How Social Media Affects Politics - Essay Example

How Social Media Affects Politics Social media ultimately is considered as one of the disruptive technologies. It alters the delivery of information, news coverage, online content and the manner in which people digest developments in the world of politics. As evidenced in the 2008 elections, social media can be utilized, as a way to mobilize voters and make an electoral impact. During this election period, they acted as the CNS of campaign organizations. The use of Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, and YouTube by various candidates raised money, built electoral coalitions, identified supporters, and as a result, the electorate was brought closer to the process. Despite its record of accomplishment in the generation of democratic engagement, however, it has proven harder to maintain online activism and political interest over a period. Faced by toxic debates on legislative provisions and a polarized political environment, most Americans have opted to ignore the civic participation that had been whipped up during the last election cycle. Most voters are cynical of the new social media push by politicians, seeing it as opportunism. Social media, while being an indispensable tool for the election period, has failed to maintain its earlier allure in connecting people to their elected leaders. However, its effects are still massive and will prolong to be so in the coming election. This paper a discussion on the way social media affects politics. Social media, at this point, does not seem to be working at the expense of the individual going to the news site directly or searching news topics that interest them. Instead, consumption of news via social media is supplemental to the main news sites. This mirrors what is happening as far as consumption of news on digital devices, with tablets and smart phones not appearing to be replacing PCs as a means of getting news. For example, 71% of individuals who follow news links on Facebook normally go to the news organization for more news. Among Twitter followers, 76% of those who get news updates also go to the news organization’s home page (Leah et al). Similarly, 65% of all Facebook users, as do 69% of all Twitter users, get their news via key word searches. Most people on Facebook get their news stories from friends and family while those on Twitter will get them from family and friends, in addition to the news organizations. Social media’s influence on political campaigns is undeniable. For starters, it allows the politician to have some control over his message since the campaign is responsible for the messages that they send out (Daily Kos group). Unlike the traditional forms of media, no filter exists, and the campaign is sure of on the way the message is going to be presented. Second, the speed of news travel on social media can be used as an opportunity when various issues that need addressing arise (Daily Kos group). There is no need for a carefully worded and edited press release or contacting a newspaper reporter and begging for print space. A politician who has grown and groomed their list on these sites will reach a wide audience in the shortest time possible. While a good press release will take time, a tweet, with its 140 characters will take a shorter time. Social media also exerts influence by its competitive advantage (Daily Kos group). Since not all people use social networking tools, if a story breaks and a reporter is working on a deadline, they will take what they can get, in this case, a tweet or a status update. If one opponent responds faster than the other does, the reporter will obviously take their response and run with it. Additionally, the free-of-cost nature of social media has leveled the playing field a bit, with candidates now using these sites to solicit for funds and connect with their electoral base. Finally, supporters and undecided voters are likely to view a candidate’s social networking activities, not as a fundraising tool or a marketing one, but rather as a resource (Daily Kos group). Voters can get quite irritated by campaign commercials popping up often on their TV or radio, or even incessant emails. However, social media tools allow them to control how much of the campaign they want to follow. This ensures that they take the messages more seriously than if they were on TV or radio. In the US, all candidates running for major seats have a social media account. These changing dynamics have led to a paradigm shift in the process of running effective campaign and responses to the candidate by the electorate. One clear influence is the ability to connect with the electorate on a personal basis. Voters will be able to share their opinions with others directly as opposed to television ads. Young voters have become an increasingly important part of this election, even surpassing the average voter. This generation finds itself more at ease with social media allowing passionate voters to carry out virtual campaigning via the creation of YouTube videos, for example (Daily Kos group). In addition to providing online forums, news organizations now offer sections for voters to make comments via Facebook or Twitter. The candidate can use this to self-promote by posting and getting his or her followers to do the same. The electorate dichotomy, that is traditional older generations vs. young technologically oriented voters, creates a chance for college students to enter the political process. Since campaigns now, need skilled social network users, the college students can now immerse themselves into politics, bringing with them a whole load of young people who respond to well thought out social media campaigns (Daily Kos group). Another influence that it has on politics is that young people tend to believe what is on social media more that what major news agencies run. This is because it is transparent with the voters knowing, almost the information pertaining to the candidate. When a person uploads a video during a rally, the message can go viral in minutes on social media, giving a candidate the benefit of not being misquoted by traditional media. During the past couple of years, social media has become a tool for revolutionary activities in the Arab world, culminating in the Arab Spring