University of Duisburg-Essen

Department of Anglophone Studies

Summer Term 2022
Seminar: Trump, Brexit and Anglo Saxon Populism
Lecturer: Prof. Dr. Frank Erik Pointner

The Power of Social Media –

An Analysis of Twitter’s Role in the
New Wave of Right-Wing-Populism
in the U.S. by Taking the Example of
Donald Trump’s Twitter Presence
Module I

Maysun Abu El Haija, B.A.

Matr. No. 3036386
Lehramt Master, Semester 4
Email: Maysun.Abu-El-Haija@stud.uni-due.de
Table of Contents

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 2

2. Approaches to Define the Concept of Populism ....................................................... 3

3. Social Media and the New Dimensions of Communication ..................................... 5

4. Twitter as a Platform for the Populist Agenda .......................................................... 7

4.1 A Breakdown of Twitter........................................................................................... 7

4.2 An Examination of Trump’s Twitter Presence ........................................................ 8

4.3 Digital Mechanisms and Phenomena in the Twitterverse ..................................... 12

5. Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 16

Bibliography .................................................................................................................... 18

1
1. Introduction

Social media platforms have become an essential part of almost every individual’s life.
They have transformed communication and interaction fundamentally and have also be-
come an important part of political communication (Miller et al., 2016, pp. 1, 7). The
social media platform Twitter has a direct and personal character which is used by all
kinds of people to voice their thoughts. However, it has also become a popular and effec-
tive tool for political campaigns and politicians like Donald Trump. After Trump’s vic-
tory in 2016 social media has become a matter of debate. Trump relied on Twitter as his
main form of communication (Tran, 2021, p. 721; Conway, Kenski & Wang, 2015, p.
365). He generated a lot of attention by posting tweets that were not only controversial
and provoking, but also racist, sexist and homophobic (Ott, 2017, p. 64). Ultimately,
Trump has been permanently banned from Twitter “due to the risk of further incitement
of violence” in 2021 (Twitter Inc., 2021, para. 1). This leads to question which influence
and power social media platforms have in this new wave of populism.
Many digital features and risky mechanism have emerged that seemingly enhance
the populist agenda and serve populist leaders. Fake news is a term that received a lot of
attention during the presidential election in 2016 (Jang, Park & Seo, 2019, p. 2). Social
bots have also become a potentially dangerous tool to alter the public opinion (Grimme,
Preuss & Trautmann, 2017, pp. 8-10). It seems that those digital platforms, tools, and
phenomena do not only impact the online world, but also the world outside of social me-
dia. The suspension of Donald Trump certainly underlines this.
Considering the digital developments in the era of social media this term paper
aims to analyze the role and power of social media platforms, specifically Twitter, in the
new wave of populism. Therefore, the main research question is: In how far do Twitter’s
mechanisms and features serve populist leaders like Donald Trump and contribute to the
spread of populist ideas?
The goal is to show why social media platforms like Twitter are popular for pop-
ulists and in how far certain mechanism and features contribute to the rise of right-wing
populism. In a first step the concept of populism will be explained in order to have a
fundamental base for the term paper. After that the concept of social media and its com-
municative functions will be outlined to understand how social media has transformed
communication and interaction. In a third step Twitter as a social media platform and its
key characteristics will be presented. Hereby, Trump’s Twitter presence will be used to

2
exemplify the analysis. Then, specific mechanisms, features and phenomena of Twitter
will be examined. In a last step this paper will discuss and reflect on the results. To sim-
plify matters, this term paper will use the term populism to refer to right-wing populism.

2. Approaches to Define the Concept of Populism

Before this research paper can establish a link between populism and social media it is
fundamental to define what populism is and to present the key elements. This chapter will
briefly present the ideational-, the political-strategic- and the folkloric approach.
The reemergence of populism has led to debates among scholars since there does
not seem to be a consensus on the definition and meaning of the concept of populism.
There are rather discussions on whether populism even exists. Therefore, it is considered
as a contested concept. The terminology is accordingly diverse. Scholars define populism
as an ideology, leadership, movement, strategy, syndrome, or as a type of political dis-
course. However, in the academic world the ideational approach has been predominantly
used to define the concept of populism (Mudde & Rovira Kaltwasser, 2017, pp. 2, 5).
Mudde and Rovira Kaltwasser (2017) define populism as:

a thin-centered ideology that considers society to be ultimately separated into two ho-
mogeneous and antagonistic camps, ‘the pure people’ versus ‘the corrupt elite’, and
which argues that politics should be an expression of the volonté générale (general
will) of the people. (p. 6)

