Social Media Is Ruining American Politics

When November rolls around, campaign advertising inevitably comes with it. Political advertising is at its peak and continues to pop up everywhere. Social media is no exception; as a matter of fact, that is probably where it lurks the most. Media has always been an advantage to politicians who need to spread their views and gather supporters. From the very beginning of media by newspapers, to the very latest of communication through phones, news through the media has always had an impact on the history of countries. Depending on how quickly information gets to both political leaders and citizens, the course of entire nations could be saved or destroyed. It has often been said that the television was vital to the winning presidential election

Austin, PhD and Professor of Philosophy at Eastern Kentucky University, believes that social media is the largest purveyor of disconcerting trends seen in readers. He claims in his Psychology Today feature entitled "Want a Better Life? Read a Book" that the punchy / quick lived nature of online media can be droning and inescapable, causing its users to accept preconceived opinions rather than critically analyzing a text using their personal rationale. For those like Austin, the increasing prevalence of social networking has not only altered the way in which we read, but the way in which we

Does Nicolas Carr, author of “How Social Media Is Ruining Politics” provide enough evidence that social media is ruining politics? The answer is a very obvious yes. Overtime, social media has slowly polarized the political perception of the American people. Social Networking is a new, popular medium that has changed the nature of political conversation. Therefore, it has become both a good thing and a bad thing. It has encouraged those who once did not partake in the political process to participate. Social networking is very useful to find out news and information ahead of the news media.. “It has become an easy way for political candidates to connect and communicate with the American people.” (Carr 1) While social media might provide the candidates with a form of convenience because it simplifies and speeds up the communication process, it also provides many ways for their campaigns to be easily and deliberately attacked. Unfortunately, what receives the most attention on social media is outrageous statements. Some candidates like Donald Trump know how to use this to their advantage. The danger in this is that candidates tend to use abrasive soundbites to grab the attention of the social media user. Unfortunately, the abrasive soundbites are often taken out the intended context. Other candidates like Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush did not come to this realization as quickly because they did not want to take the chance of hindering their image. They understood that a

In fact, the 2008 presidential election has even been coined as the “Facebook Election”. Although the concept of social media was still on the rise, social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter, or YouTube were not completely unaware of their role/leverage in American electoral politics. In fact, during the presidential campaign, each site found their own way to encourage users to discuss the election or issues contained

Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and other social media websites have affected American elections in many forms. Candidates are now turning their attention to the people on social networks Murse (2015). They 're trying to draw more people like Millennials because they use more technology. These applicants are trying to step up and make a huge difference from the election of 2008. While in the running, the usage of social media is being used to announce what he or she is doing for the presidential campaign. For this reason, candidates, controversy, public opinion, social media and its 21st century media outlets have become the center of the 2016 election (CIO, 2015).

In the more recent years due to the increased use of the everlasting advancements in technology, such as social media; and biological understandings of how the human brain works, the American media has corrupt many different aspects of the American society such as politics and racial discrimination.

In recent years the media has become, to many, unreliable when it comes to its deliverance of the news because of its strong bias and because the media, including social media outlets just as much as news networks and cites, has different ways of interpreting a story; for example some outlets such as MSNBC are known for their liberal views,

Over time the United States has been molded by new technology, and American politics were no exception. Throughout history the political process in the United States has been greatly altered by advancements in technology; mail, radio, and television(elements in a series) have all shaped the way the public sees politicians in monumental ways. Recently a new factor has made its mark on American politics: social media. The use of social media by politicians and citizens has had repercussions that echo throughout the political sphere. The introduction of social media altered the landscape of American politics forever. Now more than ever before, it is harder to find the truth and even easier to hide from

When it comes to the presidential election, social media can have not only a positive impact on potential voters but also a negative one. This is due to the amount of voters that take social media to a whole new level and depend on other people’s opinions instead of their own. One way to fix this is to encourage more voters to listen to the campaigns for themselves instead of merely taking others opinions and placing those above their own. The research I have conducted shows how much of an impact different social mediums have on elections, especially during this year’s, but more importantly during Donald Trump’s campaign. I have analyzed both the positive and negative effects of different social mediums, such as: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram

In his article “How Social Media is Ruining Politics”, Nicolas Carr argues that the media of today is more “encompassing and controlling than ever before. (Carr 1)” Media can be manipulated in a way that allows a candidate to have a perceived excellent reputation. However, it can also provide the candidate with a disadvantage by misrepresenting their ideas. As James Fallows, author of “ Learning to love the (Shallow, Divisive, Unreliable) New Media”, points out, “If ideas are misrepresented, it becomes easier to lie. (Fallows 4)” Candidates can easily change the context of their message to make it more appealing on a social media platform. this change causes political issues to become an easily overlooked. He concludes that social media is primarily “used to create a warm emotional connection for a candidate rather than keeping the focus on issues that would help our country.(Carr)” In his article, “Beware of Online Filter Bubbles”, Eli Pariser expresses similar concerns to Carr. He concedes that popular internet mediums like Yahoo and Google “filter search results to fit the needs and intrests of the user. (Pariser)” The websites “filter in what users like and filter out what they dislike. (Pariser)” His concern is that “online media personalization causes important issues to be overlooked easily. (Pariser)” His research provides a

A supporter of a candidate, who holds strong opinions on various political topics, typically runs these websites. While it is great that people have a platform to speak their mind in regards to politics, it can become problematic. Since many of these websites are built on opinions, it is hard to find credible websites that speak the facts about candidates, and how the candidates honestly feel about specific political topics. Everyday I see political posts on Facebook that credit one candidate while discrediting another. These posts are usually very opinionated and lack fair representation. The Internet has also been used to spread false accusations about competing political candidates. Once an accusation has been posted online, it typically spreads quickly and can be hard to recover from. Candidates will use this tactic to reveal information about other candidates that may have been taken out of context, resulting in a loss of supporters for said

According to Statistics Canada (2016), 59 percent of Canadians use the internet to stay updated with weekly news and events. Social media platforms are the main carriers of this news information. A grave concern currently shared amongst Canadian politicians and the government is the impact of Canadian citizens consuming news media from these digital networking sites. The 2016 American election was disturbed by incorrect information that was shared amongst citizens over the web. This spread of inaccurate information is known as “fake” news. In the context of this reflection paper, I define “fake” news as: “a fictitious report relating to current events which is fabricated, and often titled misleadingly with the deliberate purpose of

The recent surge in popularity of social media comes with a price: fake news. Fake news is defined as news or media that has been altered or modified. Journalists have begun to analyze why that fake news exists and why it continues exist. Two authors, Eoin O’Carroll and Kevin D. Williamson, both have written articles about fake news. Eoin O’Carroll’s article “How Information Overload Helps Spread Fake News,” discusses how the media has bombarded us with news stories, blurring the distinct lines between real and fake news. Kevin D. Williamson, a journalist for the National Review, writes in his article “‘Fake News, Media and Voters: Shared Reality Must Be Acknowledged” that the news is not fake; it just does not align with one’s personal beliefs. Both authors successfully appeal to their audiences’ emotions and feelings, but O’Carroll is more likely to succeed than Williamson in persuading his audience to try and combat fake news because the writer presents himself as someone the intended readers will more readily identify with and offers evidence that his readers will find more compelling.

Through the onslaught of opinionated social media posts we scroll through every day, on a variety of social platforms, we are constantly reminded of the First Amendment granting U.S. Citizens the Freedom of Speech. Often I find myself wondering what was going through their head or how they arrived at their conclusion, but I dare not restrict them from voicing their mind. Throughout the 2016 Presidential Election, a myriad of "political experts" over both party lines both consistently and unapologetically posted nasty opinionated statuses, often riddled with a plethora inaccuracies as facts, yet saw no real repercussions other than losing online "friends" or engaging in a full-blown comment war on social media. In a world where 280 characters make this evening's headline news story and where cyberbullying pushes children as young as 11 to the brink of suicide, the lines are often blurred as to what extent the right to free speech should encompass.

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.