062819460
Do you need help?
0745 200 357
- Authors
- Content
- More details
- Reviews (0)
Tănase Tasențe is a university lecturer at the Faculty of Law and Administrative Sciences of the “Ovidius” University of Constanța, where he teaches courses in Public Relations, Communication in Public Administration, Modern Communication Techniques, Public Strategies and Policies, and Sociology. He holds a bachelor’s, master’s and doctorate in Communication Sciences, as well as a master’s in European Administration, Institutions and Public Policies. He has published over 150 scientific articles and is the author of six books on institutional communication through social media and public policy strategies. In parallel with his teaching and research activity, he runs two international public relations companies, Plus Communication and International Communication & PR, coordinating marketing, advertising and public relations campaigns for national and multinational companies.
PREFACE/7
INTRODUCTION/12
CHAPTER I. HISTORICAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL CONTEXT OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS ON SOCIAL MEDIA/17
I.1. Origin and role of institutional communication in the European Union/17
I.2. The revolution of social networks and the creation of a digital public sphere /21
I.3. European crises and their impact on the online communication strategy/24
I.4. Stages of consolidation of online communication and the first attempts at coordination/27
CHAPTER II. SOCIAL MEDIA COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES OF EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS /30
II.1. European Commission: approaches and priorities in the digital age/30
II.2. European Parliament: democratic involvement and transparency/33
II.3. Council of the European Union: institutional discourse and limitations in interaction/35
II.4./ Cross-cutting initiatives and the effect on the European public space/38
CHAPTER III. CHALLENGES AND PERSPECTIVES: THE IMPACT OF THE FILTER BUBBLE PHENOMENON ON THE COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES OF EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS/41
III.1. Defining and understanding the filter bubble phenomenon/41
III.2. The intersection between the filter bubble and institutional communication: potential obstacles/44
III.3. Long-term effects on legitimacy and democratic participation/47
III.4. Possible countermeasure strategies and the future of European institutional communication/49
CHAPTER IV. ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL MEDIA COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES OF EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS/53
IV.1. Research methodology/53
IV.2. Social media communication strategy of the European Commission/56
IV.3. Social media communication strategy of the European Parliament/114
IV.4. Social media communication strategy of the Council of the European Union/166
CHAPTER V. PERSPECTIVES AND DIRECTIONS OF EVOLUTION IN SOCIAL MEDIA COMMUNICATION OF EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS/201
V.1. New trends and technological developments in the digital sphere/201
V.2. Emerging challenges and barriers in digital communication/205
V.3. Future strategies and skills for institutional communication specialists/209
V.4. Perspectives on legitimacy, democratic participation and European cohesion/212
CONCLUSIONS/217
BIBLIOGRAPHY/222
INTRODUCTION/12
CHAPTER I. HISTORICAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL CONTEXT OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS ON SOCIAL MEDIA/17
I.1. Origin and role of institutional communication in the European Union/17
I.2. The revolution of social networks and the creation of a digital public sphere /21
I.3. European crises and their impact on the online communication strategy/24
I.4. Stages of consolidation of online communication and the first attempts at coordination/27
CHAPTER II. SOCIAL MEDIA COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES OF EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS /30
II.1. European Commission: approaches and priorities in the digital age/30
II.2. European Parliament: democratic involvement and transparency/33
II.3. Council of the European Union: institutional discourse and limitations in interaction/35
II.4./ Cross-cutting initiatives and the effect on the European public space/38
CHAPTER III. CHALLENGES AND PERSPECTIVES: THE IMPACT OF THE FILTER BUBBLE PHENOMENON ON THE COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES OF EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS/41
III.1. Defining and understanding the filter bubble phenomenon/41
III.2. The intersection between the filter bubble and institutional communication: potential obstacles/44
III.3. Long-term effects on legitimacy and democratic participation/47
III.4. Possible countermeasure strategies and the future of European institutional communication/49
CHAPTER IV. ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL MEDIA COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES OF EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS/53
IV.1. Research methodology/53
IV.2. Social media communication strategy of the European Commission/56
IV.3. Social media communication strategy of the European Parliament/114
IV.4. Social media communication strategy of the Council of the European Union/166
CHAPTER V. PERSPECTIVES AND DIRECTIONS OF EVOLUTION IN SOCIAL MEDIA COMMUNICATION OF EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS/201
V.1. New trends and technological developments in the digital sphere/201
V.2. Emerging challenges and barriers in digital communication/205
V.3. Future strategies and skills for institutional communication specialists/209
V.4. Perspectives on legitimacy, democratic participation and European cohesion/212
CONCLUSIONS/217
BIBLIOGRAPHY/222
The European Union project has evolved through numerous stages of enlargement and transformation, always needing a solid relationship with the citizens of the Member States. The historical dynamics of European integration, marked by political, economic and social crises, imposed a permanent need to legitimize the common institutions. In this context, public communication has proven to be a fundamental tool, as it represented the interface between political decision-makers at the community level and public opinion throughout the Union. Against the background of recent technological developments, the relationship between institutions and the public has undergone a radical change, with social media networks opening direct channels of dialogue, but at the same time creating a series of difficulties related to the coherence of the discourse and the fragmentation of the audience.
