McElduff 1

Colin McElduff

Mr. Plinske

English II Honors

17 April 2017

Devolving Politics: A Result of Social Medias Growing Presence

Twelve weeks into an administration marred by its war against the opposition party

of mainstream media, Americans are truly seeing the effects of the 2016 election (Levitz). This

past election cycle, riddled with scandals and allegations, has been one of the most controversial

in U.S. history. Its combative candidates and divisive nature have left many wondering how

politics devolved into its current turbulent state. The growth of social media as both a

communication and news platform over the past few years has brought politics center-stage in

the national online dialogue. This expansion in countries political discourse has had damaging

effects on society by leading to a greater polarization of ideals, a more inclusive conversation on

politics, and the increasing struggle differentiating facts from lies.

Over the course of the past two U.S. presidencies, politics has become increasingly more

polarized along party lines and entrenched political ideologies. Nonpartisan polling from Pew

Research found that values and basic beliefs are more polarized along partisan lines than at any

point in the past 25 years (Public Affairs Council). This increase in polarization comes as

public issues have become progressively more personal through the use of social media. Experts

like Steven Strauss, a 2012 advanced leadership fellow at Harvard, wrote that people tend to

stick to what they already believe and selectively filter out information contradicting [their]

preferences (Public Affairs Council). As more and more people receive their news via social
 McElduff 2

networking sites, the idea of confirmation bias has the potential to further deepen long-held

beliefs and thus lead to a lack of moderates in the political spectrum. When asked about the role

of social media in the 2016 election, Former President Barrack Obama stated that its use has

accelerated in ways that much more sharply polarize the electorate and make it very difficult to

have a common conversation (Boxell). The inability to have civil and meaningful debates on

major social and economic issues leaves people unable to argue on actual policy issues, and

instead it leads to social media creating a kind of scandal-driven, as opposed to issue-driven

campaign as demonstrated in the 2016 election. (Sanders). While evidence like this seems to

support the narrative that social media is causing the increase in polarization, one working paper

published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that demographic groups most

associated with political polarization are the least likely to be using social media. By using data

from the American National Election Studies experts divided respondents by their estimated

internet usage and found that growth in polarization was consistently higher among older

people (Bromwich). Though this does question the juxtaposition of polarization and social

media, it does not openly contradict it. Since the the paper only uses data from 1996 to 2012,

there is room for error given the enormous growth of social media since 2012. So while social

media platforms are not the culprit in the big changes [in polarization]...they may be playing

some role in forming this Us vs Them mentality that has been weakening the stability of the

political landscape.

Despite these growing divisions, many have pointed out how social media sites have

opened up political dialogue to be more inclusive. As a greater number of users join online

platforms, the available audience expands exponentially. These tools allow individuals...to have
 McElduff 3

a greater say in their nation and government by giving everyone a voice (Spinner). Though this

notion works on paper by allowing for a much more diverse range of ideas to be shared, it is also

is being exploited as a means of political hate speech. Radical groups like the alt-right,

neo-Nazis, and jihadist extremist use social media to spread their message of hate and incite

fear (Bilton). The Islamic State, or ISIS, has been one of the most prominent examples of

groups employing these tactics. Platforms like Twitter have been a major tool of ISISwith an

estimated 46,000 different accounts in spreading their anti-West ideology. Tweets filled with

threats of hatred and violence against Western nations are sent out each day, instilling fear into

Twitters over 320 million users and causing concern over possible terrorist attacks. Efforts to

combat messages of hate speech have been expanding across different social media platforms,

such as an extension of Twitters tweet threat team since 2015. However a lack success in the

removal of hateful comments has led to government departments and agencies urging sites to do

more to combat this epidemic. German Justice Minister Heiko Maas has been criticizing sites

like Facebook for failing to have a more hardline approach to removing hate speech. Already

having some of the toughest laws against slander and discrimination, Maas plans on expanding

these tight regulations to social media sites (Auchard). Racist and anti-Semitic content on social

platforms have been expanding over the past two years in Germany, thus organizations such as

the Central Council of Jews in Germany concur with Minster Maas in instituting measure that

fight against the incitement of radical hatred, glorification of National Socialism and Holocaust

denial on social media ("Social Media Sites Face Heavy Hate Speech Fines under German

Proposal"). So while giving free speech to everyone on social media does serve to make political
 McElduff 4

conversations more inclusive, it also opens it up for terrorist groups to incite fear into

communities.

