Social Media Is A Form Of Political Activism

This campaign season, I worked for Bruce Davis. Bruce Davis was the Democratic candidate chosen in the primary to run for House of Representatives in the Thirteen District in North Carolina. This campaign season was not a traditional one in comparison to what I’ve studied of past campaign’s. Our world has changed with the creation of social media and campaign’s have changed with it. In our campaign we had to look harder to find a proper strategy for using social media to are advantage and think outside the box. Bruce Davis chose to give his intern’s and his staff free reign to come up with ideas to move our campaign into modern times. These ideas will be discussed throughout this paper. I will discuss my personal experience, which was an

More and more people are getting their news from social media sites like Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat, Tumbler and many more, and candidates are using this to their advantage. This election is probably one of the first were candidates have actually used social media sites as their direct communication line to potential voters. Social media today had gone from gossip and family pictures to a location for political strategy. Thanks largely to trumps regular social media first declarations and its actually working particularly with the younger voters. A study released last year from the Pew Research Center that Marissa Lang cited showed that “Among 18- to 29-year-olds, nearly two-thirds said social media is the most helpful means of learning new things about politics.” (Lang, 2016). Even if the candidate isn’t the one posting the video or message in the end it will still end up on social media. For example, Trump had announced his plan to ban all Muslims from entering the united states in South Carolina not on social media however it found its way there and spread like wild fire. This sent those who were outraged to respond in disgust and those who encouraged it to share it so that their friends could see and so on and so on. Even if those who shared it did it to

In the article “Did Social Media Ruin Election 2016,” the author, Sam Sanders, makes many valid points about social media, one being that it is not being used for what it was created for. Today, especially these past few months during the controversial election, social media has been used as a place for users to argue with others that do not agree with them. Sanders goes on to make many other points about social media being used destructively, and I agree with the vast majority of them.

President Obama not only was the first African American to be elected, but was also the first presidential candidate to effectively use social media as a major campaign strategy. In many ways the election of Barack Obama mimicked that of John F. Kennedy, both having changed politics forever. For John F. Kennedy it was the television and for Obama it was the internet. Barack Obama’s strategy of using the internet as a campaigning tool was a key to his victory in the election. He used the internet to organize his supporters. He had many more friends and followers on his Facebook and Twitter than his opponent John McCain did. The social media landscape looks a lot different now. There has been an increasing number of social media tools now than there were

On the internet, when the politics news come around, people put their own opinion about campaigns, government and activism. Statistics show, that “66% of social media users (39% of American adults) have engaged in one of eight civic or political activities with social media: 38% of those who use social networking sites (SNS) or Twitter “like” or promote material related to politics or social issues that others have posted, 35% have used social networking sites to encourage people to vote, 34% have used the tools to post their own thoughts or comments on political and social issues, 33% have used the tools to repost content related to political or social issues that was originally posted by someone else, 31% have used the tools to encourage other people to take action on a political or social issue, 28% have used the tools to post links to political stories or articles for others to read,

The Civil Rights movement in the U.S. during the 1950’s and 60’s showed how effective activism is on political issues. Under the leadership of major civil figures, most notably Dr. Martin Luther King, the organized and peaceful movement brought about major change to the civil rights of African Americans and other minorities. Moreover, this movement made historical strides in changing U.S. policy, and did so without the use of social media. Today, social media activism is merely a means to an end. Social media can share a vast amount of information, and raise awareness on a broad spectrum of issues. However, the ability to make major changes on government policy, as proven by many occurrences in history, requires high-risk activism under an organized hierarchy. I argue that social media is not an effective tool for political actions because it lacks the necessary traits to make an effective impact.

Overall, our theory that social media use is a cause for voter turnout was not supported through our tests. Our results from our hypothesis chi-square test, our regression analysis, and also our predicted probabilities test show that social media use does not have a significant effect on voter turnout in the 2012 presidential election. Our theory may have been flawed in thinking that less people are dependent on social media than we originally thought. This can been seen in our graphic that a majority people do not use social media at all for obtaining political information. Social media sites are still on the rise and are not as widely/frequently used as we previously anticipated. The millennial generation and generation z are the most common

