“Social media platforms held the promise of being more egalitarian and democratic than mass media in a sense that all users could equally participate and contribute content” (Dijck & Poell, 6). This explains a basic purpose of social media that remains consistent with the democratic values of freedom that the U.S. is founded upon by providing citizens with a platform where they are free to speak their mind. What makes this even more interesting is the ability for people to share their opinions on a stage that has relatively no geographical boundaries. Rather than restricting the spread of individuals’ beliefs, social networking sites help spread messages and information to anyone, faster than was previously possible. According to Dijck and Poell, “social media platforms seldom deal with ‘natural’ geographically or demographically delineated audiences; instead, they expedite connections between individuals, partly allowing the formation of strategic alliances or communities through users’ initiative” (Dijck & Poell, 8). Social networking sites are naturally designed to increase connectivity and interactions among individuals with common interests or beliefs. The idea of connectivity has significantly influenced the way in which protests are held in America and around the world.
In society today, we as a whole have replaced communicating face to face and have switched to expressing our ideas behind a screen. Because of this, a good number of arguments have arose from post and publications that state someone’s opinion about an issue. One of the most highly used forms of media in our world today is social media, which are websites and technological apps that enable a person or group to create their own websites and pages for a specific purpose. Social media creates a second “ world” where people can communicate with others across the world in a matter of seconds. Whenever you have a large collection of people in the same area, each stating their arguments and sides to something, there are going to be conflicting sides to every situation. Another way of describing the word argument is by using the words ethos, pathos, and logos. These three words are used when arguing on social media every single day.
In the past ten years the way we as a people communicate has changed greatly. No longer is it uncommon for conversations to not be face to face and now more so than ever conversations take place through text. As with any change there will be and is push back to it. The conflict over the consequences of the social media dependent society have now intensified as a result of social media playing ever greater roles in how politics is seen and even conducted. This has been a major societal question since the presidential election of 2008 and the debate has been written about, discussed, and argued by thousands of different politicians,
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
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
Congress, 80% of our representatives use social media to engage with constituents. That has never been done before and is changing how politicians respond. We even see some votes in Congress made based on their Facebook feedback.”(The Economic) The Internet is like being there in the whole scene. Missing out information is impossible, a simply Google search, all the information is stored. When computers came out, it cost thousands, now it’s cheaper and faster. There’s tablets and phones with the opportunity to surf the web. More than half the candidates have some type of social media, either them or a fan.
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.
The 2016 presidential election may happen to be one of the most memorable elections to have ever been. From the campaign speeches, to the Democratic and Republican National conventions, and even the presidential debates; Americans seemed to constantly be voicing their opinions on every aspect of the election, and who they believe is the more suitable candidate for president, especially on social media. The 2016 presidential election marks one of the more recent elections where we start to see social media’s impact on it. We see how presidential candidates use social media as a platform to voice about updates on their campaign as well as communicate with their supporters. With the continue rise in the number of social media users as well as politicians now using social media, how much has its impact had on elections and Americans outlook on the campaign.
In “Presidential Campaigning and Social Media”, John Hendricks and Dan Schill conduct a research and show percentages of how many people from each political party rely on social media during elections. Their research showed that 48 percent of democrats and 34 percent of republicans think that keeping up with political news through the use of social media is very important (Hendricks). People think that it is important because they cannot only express their own opinions through social media sites, but they can also look at other people’s opinions and compare the two. Although this can be a reliable source to use during elections, this has become an issue recently, especially in today’s election with a figure as big as Donald Trump in the running. Many people only know Donald Trump from his social status instead of his political standings; therefor many people that support him are doing so for the wrong reasons. People are voting for him not because of his political views, but instead because of his social
At no other time has a "like," retweet or generally thoughtless online movement been so intelligent of the condition of American politics. For the likeminded people social media acts as a glue which unite them under one roof of open discussion. They not only want to know what is going around but also want to know the opinions of other likeminded people and why their opinion is correct. Despite the fact that online networking permits individuals to be presented to various political perspectives, individuals have a tendency to be a piece of situations where their political assessments are continually fortified.
When politicians employ social media to expand their ideas to a wider audience, it allows more people to become involved in politics. Unfortunately, this expansion of politics is not really to our country’ advantage. The 2008 elections sparked the start to a new era of politics; one where social media became a major source of
“Academic research has consistently found that people who consume more news media have a greater probability of being civically and politically engaged across a variety of measures.” In a generation where everyone’s time and attention is progressively focused on social media apps such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and Twitter, there are still people who seek to appraise the relationship between public engagement and social media use. The media is a very useful tool to get people participating in the world of politics. A lot of us find out about political candidates, rallies, debates, and events through news channels, newspapers, social media, and radio stations. The media has always been critiqued by some but it also gives people the chance to be influenced by their government. Many people will login to their Facebook page and see hundreds of political memes. According to Dictionary.com a meme is “an image that is spread via the internet and often altered in a creative or humorous way.” When it comes to political memes, people like to brew jokes about the political candidates they despise and get reactions out of others. People are consistently sharing articles about candidate flaws such as Hillary Clinton’s 30,000 deleted emails or Donald Trump not releasing his tax returns. These things can tremendously affect people altering their
In today’s century social media is the main way to communicate with people with people all over the world. It has become very popular... even more popular than a text or video message. Social media is a computer technology that facilitates the creation and sharing of information, ideas, career interests and other forms of expression via communities and networks. The variety of social media services that are currently available can help benefit businesses, introduce an event, or even help you find a friend, family member, or long lost soulmate. Some social sites even help you find love. However, there are many positive things that can come out social media but there are many negatives too.
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.
Social media further dissolves borders between the uses of propaganda and public information to forward political-strategic goals. For companies, social media is a great way to promote their brand and their products and attract customers. For politicians the same is true, only in their case they are their own brand.