Braman 1

Ben Braman
Professor Sonnega
MEDIA 160Mass Media
25 October 2016

Social Media in Elections: Effective and Dangerous?

The race for the forty-fifth presidency is heating up. Donald

Trump and Hillary Clinton continue to exchange jabs in hopes of

achieving more votes. In order to do this, the candidates use platforms

such as debates, tweets and other forms of mass communication.

These forms of media help shape the common voters opinion of each

nominee. Donald Trump has 12.7 million followers on Twitter and

Hillary Clinton has 10 million. Its easy to see the magnitude that a

single tweet can have on todays society--more specifically the voting

population. This election is different though. Elections of the past

focused on opposing stances whereas in this election, personal attacks

have become a norm. Because of this, rumors spread across social

media like wildfire. Following any politician on Twitter doesnt always

coincide with showing support. Many followers want to stay in the

early majority. In other words, people who follow Hillary Clinton want

to be the first ones to see what she tweets and then create arguments

around them. Both of the nominees are racing towards a social media

victory in hopes that it helps them win the general election. What

does this type of victory entail? Its very hard to measure. For voters

who have historically voted solely Democrat or Republican, this victory

 Braman 2

involves slandering the other nominee. For a first time voter who

doesnt have any tendencies, this victory shows itself with information

overload. Regardless of the category you fall under, a controversial

social media post is at your fingertips. The race to win social media

has taken many obscure twists and turns and the result has been a

headache for unsure voters.

The first presidential debate of this election cycle was held on

Monday, September 26, 2016. Broadcasted directly from Facebook

and Twitter for the first time ever, the debate was watched by more

than 84 million people. Inaugural voters tuned in across America in

hopes of attaining a better idea of who to cast their vote for. Instead,

Trump and Clinton bashed each other repeatedly in what was

reminiscent of a nasty high school bullying scene. As an independent

voter, I dont sway left or right. I was hoping that the debate shed light

on important policy issues. Instead, I got tired of seeing an argument

instead of a debate and I turned it off. However, still engrossed by the

two candidates, I checked Twitter to see what was trending. 35% of

citizens aged 18-29 say that social media is the most helpful source

of information about the presidential election (Pew). Seeing tweets

from close friends and family firmly show what side they lean to.

Never before has a like been so reflective of the society we live in

today. Thats why this election is different. The influence of social

media popularizes narrow opinions. As human beings, it is rational for

 Braman 3

us to seek out environments in which our opinions arent only correct,

but reinforced by others. This is part of the headache that

independent voters are tired of having. Without any polarizing views,

we have no choice but to be caught in the middle of anti-Trump or anti-

Clinton dialogue. The problem intensifies when you include the social

media barbarians who choose not to be civil or respectful. When the

digital revolution was in its infancy, many Americans held out hope

that social media would improve political discourse. Now, with the

revolution at its height, Americans have lost this hope. In a society

where any post can go viral at any time, websites dont filter

inappropriate topics or comments. A great example of this is

Facebook. Todays news feeds are clogged with radical political

commentary that showcases the ugly side of social media. All it takes

is one insensitive comment to spark the anger of millions of people

around the world. Think about what that type of influence this can

have if it was put in the hands of, say, a presidential nominee.

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have this power. Beginning

with Trump, its clear to anyone that his Twitter feed is a melting pot of

endless feuds, ego stroking and casual cruelty. Trump understands the

magnitude of achieving social media success. During the Republican

National Convention he purchased the official Twitter hashtag of the

day. Costing $200,000, the hashtag was exposed to everyone on

Twitter across the United States (Jones). When met with backlash,
 Braman 4

Trump regressed to his classic Twitter strategy: arguments. Trumps

authoritative nature definitely has its perks. In his own words, hes

the Hemingway of 140 characters (Sherfinsky). No matter what is

found in those 140 characters, one can be sure that debate will follow.