Often times the spread of these hate messages and the growing polarization seen in

politics are a result of the same issue with social media: fake news. A key catch phrase from the

Trump Administration, the term fake news applies to the deliberate spread of misinformation

through media platforms. Since President Trumps first press conference as President-elect, it has

been used by right-leaning individuals to discredit conventional news outlets in the Trump

Administration's war against the media (Carson). As news outlets struggle to maintain their

positions as reputable sources, actual false information floods social media sites. Headlines like

Pope backs Trump, Hillary sold weapons to ISIS, FBI Agent Suspected in Hillary Email

Leaks Found Dead mislead the public on what was happening politics due to their rapid

circulation on sites like Facebook (Carson). Facebook has been increasing accused of becoming

a hotbed of fake political news due to the algorithm used to display news to users (Sanders).

Despite concerns over the rise of fake news as well as failure to act on complaints, the failure

to remove false news stories from social media platforms further spreads targeted propaganda to

the masses (Martinson). These alternative facts and narratives damages the political system by

promoting confusion that leads to a lack of faith in the democratic process.

As social media expands further into the realm of politics, its damaging effects on society

become more and more apparent. Political polarization and spread of hate speech on different

platforms damages confidence in government, especially as it becomes increasing more difficult

differentiating between fact and fiction. Though social media has already led to a more turbulent

and aggressive political landscape, one thing is certain: this is only the beginning.
 McElduff 5

Works Cited

Auchard, Eric, and Hans-Edzard Busemann. "Germany Plans to Fine Social Media Sites

over Hate Speech." Reuters. Thomson Reuters, 14 Mar. 2017. Web. 16 Apr. 2017.

Bilton, Nick. "The Upside to Technology? It's Personal." The New York Times 31 Mar.

2016, New York ed., D7 sec.: n. pag. Print.

Boxell, Levi, Matthew Gentzkow, and Jesse M. Shapiro. "Is the Internet Causing Political

Polarization? Evidence from Demographics." (2017): n. pag. National Bureau of Economic

Research. Brown University Population Studies and Training Center and the Stanford Institute

for Economic Policy Research, Mar. 2017. Web. 15 Apr. 2017

Bromwich, Jonah Engel. "Social Media Is Not Contributing Significantly to Political

Polarization, Paper Says." The New York Times. The New York Times, 13 Apr. 2017. Web. 15

Apr. 2017.

Carson, James. "What Is Fake News? Its Origins and How It Grew in 2016." The

Telegraph. Telegraph Media Group, 08 Feb. 2017. Web. 16 Apr. 2017.

Levitz, Eric. "Every Terrifying Thing That Donald Trump Did Lately." Daily

Intelligencer. N.p., 29 Mar. 2017. Web. 15 Apr. 2017.

Martinson, Jane, and Jasper Jackson. "Fake News Inquiry to Review Social Networks'

Complaints Procedures." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 08 Mar. 2017. Web. 16 Apr.

2017

Public Affairs Council. "Does Social Media Drive Polarization?" Newsletter. Impact.

Public Affairs Council, 13 Dec. 2013. Web. 15 Apr. 2017.

 McElduff 6

Sanders, Sam. "Did Social Media Ruin Election 2016?" NPR. NPR, 08 Nov. 2016. Web.

15 Apr. 2017.

"Social Media Sites Face Heavy Hate Speech Fines under German Proposal." The

Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 14 Mar. 2017. Web. 16 Apr. 2017.

Spinner, Melissa. "Effects of Social Media on Democratization." City University of New

York(2012): n. pag. CUNY Academic Works. Web. 16 Apr. 2017.

<http://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1109&context=cc_etds_theses>.