This definition includes four concepts which are constitutive for this approach,
namely: ideology, the elite, the people, and the general will (Mudde, 2017, p. 29). The
idea of the corrupt elite and the people is fundamental. Populism revolves around the idea
of doing what is right for the people. The people are seen as a homogenous group whose
general will is based on honesty, logic and common sense. They are considered as pure
and authentic while the elite is characterized by corruption since the elite have chosen to
turn against the people by prioritizing their own interests. This betrayal in turn makes
them inauthentic and impure (ibid., pp. 30-34). The difference between this ideology and
other ones is that the distinction is based on the concept of morality (Mudde, 2017, p. 29).

3
Nevertheless, this ideology lacks intellect, and it does not offer any real solutions to socio-
political issues like other ideologies which is why it is thin-centered (ibid., p. 30).
Another important and more recent approach is the political-strategic one which
shifts the focus towards the things populist do to pursue and sustain political power in-
stead of what they say (Weyland, 2017, p. 50). In this approach Weyland (2017) defines
populism “as a political strategy through which a personalistic leader seeks or exercises
government power based on direct, unmediated, uninstitutionalized support from large
numbers of mostly unorganized followers” (p. 50). This approach highlights the im-
portance of a leader who directs and mobilizes the people. The populist leader, also re-
ferred to as the political actor, is constitutive for populism and its political strategy.
Hereby, a personalistic character is added because the ordinary people have a strong
leader who seemingly wants to follow their will and their interests, and who is also willing
to attack the enemy. To do that populists usually use ways in which they can directly
approach the mass. TV presence, rallies and social media are tools that are used to achieve
this goal, and attributes like charisma can intensify the relationship between the leader
and the people significantly (ibid.). Still, populist leaders’ statements are usually marked
by “vagueness, rhetorical license, and opportunistic dissimulation” (Weyland, 2017, p.
61).
Since this term paper is going to focus on the communicative dimension of popu-
lists and social media a third approach will be presented as well. The folkloric approach
has gained popularity in the research field of political communication and in the media.
It is based on the idea that political figures act unprofessionally and display amateurish
behavior to generate media attention and to win popular support. Political leaders express
this, for example, through their outer appearance by not dressing appropriately or through
their poor language manners (Mudde & Rovira Kaltwasser, 2017, p. 4). Hereby, they
attempt to present themselves as one of the people. They do not fear to stand out among
other politicians and appear as courageous since they act visibly different than the elite
(ibid.). Populist leaders present themselves as a strong and as a man of action. They usu-
ally create a sense of urgency and are willing to do everything it takes to solve the prob-
lems by making quick decisions and/or using solutions that require common sense. More-
over, they use simple- or even vulgar language since they aim to appear as an ordinary
and relatable person (Mudde & Rovira Kaltwasser, 2017, pp. 64, 66). Nevertheless, it is
important to note that there is not a stereotypical populist leader. The attributes can vary
according to the country and the political culture. But a characteristic that they all have

4
in common is that populist leaders see themselves as the voice for the ordinary people
(ibid., p. 66).

3. Social Media and the New Dimensions of Communication

This chapter aims to define social media and explain the new dimensions of communica-
tion and interaction. This is important in order to explain social media’s impact on the
political discourse. To do that this chapter will define the concept of social media first
and then, give some general data information. After that the key features of social media
will be presented and it will be explained how they affect political communication.
“Social media is the term often used to refer to new forms of media that involve
interaction and participation” (Manning, 2014, p. 1158). There are various terms and con-
cepts that are used to describe the new forms of media such as: Social Media Platforms,
Social Networking and Web 2.0. Nonetheless, all these terms refer to platforms that are
based on information and communication technology (Spier, 2017, p. 15). According to
Statista (2022a), around 4.5 billion people use social media worldwide. The number of
users is even going to reach almost 7 billion by 2027. The platforms Facebook, Instagram,
Twitter are under the top five most used social media platforms in the United States (Sta-
tista 2022b). Statistics show that 90% of adults between 18 and 29 years used social media
in 2019. It was also used by 82% of adults between the age of 30 and 49 and by 69% of
the people of adults between the age of 50-64 (2022c).
These innovative forms of media have changed every aspect of human life. Shar-
ing and building information has been facilitated immensely. The dimensions of commu-
nication have been shifted to another level since it is now possible to connect with anyone
despite geographic, demographic or social differences (Adewuyi & Adefemi, 2016, p
109). Social media and globalization have made it possible to shrink time and space to
relatively small interactive field which has become an essential part of almost every indi-
vidual’s life. Those platforms have been integrated in people’s daily routines. (Kruse et
al., 2017, p. 62; Sawyer & Cheng, 2012, pp. 151, 152). The possibility to access and
exchange information, share opinions engage in discussions, form friendships, acquire
knowledge and understanding, and build communities has made social media not only a