By accumulating synergy through word of mouth, Trump attains

publicity due to the fact that he can leave an impression on millions of

people with a couple sentences. Luckily for the public, it doesnt take

much to provoke him. For an independent voter, it seems like he

derives his happiness from putting others down. During the first

debate, Hillary Clinton provocatively but somewhat elegantly stated: a

man who can be provoked by a single tweet should not have his

fingers anywhere near the nuclear codes.

Objectively speaking, Hillary is not much better. While Trump

fires personal insults, Clinton takes past rhetoric to formulate tweets

that embody her campaign message while slandering opposition.

Although Clinton doesnt spend as much on social media, she has gone

to extensive lengths to counter Donald Trumps provocative tweets.

For example, on the same day of Trumps convention speech, Clinton

released a widget on Facebook that allowed users to Trumpify their

Facebook profile by super-imposing Trump insults onto their personal

pictures. On the first day over 800,000 users had Trumpified their

Facebook and over half of them had allowed the widget to authorize

their accountthus giving their information to the Clinton campaign

 Braman 5

(Hess). Both campaigns seem to be in the constant game theory

mindset. What do we do if they do this? Trump is quick to fire off a

racy tweet while Clinton analyzes her position before replying. Both

have their pros and cons.

So if youre an independent voter, and both Hillary Clinton and

Donald Trump dont find your vote, the easiest thing to do is to scroll

through all the clutter and not voteright? Wrong. Social media

websites are hoping to augment voter turnout by partnering with

nonprofits such as Rock the Vote and TurboVote by streamlining the

voting registration process. From a young age we are conditioned to

believe that voting is our civil duty. But for first time voters like me,

this election is especially difficult. The ongoing circus that we call

media coverage is taking its toll. Never before have I been so pressed

to form an opinion on candidates. All of a sudden, not voting seems

reasonable to me. Information overload continues to dominate my

social media feeds. I follow Trump and Clinton on Twitter because I

have always felt the need to keep up with trending events. I dont

follow them to comment on their stances. Facebook and Twitter have

now implemented ways to register to vote almost immediately. As I

clicked through the registration process I thought about how powerful

these platforms have become. I dont know if I will end up voting on

November 8, yet I still hesitantly filled out the form. This goes to show

that because of my social media presence I want to conform to society

 Braman 6

and try to fit into a voting demographic that supports someoneeven

if I dont readily accept that.

Part of the struggle of being an independent voter is the

immediate environment that surrounds you. Raised in a conservative

household, sent to a Catholic elementary school, then transferring to a

radically liberal high school, I saw the astounding differences that

media had around me. In high school, any conservative media was

met with instant backlash. One particular example stood out to me.

Senator Al Franken came in and spoke to our school via our political

awareness committee. He made a comment about gay marriage and

the attention it was getting on social media. Since my high school

leaned heavily towards liberal philosophies, Vote No signage began

popping up all around the school. Classmates of mine posted novels

on Facebook about how sinister it was if you voted yes. On one

instance, a conservative at my school posted a Vote Yes sign on the

class bulletin board. Within the hour it had been torn down and ripped

to shreds. The uneasiness I felt during the discussion that followed is a

metaphor of being caught in the middle as an independent voter.

Social media has advanced leaps and bounds since the early

2000s. It allows access to information the immediate seconds after it

breaks. For most, its a blessing, but for some it causes stress. When

placed in the hands of political nominees, social media is a useful tool

in aiding their campaigns. This is not the case for independent voters.
 Braman 7

With constant hogwash being shoveled down our timelines and news

feeds, it seems as though Trump and Clinton will stop at nothing to

reach out to us. One thing is for certain; the headache isnt going

away any time soon.

Works Cited

Pew Research: "Where Americans Are Getting News About the 2016 ..."
N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Oct. 2016.
 Braman 8

Hess, Amanda. "Donald Trump Is the Best at Twitter . Here's Why. -

Slate." Slate. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Oct. 2016.

Sherfinsky,
David."http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/20/donald-
trump-somebody-said-im-ernest-hemingway-140/." Washington Times.
N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Jones, Van "Trump: The Social Media President?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/26/opinions/jones-trump-social-media/
N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Oct. 2016.