This paper investigates how the European institutions – the Commission, the Parliament and the Council – have responded to the challenges of the digital age, focusing on how they use online social networks to disseminate information, legitimise decisions and maintain relations with citizens. Through a methodical approach and a series of case studies, both strategic developments in recent decades and the inherent tensions that arise in an increasingly polarised and competitive digital landscape are highlighted. The approach is based on quantitative analysis (frequency of postings, type of content, interaction rate) and qualitative analysis (tone, theme, narrative strategies), highlighting the defining elements of European institutional communication.
In a first step, the historical and technological background of this type of communication is explored. From the period when EU institutions relied mainly on press releases and formal events, a new reality has emerged, in which platforms such as Facebook, X (the former Twitter network) and Instagram have become priority channels for transmitting messages and dialogue with the public. This transition is not limited to the use of technical tools, but involves changes in mentality and the internal reorganization of communication departments. The accelerated pace imposed by successive crises (financial, migration, Brexit, the COVID 19 pandemic) has demonstrated that the speed of reaction and adaptation to new formats (infographics, live broadcasts, stories) have become vital for maintaining relevance and gaining public trust.
Another important aspect arises in the context of the European crises, which have proven to be major catalysts for paradigm shifts in the field of online communication. It analyses, for example, how the Commission has tried to explain anti-crisis measures, the Parliament has sought to reach out to voters during electoral periods, and the Council, reluctant by its intergovernmental nature, has sought ways to harmonize the positions of the Member States with the need for transparency. At the same time, the digital landscape has allowed the rapid spread of Eurosceptic and populist messages, often built on emotion and rhetorical simplicity. Thus, social networks have proven to be a terrain of narrative competition, raising questions about how the EU can maintain its balance and credibility in an environment conducive to polarization.
Moreover, in this huge flow of information, the “filter bubble” dimension takes on significant importance. If in traditional communication institutions disseminated messages through centralized channels (television, print media, radio), today, platform algorithms could block access to content for certain groups of users, who only receive information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs. The phenomenon undermines efforts to create a common discourse at European level, allowing the proliferation of hostile rhetoric against the EU. The paper explains how the communication strategies of the Commission, Parliament and Council try to mitigate the effect of algorithmic bubbles and reach reluctant categories, either through cross-cutting campaigns or through partnerships with influencers or civil society actors.
Particular attention is also paid to differences in tone and communicative objectives between the institutions. The European Commission, with its role as initiator of legislation and “guardian” of the Treaties, adopts a technical, balanced discourse, but tests visual formats and live interactions to expand its visibility. The Parliament, as the institution with a directly representative component, emphasizes proximity and involvement, organizing online debates, surveys and mobilization campaigns to vote, especially in an electoral context. The Council, which negotiates intergovernmental compromises, is more cautious and formal, publishing messages related to meetings and conclusions, but relatively unwilling to initiate extensive discussions with the public. All these differences reflect the complex structure of the Union and the varied missions of each institution.
Against the backdrop of these variations in style and content, significant conclusions emerge about the need for more effective inter-institutional cooperation in online communication. While, in crisis situations or under the pressure of major events (such as Brexit), the institutions have collaborated and tried to convey coherent messages, at other times the lack of coordination has led to confusion or the impression of public disagreement between EU structures. The analysis of quantitative and qualitative data shows that engagement increased when messages were unified and linguistically and culturally adapted, and when each institution followed its own calendar, the public was left with the perception of an uncorrelated puzzle.
The final sections of the volume highlight the prospects for the evolution of European institutional communication in the new digital landscape. It is expected that the development of artificial intelligence, virtual reality and metaverse platforms will open up new channels of interaction, with a greater degree of immersion and personalization. There is also a need to develop advanced skills in communication teams: knowledge of data analysis, storytelling skills that make European policies understandable and interesting, reactivity to crises and hostile rhetoric. It remains to be seen how this scenario will be configured, given that reluctance towards social media, regulatory pressures and concerns about data protection may slow down the massive implementation of new tools. In addition, discussions are emerging on the ethics of microtargeting and the risk of online manipulation.
The opening remarks therefore underline the essential character of social networks in maintaining connectivity between European institutions and the public. In an era in which the European integration project is contested from multiple directions, the way of communication can be decisive for regaining trust and for consolidating democratic legitimacy. This paper not only presents the methods and results analyzed, but also offers an invitation to reflect on how the European Union can adapt its discourse and tools to become an authentic benchmark in digital public communication.