5
key tool for communication, but also a place where people socialize (Miller et al., 2016,
11). Social media users do not only consume the content that is created in the digital
world, but they also produce it. Interaction and participation, sharing, connectedness,
peer-to-peer communication, information openness are some of the main characteristics
of social media platforms. Ultimately, social media has transformed the dimensions of
communication and interaction. (Jiao,Yang & Xu 2013, p. 1095; Grover, Kar, Dwivedi
2022, p. 1; Kruse et al., 2017, p. 64). This also applies to the political discourse and to the
consumption of news (Kruse, et al., 2017, p. 62; Pentina & Tarafdar, 2014, p. 212).
While traditional media like TV or newspapers are still the main sources of news,
social media platforms have become a vital and important source for political news and
political communication in general (Enli, 2017, pp. 50, 52). As a consequence, journalists
and news channels have become widely present on these platforms. Some even offer 24-
hour news delivery and promote engagement with users (Bruns & Nuenrbergk, 2019, p.
199). Politicians have also noticed the potential to directly engage with their electrical
voters and to mobilize voters (Enli, 2017, p. 51; Hameleers, 2018, p. 333). It is now pos-
sible for politicians to reach their target audience and to share their views with the rest of
the world. Now, they have the access to produce news themselves. During the presiden-
tial election campaign in 2016 social media platforms were primarily used a direct source
of information and news (Enli, 2017, p. 53).
Moreover, politicians are required to create a social media presence which is also
part of their “performative flexibility” (Enli, 2017, p. 52). They have to adjust to different
circumstances and formats and be able to switch from formal to informal settings or from
professionalized to personalized formats. Ultimately, one can conclude that the transfor-
mation in the field of communication has changed the power dynamic between journalists
and mainstream media and between politicians and their campaigns (ibid., p. 53). The
next chapter will specifically discuss the role of Twitter in the context of political com-
munication and populism in the United States.

6
4. Twitter as a Platform for the Populist Agenda

This chapter will explain the role of Twitter regarding the populist agenda. In a first step,
a breakdown of twitter and its core characteristics will be done to create a general under-
standing of the platform. In a second step, the most important features of Twitter will be
presented, and it will be explained how they contribute to the populist agenda. Trump’s
Twitter activity will be used as an example throughout the analysis. As a matter of clari-
fication, it is important to note that Trump’s Twitter account has been permanently sus-
pended. Therefore, it is not possible to access his Twitter account as a main source.

4.1 A Breakdown of Twitter

Twitter is one of the most dominant and leading social media platforms regarding news
communication and is especially popular for breaking news (Bowd, 2016, p. 135). It has
launched in March 2006 and has reached around 76.9 million Twitter users in the United
States alone (Statista, 2022d). Twitter is a microblogging platform which is characterized
by short content like quick comments, short phrases, images and videos. Twitter limited
the characters of tweets to 140 but has doubled it later to 280 characters. There are three
key elements that are constitutive for Twitter, namely: “simplicity, impulsivity, and inci-
vility” (Ott & Dickinson, 2019, p. 61).
Since Twitter restricts tweets to 280 characters it does not allow deep or profound
discussions and conversations. It rather relies on a simplified presentation of information
or messages. Considering the structure of this platform it leads to the consequence that it
disallows complexity within tweets. However, this does not mean that tweets cannot con-
tain clever ideas, it is just necessary to simplify them. In consequence, the simplification
and constant production of such simplified content promotes simplemindedness (ibid.,
pp. 61, 62).
Engaging on the platform Twitter is not bound to any kinds of efforts. Anyone can
tweet from anywhere. Tweets are usually written or created out of affect. Users to not
necessarily have to tweet important information. Anything can be tweeted. Even though
tweeting does require little to no effort it is bound to the fact that it also does not need
consideration or reflection before tweeting. Potential consequences are usually not