as youths become more involved in protest and politics. The explosive growth of the Arab Spring would by no means have occurred were it, not for social media. Protestors and revolutionaries looking to install democratic governments by toppling dictators organized themselves on Twitter and Facebook, while sharing YouTube videos of various brutal crackdowns (Irwin). Their actions made mobilization of protestors easier, although the governments would still not have fallen without courage. Social media aided the protestors to organize and communicate more efficiently and effectively, and when the mobilized protestors took to the streets, they did so with knowledge of what was to come (Irwin). This is because they had seen the brutal crackdowns on YouTube, and thus, were prepared to fight the government. Many of the countries threatened to arrest the bloggers who they accused of spreading malicious lies. Pressure from these governments forced Twitter to announce that it would be allowing country-specific Twitter censorship, which sparked outrage from users around the globe. This shows just how influential social media is, given that major governments are willing to risk draconian censorship to stop its effects. Twitter, as a social network has escalated how political campaigns are carried out. Campaign managers utilize twitter to help them reach out to an extensive range of voters from different geographical areas, who have been linked up with this social network. Currently it is almost impossible for a political party to carry out successful campaigns without employing twitter as a campaign tool. For instance, campaign managers notify and sell their party’s policies to voters by writing tweets on their twitter page. Voters, who are “followers” of a particular party on twitter, respond by tweeting about their preferable political parties. Trends in twitter are very influential as it portrays the most popular and currently issue, which is under discussion. Thus, in politics, politicians strive in ensuring that their trends are the most popular. Having a top trend is not an easy task since it requires a politician or political party to be famous or popular. A famous politician is likely to have many twitter followers; equally, a popular party is likely to have many followers. Those many followers will re-tweet about an issue and in this regard the more a tweet is re-tweeted, the higher chances it has of becoming a top trend on twitter. However, it is important to note that this internet-age has provided people with access to a lot information, and thus, when a tweet is made by either a politician or a political party it will attract both negative and positive comments depending on its authenticity. It is obvious that a tweet that will attract numerous negative comments will have a little chance of becoming a top-trend. Therefore, a good way of making a political tweet a top-trend is to tweet a true and authentic tweet (Chapman). It is an excellent opportunity to reach an extensive number of followers in twitter through having a top trend. As a result, political candidates and political parties resort to paying for trends in twitter, although, it is an expensive undertaking. Paying for trends in twitter is similar as paying for an advertisement in a traditional media. Moreover, people can view a promoted trend regardless of being followers or not, and so political candidates settle for the idea of paying for a trend since they are guaranteed that they will reach a vast number of voters and make them their followers. Some of these may belong to other, different political parties. On the flipside, the people who decide to follow promoted accounts owned by political candidates on twitter, perceive these candidates as being genuine and truthful; of course, this being authenticated by their prowess of having top-trends. In general, the reaction of followers to a political-tweet is guided by the popularity of that particular tweet (Chapman). Opposite Opinion As much as social media influences politics positively, it negatively influences politics in other ways. To start with, not all groups of people prefer interacting through social media. Mentioning the old generation will be a good example, and in this case, these are people aged from 65 years and above. It is unlikely, that an old woman, 70 years of age would access and sing up in a social network such as twitter, and thereafter, become a follower of a particular candidate or political party. In essence, the teenage group is the group from which numerous users of social media emerge. When taking a critical look at this group, an individual, will realize that most of them are below the age of 17 years, and they are not eligible to vote (Chapman). Consequently, political candidates should not dedicate most of their resources to camping through social media. However, a traditional form of campaigning such as door-to-door campaigns can prove to be a very successful embarking. The other negative effect of social media on politics is associated with spammers and scammers all over the internet. Many people are suspicious of the genuine and authentic nature of the internet and social media especially those who have been victims of scammers and spammers. Additionally, the possibility of con artists impersonating individuals in social networks by fake names has made some people lose faith on any political message, which is conveyed through the internet. Works Cited Chapman, Stephen. "Great news: Promoted Trends on Twitter now cost only $120,000 per day!" (2011): 1. 06 June 2011. Web 02 November 2012. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/seo/great-news-promoted-trends-on-twitter-now-cost-only-120000-per-day/3255 Daily Kos group. Campaign Tech: 5 Advantages of Social Networking for Campaigns. 04 May 2011. Web 02 November 2012. www.dailykos.com/story/2011/05/04/973015/-Campaign-Tech-5-Advantages-of-Social-Networking-for-Campaigns>. Irwin, John. Social media impact politics from Arab Spring to President Obama. 08 February 2012. Web 02 November 2012. www.cm-life.com/2012/02/08/social-media-impact-politics-from-arab-spring-to-president-obama. Leah, Christian. Amy, Mitchell. & Tom, Rosenstiel. What Facebook and Twitter Mean for News . 04 May 2012. Web 02 November 2012. . Read More