Election Disruption” – a new phenomenon in political communication.

by Prof. Dr. Alfred-Joachim Hermanni

1. Abstract
Political elections are increasingly susceptible to unexpected events that can significantly influence the election campaign and voter preferences. (Iyengar & Kinder, 1987; Druckman, 2001) The concept of election disruption describes such external disturbances, which are triggered by crises, scandals or security policy developments. Based on historical case studies from Germany, France, Austria and Australia, this article shows how election processes are energized by sudden events. It analyzes the role of the media, political strategy and public perception in times of election disruption. In addition, the concept is distinguished from the “October Surprise” in the US context to underscore the global relevance of this phenomenon.

2. Keywords
Election Disruption; Political Communication; Election Campaign; Election Sociology; Crisis Research; Media Effects

3. Definition
Election disruption describes an unforeseen event that can significantly influence the course and outcome of political elections. Such events can take the form of terrorist attacks, political scandals, natural disasters or health crises and significantly alter public perception and voter behavior. (Benoit, 1997; Wirth & Stegmaier, 2000)

4. Theoretical classification: The term “election disruption” can be classified in the research areas of electoral sociology, political communication research and crisis research. (Meier & Richter, 2010) It describes external disturbances and turmoil in the electoral process that can change the dynamics of an election campaign and influence voter behavior.

5. Consequences: Public opinion can be shifted in a certain direction by a sudden disruptive campaign event. Such events can lead to a re-balancing of political issues, a changed perception of political actors or a change in voter turnout.

6. Current example (2025): Foreign policy dynamics ahead of the federal election.
U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance's declaration in Munich on February 17, 2025, that European states should remain excluded from negotiations with Russia and that a strict policy of demarcation against political opponents (“firewalls”) is not planned, had an impact on the election campaign shortly before the Bundestag election on February 14, 2025. (Handelsblatt, 2025) Immediately before the election, the candidates for chancellor were forced to reformulate their foreign policy positions and emphasize their ability to act in this geopolitical context to the German electorate. As a result, the security policy debate briefly took on central importance in the election campaign.

7. Further case studies of “Election Disruption” in the run-up to political elections:
(1) Germany 2025: Terrorist attacks before the federal election
Shortly before the parliamentary elections in spring 2025, German politics was confronted with a series of terrorist attacks in Magdeburg, Aschaffenburg and Munich. These attacks, in which children were among the victims and the perpetrators had a migrant background, triggered intense political debate. Parties were forced to adjust their campaign topics at short notice, particularly in the areas of migration policy and internal security, which could potentially affect voter behavior.
(2) France 2022: McKinsey scandal and presidential election
In the run-up to the French presidential election in April 2022, President Emmanuel Macron came under pressure from reports of his extensive use of consulting firms such as McKinsey. These revelations led to public debates about the role of outside consulting firms in government. Macron was forced to strategically adjust his campaign strategy to regain voter confidence.
(3) Germany 2021: Flood disaster and federal election
Two months before the federal election in July 2021, one of the most devastating flood disasters in the history of the country occurred in western and southern Germany. The political reaction under Chancellor Angela Merkel and the chancellor candidates was the subject of intense discussion. Armin Laschet, the CDU/CSU's candidate for chancellor, was particularly in the media spotlight. The disaster steered the election campaign towards climate policy and crisis management, which may have influenced the election decision.
(4) Australia 2020–2021: COVID-19 pandemic and state elections
Elections were held in several Australian states between 2020 and 2021. These occurred during the global COVID-19 pandemic, after the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a global health emergency on January 30, 2020. Governments perceived as particularly competent in pandemic management were able to benefit politically and secure electoral success.
(5) Austria 2019: Ibiza Affair and European elections
In May 2019, a few days before the European elections, a secretly recorded video was published showing the then Vice Chancellor and FPÖ leader Heinz-Christian Strache offering a supposed Russian oligarch state contracts in return for electoral support. The so-called “Ibiza Affair” led to his resignation and the collapse of the governing coalition. The FPÖ suffered a loss of votes in the European elections, although the exact influence of the scandal on the election result has not been conclusively determined.