7
thought of. In fact, tweets that are emotionally charged tend to be distributed more quickly
and often than tweets that are rather neutral (ibid.).
The third key element, according to Ott and Dickinson (2019), is incivility and
how twitter promotes impolite and insulting speech. Elements that underline this claim
are that Twitter is rather informal and does not insist on correct grammar or specific
speech norms. Furthermore, Twitter creates a space where people do not necessarily have
to consider the feelings of others. The absence of physical presence makes it easier to
talk offensive to and about other people. A depersonalization of interaction occurs (ibid.,
p. 63). Interestingly, personality traits such as psychopathy and narcissism are positively
linked to the use of Twitter. Twitter users get on this platform to fill their need of self-
promotion and self-interest as well as their need for attention. Moreover, a study showed
that negative tweets are more probable to get popular, which again undermines the con-
cept of Twitter promoting an offensive discourse (ibid., p. 64).

4.2 An Examination of Trump’s Twitter Presence

This chapter will discuss how populist leaders take advantage of Twitter and its charac-
teristics by using Trump’s Twitter presence and activites as an illustration.
Twitter appeals to populist politicians since it makes them seem as one of the
people. The fact that a politician even creates an account on such a platform like Twitter
conveys an image of being just like all the other million users. The wall between seem-
ingly unreachable politicians and the people has been broken (Dakers, 2020, para. 31).
Trump’s Twitter account before he was banned was @realdonaldtrump. He used Twitter
as his main communication platform and gained 10 million followers from the day he
announced his campaign until the day he won, leaving him with nearly 13 million follow-
ers on Twitter. He was also present on other platforms such as Instagram and Facebook,
however, Twitter generated more controversies. A large number of followers does not
necessarily mean that he is approved by all of them, but it underlines his influence on the
public communication. Interestingly, Trump retweeted tweets of regular citizens more
often than other politicians and candidates. This supports the idea of him being the only
leader speaking and acting for the people and making them feel seen and heard (Zhang,
Afzaal & Chao, 2020, p. 1274).

8
Twitter facilitates political communication, and it is not necessary for politicians to rely
on traditional media to broadcast news or information. The same goes for twitter users.
Instead of relying on other news sources and channels people can easily access Twitter
and enter political discussions. Still, Twitter as a communication platform rather pro-
motes the act of broadcasting than profound discussion with voters (Conway & Kenski,
2015, p. 365). Moreover, it offers politicians a place where they are not forced to justify
themselves immediately or react to criticism in contrast to other forms of journalism and
traditional media (Dakers, 2020, para. 35).
Trump did not use Twitter in a strategic way or to discuss policies. In many ways
he used the platform to tweet like a regular user by talking about his life, preferences,
dislikes etc. and making use of Twitter’s personal character. Additionally, he used simple
language which sometimes contained grammar mistakes. Some tweets were even written
in the middle of the night which promotes his authenticity as well (Dakers, 2020, para.
32; Zhang et al., 2020, p. 1274). Trump tweeted about his preference of drinking regular
coke instead of diet, he talked about his parents, he also engaged in Hollywood gossip
(Barbaro, 2015). This kind of behavior conveys the image of a regular man and promotes
the connection between the populist leader and his followers which is a central element
of populism (Hameleers, 2018, p. 333). Therefore, Twitter has a “humanizing effect”
(Dakers, 2020, para. 32). Twitter was used by Trump to promote himself as a confident
authentic and charismatic person which in consequence made him stand out compared to
other politicians. This could have been reason that helped him to mobilize new voters
since they felt more comfortable and familiar with his communication style in contrasts
to the typical political discourse (Clarke & Grieve, 2019, p. 20). Charisma and emotion-
alization are key elements of populism and can be best conveyed on a platform like Twit-
ter. Furthermore, people are less likely to question the dubious policies if the populist
leader is charismatic (Zhang et al., 2020, p. 1278).
Twitter is also a place where polarizing, emotional or shocking tweets gain a lot
of attention. Those tweets end up going viral and add to controversial discussions and
ultimately disseminate populist ideas (Gil de Zúñiga, Koc-Michalska & Römmele, 2020,
pp. 587-588). Trump is known to spread content that is anti-establishment and anti-im-
migration, and to excessively attack and insult politicians, celebrities, companies, coun-
tries, news channels, journalists and movements on a regular basis (Quealy, 2021; Zhang
et al., 2020, p. 1278). As already said in the beginning of this chapter, Trump’s account
has been suspended. However, The New York Times published a list with an