Social media can also play a vital role in influencing the political decisions of its users. Multiple studies have been conducted measuring Facebook’s impact on young people. Some suggest that young Internet users are more influenced by other young people online. Others suggest young voters seem to trust older users’ evaluations more (Lee). People who intend to vote need to understand that they have to think for these issues themselves. There is nothing wrong with discussing these issues with others online, but why constantly let others decide for you? Politicians have to use social media

As a logical consequence, Postmes and Brunsting (2002) reasoned that the Internet is changing society because people's cognitive processes, triggered by access to information and communication, replace the strong social ties that traditionally underpin committed activism. In simpler words, in the past, humanity used the herd instinct as the main driving force behind committed forms of activism. Thanks to the Internet, we climb another step or three on the evolutionary ladder, and simply do away with the herd instinct and replace it with reason. The argument, if put this way, does not sound particularly strong. What can be taken away is that social media is still evolving, that social media changes the way we – or most of us communicate, that social media is used in social and political activism, and that the Internet increases quantitative if not qualitative access to information.

According to Dictionary.reference.com, activism is the policy or action of using campaigning to bring about political or social change. A huge campaign that is well known across the world, the Civil Rights Movement, was brought about by Martin Luther King, Jr. King risked his life everyday to ensure justice and equality for the African American race. “Small Change” by Malcolm Gladwell gives insight on how activism is more effective than social media, especially from one scenario at the Woolworth’s lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina. Gladwell points out his strong belief of what activism can do for a society rather

Social media has changed how social activism is done by “making it easier for the powerless to collaborate, coordinate, and give voice to their concerns” (Gladwell 68). However, this does not mean that social media has changed what a successful social activism has always required. There has been a common misbelief that when a social campaign “go viral” on the internet, it means a successful social activism. Social media can be used as a tool for the organization and the communication of real activists, but not an effective tool for starting a social change by convincing people on the internet to become real activists and take real-life action.

It was the third semester of my freshman year in high school when I got the news. I was doing my homework in preparation for another dreadful Monday at school. I was scrolling through my Instagram timeline instead of finishing my homework when my mom asked me to cut on FOX 5 News. Now that the television was on, it gave me another excuse to procrastinate even more. My eyes were glued to the television as reporters talked about events that deserved no air time, when suddenly the segment began to air. The reporter said a black teen, named Trayvon Martin had been shot and killed in Stanford, Florida by a neighborhood watch volunteer. She said the story was still developing and information would be coming. It was relayed later that day that the neighborhood watch volunteer followed and shot Martin because he looked suspicious and up to no good, also known as black. I was so shocked. I mean, I knew that hate crimes against black people existed, but I could not tell someone a case in which it had happened recently.

Social media has grown at phenomenal rates over the past decade, with its rise being easily visible in several fields such as publishing, business, and activism, among others. The rise of its use in the field of politics is well known by those who are on and off social media, as a result of increasing number of politicians using this global platform to their maximum advantage.

This democracy ultimately rests on the people raising their voices, and once again, the internet improves this process. Through social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter, citizens have an ability to speak out like never before. Mark McKinnon, an American political advisor, said, “Technology and social media have brought power back to the people” (“Mark McKinnon Quotes”). If social media can elect a president, as it did in 2016, then it is clearly a force to be reckoned with. Before the age of the internet, voicing your opinion on a public platform often meant writing a letter to the editor and hoping that it was selected for publication, but now, it’s as easy as posting on Facebook, something many people do frequently. Speaking out on important issues has never been easier.

In the writing by Briggs (Young People and Political Participation: Teen Players) she notes that “social media are a critical new space for political discourse and engagement, which political institutions cannot afford to neglect” as the younger audiences use social media, and the people they follow as a guide it seemed vital that modern day politics has to infiltrate social media formats. This can be utilised by politicians and their agenda to widen the scope of their message. In the Praeger Handbook of Political Campaigning in the United States, Benoit investigates how successful an organised strategy using new media to win an election can be for political candidates. He states that “the innovative use of new media contributed to President Barack Obama's presidential campaign win in 2008” (Benoit, 2016). Obama's presidential campaign was one of the first to set the standard for political strategy online. The literature talks about the expansion of the internet and how that has provided a suitable platform for political agendas to grow exponentially. With the focus of the research project highlighting the specific use of social media it is important to reflect on the initial stages of online political campaigning, and to understand how Trump has cultivated this style of political