8. Differentiation from “October Surprise”
A related but not identical phenomenon is the “October Surprise”, which was coined by political consultant William Casey during the 1980 US presidential election. This term was used in the context of the Iran hostage crisis, which influenced the election campaign between Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan.

Differences between “Election Disruption” and “October Surprise”

Source: authors’ own work.

9. Conclusion
While the term “October Surprise” is limited to short-term revelations in the US election campaign, “Election Disruption” describes a broader phenomenon that can influence elections worldwide and in the long term. These include security crises, natural disasters or political scandals that can profoundly change electoral strategies and voter preferences. Such events can not only dominate public debate, but also force political actors to adjust their campaign strategies at short notice. The dynamics of election disruption show that electoral processes are highly dependent on external factors that go beyond traditional political strategies. It also highlights the crucial role of media coverage in determining whether and to what extent a disruption has a long-term impact on election results. Ultimately, this phenomenon illustrates the fragility of democratic election campaigns in the face of unpredictable events and their potential influence on political decision-making processes.

10. Recommendations for future research: strategic election disruption and digital manipulation
The study of Election Disruption shows that election disruptions are not exclusively external, random events, but in many cases are deliberately used or even actively induced by political actors. In particular, two aspects deserve increased attention in future research:

1. strategic publication of incriminating material (“timed leaks”) as an election strategy
A recurring pattern in election campaigns is the targeted publication of incriminating information about political opponents at strategically favorable times. These so-called timed leaks or October surprises have the potential to influence voter opinion in crucial phases of an election and to fundamentally change the dynamics of an election campaign.
Important research questions in this context are:
• Which mechanisms and actors are involved in the targeted release of incriminating material during an election campaign?
• Are there recurring patterns in the timing of such releases?
• To what extent do such revelations actually influence voting decisions – in the short and long term?
• What role do traditional media play in disseminating and reinforcing timed leaks, as opposed to social networks? (Meier & Richter, 2010)
• Can we identify particular campaign systems or political cultures in which this strategy is used particularly frequently or effectively?

2. Digitalized manipulation strategies and influence by external actors
The increasing digitalization of political communication has created new opportunities for influencing election campaigns – both by domestic actors and by foreign states. The targeted use of social bots, deepfakes, disinformation campaigns and personalized political advertisements (“microtargeting”) can be used to control public debates or influence election decisions. (Allcott & Gentzkow, 2017; Woolley & Howard, 2018; Marwick, 2018)
The following questions are particularly relevant for future research:
• To what extent have foreign actors used digital strategies in past election campaigns to influence election results?
• What role do social bots and algorithm-driven news distribution play in amplifying or dampening election disruption?
• Can state actors be identified that systematically intervene in election campaigns in other countries? If so, what methods do they use?
• Which technological developments (e.g. deepfake videos, AI-generated fake news) could play an even greater role in future election campaigns?
• What countermeasures are needed to protect democratic elections from targeted manipulation?

References
Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211–236.
Benoit, W. L. (1997). Image Repair Discourse and Crisis Communication. Public Relations Review, 23(2), 177–186.
Druckman, J. N. (2001). The implications of framing effects for citizen competence. Political Behavior, 23(3), 225–256.
Handelsblatt (14.02.2025). J. D. Vance. Die Münchener Rede des US-Vizepräsidenten im Wortlaut. https://www.handelsblatt.com/politik/international/j-d-vance-die-muenchener-rede-des-us-vizepraesidenten-im-wortlaut/100107881.html
Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D. R. (1987). News That Matters: Television and American Opinion. University of Chicago Press.
Marwick, A. E. (2018). Media Manipulation and Disinformation Online. Data & Society Research Institute.
Meier, M., & Richter, F. (2010). Medienmanipulation und Wahlkampf: Der Fall "October Surprise". Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, 20(2), 112–134.
Wirth, W., & Stegmaier, R. (2000). Politische Kommunikation. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Woolley, S., & Howard, P. N. (2018). Computational Propaganda: Political Parties, Politicians, and Political Manipulation on Social Media. Oxford University Press.

Please click on the following link to find the German-language version of this text: https://wissensbank.info/Neues-Phaenomen-der-politischen-Kommunikation