9
overwhelming number of insults that Trump tweeted from 2015 to 2021, including his
original tweets (Quealy, 2021). Naming each and everything or anyone that was insulted
by Donald Trump would go beyond the scope of this paper, but to get an overview some
will be named: ABC News, CNN, Fox News, the United Kingdom, Canada, China, Bill
Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Ted Cruz, Democrats, Jimmy Fallon, Joe Biden, Jeff Bezos,
Black Lives Matter movement, Mexico, big tech companies and a lot more (ibid.). He
constantly referred to Hillary Clinton as “Crooked Hillary” (Trump, 2020, as cited in
Quealy, 2021, letter C) and called Joe Biden “Sleepy Joe”, “Pathetic Joe”, “Sleepy Joe
Hide”, “Slow Joe”, “Corrupt” and “a TOTAL FAILURE” (Trump, 2020, as cited in
Quealy, 2021, letter B). Even after the election in 2020, Trump called him a “Fake Pres-
ident!” (ibid.). Trump also tweeted that the U.S representative Justin Amash is “[…] one
of the dumbest & most disloyal men in Congress […]”, “[a] total loser!” and “[a] total
lightweight” (Trump, 2019, as cited in Quealy, 2021, letter A). Further, he made several
racist and Islamophobic statements by tweeting that Covid-19 is a “China Plague”, a
“ChinaVirus” (Trump, 2019, as cited in Quealy, 2021, letter C) and that Britain is “trying
hard to disguise their massive Muslim problem” (ibid., letter B).
Trump and his campaign certainly received a lot of criticism. Yet, the attacks and
insults were also a defensive strategy. For example, when the Access Hollywood tape1
was released a low engagement with Trump’s Twitter account was noted. But he decided
not to address this controversy at that time and focused on creating other controversies
by defaming his opponents in order to keep his followers actively engaged (Clarke &
Grieve, 2019, p. 20). Trump also said that the revelation of this video is rather used as a
distraction from the real issues (Farendthold, 2016, para 1). Considering all these contro-
versies, Trump still referred to himself as an extraordinary leader (Zhang et al., 2020 p.
1279). Within the Twitterverse2 populists like Trump can thrive. The platform serves as
a stage for populist leaders and allows baseless and hostile tweets to be spread. There is
no need for populists to engage in constructive, rational and well-founded discussions
because these are not going to generate attention (Dakers, 2020, para. 35).
The study by Zhang et al. (2020) aimed to find out which topics were most prom-
inent on Trump’s Twitter account in 2016. It showed that he liked to refer to himself the

1
The Access Hollywood tape is a video recording that shows Billy Bush and Donald Trump talking vul-
garly about kissing and groping women (Farenthold, 2016, para. 1).
2
The term Twitterverse is a blend word formed of the words “twitter + (uni)verse ‘the Twitter universe’“
(Klymenko, 2019, p. 8).

10
most. Instead of using the pronoun I, he used the word Trump to refer to himself in his
tweets. This was mainly used to brand his name. The second most popular topic in his
tweets was attacking his enemies and opponents, and the third most popular topic was
Make America Great Again which was the political slogan of the campaign. Trump is
known for bashing traditional media and calling his opponents liars. He used his platform
to call the media “dishonest”, “failing” and “low-rated” (ibid., p. 1276). Further topics,
that he tweeted about often were the following: fake news, the people, the truth. Interest-
ingly, policies were mentioned the least frequent (ibid.).
The study by Zhang et al. (2020) also analyzed the response of Trump’s followers
to his tweets. The tweet that got the highest response was “TODAY WE MAKE AMER-
ICA GREAT AGAIN” (Trump, 2016, as cited in Zhang et al., 2029, p. 1276). It found a
strong correlation between retweets and likes. Ultimately, Twitter is seen as a powerful
tool which enhances a new form populism. It is the perfect platform that offers a direct,
user-controlled and interactive tool for populist leaders like Trump. Instead of discussing
important topics he rather talked about himself and his persona. This is a strategy to ap-
peal to the voters because they are less likely to disagree with him (ibid., p. 1277, 1278).
According to the study of Clarke and Grieve (2019), Trump changed the style of his lan-
guage when he addressed different audiences. For example, he used more informal lan-
guage when he addressed Republicans and other people who shared his political views,
but he was more formal when he addressed the general public (p. 20).
In addition, Twitter serves as a stage where populist politicians like Trump can
finally speak the truth or rather their truth (Varis, 2020, p. 431). As stated above, Trump
constantly bashed the mainstream media and labeled them as “biased and untrustworthy”
(Enli, 2017, p. 53). According to Trump, Twitter is the only way of him to speak the truth
(Varis, 2020, p. 431). In the following some tweets posted by Trump will be presented as
an illustration: “Only the Fake News Media and Trump enemies want me to stop using
Social Media (110 million people). Only way for me to get the truth out!” (Trump, 2017,
as cited in Varis, 2020, p. 431), “The FAKE MSM [mainstream media] is working so
hard trying to get me not to use Social Media. They hate that I can get the honest and
unfiltered message out” (Trump, 2017, as cited in Varis, 2020, p. 431).
Ultimately, Trump’s tweets received a lot of attention whether positive or nega-
tive. He embodied the three key elements of Twitter: simplicity, impulsivity and incivility
(Ott, 2017, pp. 63-64). Through Twitter, populists are able to generate attention whenever
they please and get the possibility to feed their narcissistic supply (Zhang et al., 2020, p.

