Pros & Cons of Social Media in Politics

By Shane Bromfield on May 7, 2018

Over the past century, the means by which politicians communicate with the people of this country have changed greatly. Initially, politicians would physically meet with people and give speeches in front of large crowds of people. However, as new communication mediums took hold, politicians gained more power in terms of how they are able to reach people. First, it was the radio, which gave politicians who had soothing voices an edge over politicians who did not possess that quality.

Then, it was the television 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 most powerful communication medium to ever exist. Politicians can post messages that have the potential to reach billions of people. The advent of social media in the political arena 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 as big a name as their opponent(s). We first saw this phenomenon play out in the 2008 presidential election, when Barack Obama, a relatively unknown candidate was able to defeat seasoned politicians with the help of social media. During 2008 there were many content creators on YouTube making videos in support of Barack Obama, with one of the most popular content creators aptly named “Obama Girl”. These people were basically campaigning for Obama without being a part of his team. Were it not for social media, there is a strong chance that Barack Obama would have lost the run for presidency.

Feedback/Engagement: One aspect that makes social media such a powerful communication tool is the feedback aspect. Unlike the days of old, anyone can participate in dialogue and let 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 real time. I assume having a politician answering your questions on a live stream would be an indescribable feeling. Social media allows politicians to reach voters in an intimate way.

Analytics: Radio and Television did not give politicians an understanding of who was watching/listening to them. Social media, on the other hand, 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 can craft their message to reach voters who are undecided about which candidate will get their vote.

Informed Voters: According to the Pew Research Center approximately 66% of American adults are getting a portion of their news from social media. Prior to the rise of social media, the only 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 you. 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 light problems with social media platforms, as well as the underhanded nature of political campaigns. Although this scandal is more so a failure on Cambridge Analytica’s part than on the Trump campaign, it brings up the question, “How will future campaigns utilize social media?”. It would be nice to believe that something like this will never happen again, however, with so much at stake, it is not hard to believe campaigns in the future will engineer underhanded tactics to get their candidate into office.

Bots: The topic of bots affecting the outcome of elections has recently become a mainstream topic. Bots are fake 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 two 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 discussion is estimated to have up to 48 million bots operating on the platform according to University of Southern California and Indiana University. Although the problem of bots is a complicated one, I do believe that social media sites can do more to prevent the problem from growing. Bots, are already dangerous, and will undoubtedly become a greater danger in the future.

Echo Chamber: One of the most dangerous aspects of social media is the “echo chamber” effect. The intent of social media is to connect people with other people who they like and agree with. Most of the reaction buttons on social media are centered around agreement, 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 ever have to sincerely defend their political stance unless they actively seek people and media outlets with opposing political views. Echo chambers create a cult-like following, meaning that politicians will need to exert less effort to reel in certain segments of the voter base. On top 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 be on one side or the other.

Low-Tier Discourse: Social media has caused the deterioration of political discourse. 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 appeal to more people. There are several problems with this. If a normal person were to behave the way politicians behave on social media, they would be out of a job, therefore politicians should be held to the same, if not a greater standard. On top of that, the deterioration of communication moves focus away from the important things a politician should be addressing, such as the policies they wish to implement. Sadly, the downward slope that political discourse is on will continue to steepen, because candidates are not held to a high standard.

Social media has given more power to politicians in terms of how they distribute information, and how they gain support. I would like to believe that social media has also placed more power in the hands of voters, however, the echo chambers created on social media platforms diminish any power that voters have. Ultimately, social media is the most powerful communication medium in history, and it will continue to influence and change the way campaigns are run and won.

Follow Uloop

Apply to Write for Uloop News

Join the Uloop News Team

Discuss This Article

Back to Top

Log In

Contact Us

Upload An Image

Please select an image to upload
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format
OR
Provide URL where image can be downloaded
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format

By clicking this button,
you agree to the terms of use

By clicking "Create Alert" I agree to the Uloop Terms of Use.

Image not available.

Add a Photo

Please select a photo to upload
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format