In the last two decades, the internet became crucial to everyday life, predominantly to the political arena. This paper examines personalized politics online. It asks whether there are any differences between online personalized politics in Twitter compared to Facebook (the most widespread campaign tools), and if so which is more personalized? It analyzes cross-national data covering online activity and consumption of parties, their leaders and prominent politicians from 25 democracies. Previous findings, using the same database, showed variance among different parties and democracies regarding their level of personalized politics online (Rahat and Zamir, forthcoming, Zamir and Rahat, 2017). Generally, they showed that parties are more present online and more active online than their politicians. However, online consumption of individual politicians' Facebook and Twitter accounts is larger than their parties, especially the consumption of party leaders, rather than other prominent politicians. Different online platforms can be expected to breed differing levels of personalized politics. Their varied properties are expected to influence the way they are used and consumed, and thus to have an impact on the levels of online personalized politics that they create. It is important to understand which platform generates more personalized politics. First, if there are differences between these platforms we might conclude that online-personalized politics is not consistent and technologically deterministic. Second, it may shed light on some of the factors for personalized politics, given the variety of incentives it gives the political actors to use it. Findings of this paper show that in a majority of democracies, online personalized politics is more evident on Twitter than on Facebook. The gaps are even larger when it comes to the consumption of individual politicians on twitter. It seems that Facebook bear more opportunities for parties to revive while Twitter seem to be much more individualistic.