This paper investigates how the European institutions – the Commission, the Parliament and the Council – have responded to the challenges of the digital age, focusing on how they use online social networks to disseminate information, legitimise decisions and maintain relations with citizens. Through a methodical approach and a series of case studies, both strategic developments in recent decades and the inherent tensions that arise in an increasingly polarised and competitive digital landscape are highlighted. The approach is based on quantitative analysis (frequency of postings, type of content, interaction rate) and qualitative analysis (tone, theme, narrative strategies), highlighting the defining elements of European institutional communication.
In a first step, the historical and technological background of this type of communication is explored. From the period when EU institutions relied mainly on press releases and formal events, a new reality has emerged, in which platforms such as Facebook, X (the former Twitter network) and Instagram have become priority channels for transmitting messages and dialogue with the public. This transition is not limited to the use of technical tools, but involves changes in mentality and the internal reorganization of communication departments. The accelerated pace imposed by successive crises (financial, migration, Brexit, the COVID 19 pandemic) has demonstrated that the speed of reaction and adaptation to new formats (infographics, live broadcasts, stories) have become vital for maintaining relevance and gaining public trust.
Another important aspect arises in the context of the European crises, which have proven to be major catalysts for paradigm shifts in the field of online communication. It analyses, for example, how the Commission has tried to explain anti-crisis measures, the Parliament has sought to reach out to voters during electoral periods, and the Council, reluctant by its intergovernmental nature, has sought ways to harmonize the positions of the Member States with the need for transparency. At the same time, the digital landscape has allowed the rapid spread of Eurosceptic and populist messages, often built on emotion and rhetorical simplicity. Thus, social networks have proven to be a terrain of narrative competition, raising questions about how the EU can maintain its balance and credibility in an environment conducive to polarization.
Moreover, in this huge flow of information, the “filter bubble” dimension takes on significant importance. If in traditional communication institutions disseminated messages through centralized channels (television, print media, radio), today, platform algorithms could block access to content for certain groups of users, who only receive information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs. The phenomenon undermines efforts to create a common discourse at European level, allowing the proliferation of hostile rhetoric against the EU. The paper explains how the communication strategies of the Commission, Parliament and Council try to mitigate the effect of algorithmic bubbles and reach reluctant categories, either through cross-cutting campaigns or through partnerships with influencers or civil society actors.
Particular attention is also paid to differences in tone and communicative objectives between the institutions. The European Commission, with its role as initiator of legislation and “guardian” of the Treaties, adopts a technical, balanced discourse, but tests visual formats and live interactions to expand its visibility. The Parliament, as the institution with a directly representative component, emphasizes proximity and involvement, organizing online debates, surveys and mobilization campaigns to vote, especially in an electoral context. The Council, which negotiates intergovernmental compromises, is more cautious and formal, publishing messages related to meetings and conclusions, but relatively unwilling to initiate extensive discussions with the public. All these differences reflect the complex structure of the Union and the varied missions of each institution.
Against the backdrop of these variations in style and content, significant conclusions emerge about the need for more effective inter-institutional cooperation in online communication. While, in crisis situations or under the pressure of major events (such as Brexit), the institutions have collaborated and tried to convey coherent messages, at other times the lack of coordination has led to confusion or the impression of public disagreement between EU structures. The analysis of quantitative and qualitative data shows that engagement increased when messages were unified and linguistically and culturally adapted, and when each institution followed its own calendar, the public was left with the perception of an uncorrelated puzzle.
The final sections of the volume highlight the prospects for the evolution of European institutional communication in the new digital landscape. It is expected that the development of artificial intelligence, virtual reality and metaverse platforms will open up new channels of interaction, with a greater degree of immersion and personalization. There is also a need to develop advanced skills in communication teams: knowledge of data analysis, storytelling skills that make European policies understandable and interesting, reactivity to crises and hostile rhetoric. It remains to be seen how this scenario will be configured, given that reluctance towards social media, regulatory pressures and concerns about data protection may slow down the massive implementation of new tools. In addition, discussions are emerging on the ethics of microtargeting and the risk of online manipulation.
The opening remarks therefore underline the essential character of social networks in maintaining connectivity between European institutions and the public. In an era in which the European integration project is contested from multiple directions, the way of communication can be decisive for regaining trust and for consolidating democratic legitimacy. This paper not only presents the methods and results analyzed, but also offers an invitation to reflect on how the European Union can adapt its discourse and tools to become an authentic benchmark in digital public communication.
Prof. univ. dr. habil. Mihaela Rus
Ovidius University of Constanța,
Faculty of Law and Administrative Sciences
Institute of Philosophy and Psychology
"Constantin Rădulescu-Motru"
of the Romanian Academy
If you want to express your opinion about this product you can add a review.
write a review
Similar products
How We Speak in Public. Oratory Exercises
The end of history and the last Man - Francis Fukuyama
