How Politicians Use Social Media

Pros & Cons of Social Media in Politics

Over the past century, the means by which politicians communicate with the people of this land have changed greatly. Initially, politicians would physically meet with people and give speeches in front of large crowds of people. Notwithstanding, as new communication mediums took hold, politicians gained more ability in terms of how they are able to achieve people. Get-go, information technology was the radio, which gave politicians who had soothing voices an edge over politicians who did non possess that quality.

So, it was the goggle box which gave politicians who were tall, attractive, and healthy an overwhelming advantage against opponents. Today, we have social media, which is without a doubt the about powerful communication medium to ever exist. Politicians tin can mail messages that accept the potential to reach billions of people. The advent of social media in the political loonshit has drastically impacted the politicians and voters alike.

via Pixabay.com

Pros of Social Media in Politics

Large Audience: Having a large audience on social media evens the playing field for candidates who may not have as much funding, or equally big a proper name as their opponent(s). Nosotros first saw this phenomenon play out in the 2008 presidential ballot, when Barack Obama, a relatively unknown candidate was able to defeat seasoned politicians with the assistance of social media. During 2008 there were many content creators on YouTube making videos in support of Barack Obama, with one of the well-nigh popular content creators aptly named "Obama Daughter". These people were basically campaigning for Obama without being a part of his squad. Were it not for social media, there is a potent gamble that Barack Obama would have lost the run for presidency.

Feedback/Appointment: Ane aspect that makes social media such a powerful communication tool is the feedback aspect. Unlike the days of one-time, anyone can participate in dialogue and permit their voice be heard. One popular method for engaging with users is the live video feature. Live video is unique in the sense that it allows users to interact with the person streaming the live video in existent time. I assume having a pol answering your questions on a live stream would exist an indescribable feeling. Social media allows politicians to reach voters in an intimate mode.

Analytics: Radio and Television did not give politicians an understanding of who was watching/listening to them. Social media, on the other manus, uses analytics software to give politicians an idea of the different demographics who they are engaging. This allows campaigns to spend money more efficiently to target voters. Politicians tin can craft their bulletin to reach voters who are undecided about which candidate will become their vote.

Informed Voters: According to the Pew Research Middle approximately 66% of American adults are getting a portion of their news from social media. Prior to the rising of social media, the but people who would get the news were the people who took initiative to seek news sources. However, in the age of social media, the news is right in front of y'all. Whether it's a friend sharing news, or seeing what's in the "trending" sidebar on Facebook, people who are on social media sites, particularly Facebook and Twitter, cannot avoid seeing the news. Staying informed an updated is important for voters who are deciding who to vote for.

Cons of Social Media in Politics

Underhanded Tactics: The recent Cambridge Analytica debacle brought to low-cal bug with social media platforms, too equally the underhanded nature of political campaigns. Although this scandal is more so a failure on Cambridge Analytica's office than on the Trump campaign, it brings up the question, "How volition future campaigns utilize social media?". It would exist nice to believe that something similar this will never happen once again, withal, with so much at stake, it is not hard to believe campaigns in the future will engineer underhanded tactics to get their candidate into function.

Bots: The topic of bots affecting the outcome of elections has recently get a mainstream topic. Bots are imitation profiles on social media platforms that sew divide between people and political parties. Bots are being used to spread dissension and news from untrustworthy sources. Facebook and Twitter are the ii largest platforms under scrutiny. In the recent 2016 elections, Russia allegedly influenced the election by using bots on popular social media platforms, with Facebook being at the forefront. Twitter, a platform used mainly for news and word is estimated to take upwardly to 48 million bots operating on the platform according to Academy of Southern California and Indiana Academy. Although the problem of bots is a complicated ane, I do believe that social media sites can do more to forestall the problem from growing. Bots, are already dangerous, and will undoubtedly become a greater danger in the future.

Echo Sleeping accommodation: Ane of the nearly dangerous aspects of social media is the "echo chamber" consequence. The intent of social media is to connect people with other people who they like and agree with. About of the reaction buttons on social media are centered around understanding, whether it is a heart icon on Twitter, or a thumbs up icon on Facebook. Users will mainly see content and people who they agree with when they scroll down their news feed. This makes it unlikely that voters will always take to sincerely defend their political stance unless they actively seek people and media outlets with opposing political views. Repeat chambers create a cult-like following, meaning that politicians will demand to exert less attempt to reel in certain segments of the voter base of operations. On meridian of that voters will care less about the policies their candidate wants to institute and more about which side of the political spectrum the candidate is on. Social media exacerbates the problem of echo chambers, with everyone feeling the need to exist on one side or the other.

Depression-Tier Discourse: Social media has caused the deterioration of political soapbox. Politicians have resorted to communicating through memes and inappropriate posts on social media. In the 2016 elections, several of the candidates who were running for the highest office in the land downgraded their discourse in order to entreatment to more than people. There are several problems with this. If a normal person were to bear the way politicians behave on social media, they would be out of a task, therefore politicians should be held to the same, if not a greater standard. On height of that, the deterioration of advice moves focus away from the important things a politician should exist addressing, such as the policies they wish to implement. Sadly, the downward slope that political discourse is on volition continue to steepen, because candidates are non held to a loftier standard.

Social media has given more than power to politicians in terms of how they distribute information, and how they proceeds support. I would like to believe that social media has also placed more than power in the hands of voters, however, the echo chambers created on social media platforms diminish whatsoever ability that voters have. Ultimately, social media is the near powerful advice medium in history, and information technology will go along to influence and alter the way campaigns are run and won.