#mda20009 digitalcommunities election2016 tweeter-in-chief politics

[kateayoung-blog]

Are social media platforms bad for democracy?

From revolutions to presidential elections, there is little doubt that the realm of Web 2.0 has real-world political consequences. Social media has long been heralded as a tool for liberation, giving a platform to those who had been excluded from the political arena, and affording them the ability to mobilise support (Tucker et al. 2017, p. 47). Likewise, official Facebook and Twitter accounts have become commonplace on the campaign trail, providing a forum for politicians to reach the masses and niche audiences alike (Young 2010, p. 221).

The events of the 2016 U.S. presidential election have raised serious questions over the capacity of such platforms to interfere with the democratic process. Previously, my biggest social-media-based election concerns might have been whether to unfollow my local member (and his incessant parking meter posts) on Facebook, or if I should post a picture of my ballot sheet that listed Meow-Ludo Disco Gamma Meow-Meow as a candidate (I did). Now, they’re more along the lines of whether my accounts have (undoubtedly) been exposed to foreign interference and fake news. These concepts are not new but, like many others prior to 2016, I was still riding the optimistic high of social media’s democratic potential, unaware of the dark world of algorithms, data breaches, and filter bubbles that lurked beneath. As stated in a 2017 leading story in The Economist – “Facebook, Google and Twitter were supposed to improve politics. Something has gone very wrong” (The Economist 2017).

A couple of nights ago I went to see Hillary Clinton speak. When asked what she believed influenced the outcome of that November 2016 night, her response was clear – her fate was sealed by social media. In a presidential race that earned “fake news” and “alternative facts” places in our vernacular, the unsuspecting digital citizenry was bombarded with political bias, unprecedented vitriol, and highly unconventional campaign social strategies. Even Trump himself has declared that he probably wouldn’t be where he is had it not been for Twitter (Factba.se 2017). Circumventing traditional media outlets, Trump led a one-man Twitter campaign. Policy, attacks on other candidates, and self-praise came tumbling out in bizarre late night Twitter tirades, controlling the mainstream news of the day with perfectly timed distractions. When asked how he would change his social media behaviour upon being sworn in he responded "I'm going to do very restrained. If I use it at all, I’m going to be very restrained.” (Firozi 2016). I’ll just leave these here. 

The biggest threat, however, comes from the influence we cannot see. Facebook has admitted that between January 2015 and August 2017, 146m users may have been exposed to Russian backed misinformation across its platform (The Economist 2017). Additionally, the data of 87 users was accessed by big data firm Cambridge Analytica in an effort to deliver targeted political bias to Facebook users (Solon 2018). The danger lies in the fact that social media platforms are increasingly being treated as news sources (Tucker et al. 2017, p. 49), a trend that is particularly rampant amongst those who are “headline-checkers” (Young 2010, p. 218). The UI of social media platforms, combined with our “attention economy”, ensures that fake news travels fast and largely unchallenged (The Economist 2017; Tucker et al. 2017, p. 54), using so-called filter bubbles to keep us safe inside our like-minded microcosms. To step outside the filter bubble is to be confronted with an anger and moral outrage that seems to multiply on the internet, amplifying divisions that have long existed, and giving voice to partisans that were previously sidelined. Civilised discussion seems to have no home on our feeds - “Facebook is where you go to be outraged among people who are outraged by the same things; Twitter is where you take your outrage to the enemy” (Williams 2017). In the months surrounding November 2016, I witnessed many a post implosion, as people seemed to forget about general niceties, going straight for the throat at the first mention of politics. Magnified by this concept of everybody having a voice on social media, these disputes moved offline, making for many an awkward thanksgiving dinner in my own friendship circle.

Whilst the events of 2016 (unfortunately) cannot be undone, I at least hope that they serve as an example of how not to use the internet. The attention that has been brought to privacy and authenticity concerns on social media has offered an opportunity for individuals and corporations alike to take stock of their own practices – and maybe untick a few boxes in their Facebook settings. Perhaps if we spend as much time investigating sources as we do screaming at each other on the internet, there may be hope for us yet. As Hillary told us the other night - “we need to make social media work for democracy”.

References

Factba.se 2017, Fox News: Tucker Carlson Interviews Donald Trump - March 15, 2017, Factba.se, viewed 10 May 2018, <https://factba.se/transcript/donald-trump-interview-fox-march-15-2017>.

Firozi, P 2016, 'Trump vows to be 'very restrained' with Twitter as president', The Hill, 11 December 2016, Available at <http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/305747-trump-vows-to-be-very-restrained-with-twitter-as> (Accessed 10 May 2016).

Solon, O 2018, 'Facebook says Cambridge Analytica may have gained 37m more users' data', The Guardian, 5 April 2018, Available at <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/04/facebook-cambridge-analytica-user-data-latest-more-than-thought> (Accessed 10 May 2018).

The Economist 2017, 'Do social media threaten democracy?', The Economist, Nov 4, Available at <https://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21730871-facebook-google-and-twitter-were-supposed-save-politics-good-information-drove-out> (Accessed 4 May 2018).

Tucker, JA, Theocharis, Y, Roberts, ME & Barberá, P 2017, 'From Liberation to Turmoil: Social Media and Democracy', Journal of Democracy, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 46-49.

Williams, Z 2017, 'We are all angry on social media - at least try to listen to the rage of others', The Guardian, 9 October 2017, Available at <https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/09/angry-social-media-facebook-twitter-silicon-valley> (Accessed 10 May 2018).

Young, S 2010, How Australia Decides: Election Reporting and the Media, Cambridge University Press, Melbourne.

Images and video

‘Bruce Plante Cartoon: Trump and Twitter’ 2017 [image], Bruce Plante, Tulsa World, viewed 10 May 2018, <http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoon/display.cfm/161817>.

‘How social media helped weaponise Donald Trump’s election campaign’ 2017 [video], Planet America, ABC News Australia, viewed 11 May 2018, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VFTCwKLlgg>.

‘Outcome of political arguments meme’ 2016 [image], Me.me, viewed 10 May 2018, <https://me.me/i/outcome-of-political-arguments-on-facebook-you-change-your-mind-2911634>.