11
1274; Conley, 2022, p. 35). The attention generated on social media, however, was also
enhanced by news channels since they covered Trump and his polarizing tweets regularly.
This gave him even more attention and made him a significant figure in the traditional
media (Tran, 2021, p. 726). Twitter turned Trump into a media spectacle (Conley, 2022,
p. 5).

4.3 Digital Mechanisms and Phenomena in the Twitterverse

This chapter focuses on specific digital features, mechanisms and phenomena of Twitter
including the Twitter algorithm, the retweet function, social bots, echo chambers and fake
news. All those aspects will be discussed in the light of populism.
It was found that people who have rather strong populist attitudes usually use so-
cial media more often as a news resource (González-González, Marcos-Marne, Llamaz-
ares & Gil de Zúñiga, 2022, p. 205). Twitter is popular for the personalization that the
algorithm creates. Certain tweets’ visibility is reduced to personalize the content that ap-
pears on users’ Twitter feed. Some tweets are therefore prioritized. Discussions have oc-
curred that some groups voices are silenced by the algorithm whereas others are high-
lighted in the twitterverse (Huszár et al., 2022, p. 1). Users also tend to share information
and content that is likely to be accepted by their followers. On the one hand, this function
of filtering content in order to personalize the Twitter feed can lead to a one-sided political
view that undermines critical thinking and damages democracy. On the other hand, schol-
ars also argue that the plethora of information and opinion sharing contributes to a broad
spectrum of diverse opinions and perspectives (Flaxman, Goel, Rao, 2016, p. 299). Nev-
ertheless, people tend to join communities that conform with their own beliefs and where
they can meet like-minded people. But they also move to other communities if the previ-
ous ones do not align with their beliefs anymore (Kruse et al., 2017, p 65).
In addition, search engines allow users to access information that they specifically
look for. This option, however, leads to the consumption of news that also tend to align
with one’s own opinions and beliefs. This results in so called echo chambers or filter
bubbles, a digital place where users are exposed to conforming content. Previous studies
have already shown that people are more likely to choose and consume news that align
with their political opinions (Flaxman et al., 2016, p. 299). It is argued that social media
platforms helped Trump’s electoral victory by creating filter bubbles that prevent users

12
from exploring alternate information or perspectives. The study by Huszár et al. (2022)
found that there is indeed a positive correlation between right-wing news sources and the
Twitter algorithm and that they are amplified more than left-wing news sources. Another
study found that users who read partisan news articles on a regular basis are exposed to
one-sided political news to a great extent. Consequently, those users examined in that
study existed in such echo chambers (Flaxman et al., 2016, p. 317).
One of Twitter’s main functions is the retweet function. It allows users to re-share
the content of another user with their followers without changing it. Retweeting a tweet
usually expresses their interests in the information. It is the most important tool to spread
information and news (Jang et al., 2019, p. 4). The quote retweet function allows users to
add a comment to tweet that was previously written. This comment of course does not
need to be in favor of the original tweet. It can contain any kind of perspective or infor-
mation. Ultimately, a cycle of retweets and quote retweets can be created (ibid.).
Nevertheless, sharing and distributing information circulating around Twitter can
result in sharing mis- or disinformation. In fact, 49% of the adults in the US use social
media as a news source. Twitter is known for its instant news updates and the rapid dis-
tribution of news (Xiao, Borah & Su, 2021, p. 979). It is found that Trump gained benefits
from retweets (Gil de Zúñiga et al., 202, p. 590). However, the fact that anyone can create
content share information leads to the problem that information with a lack of credibility
and accuracy is spread. Especially since the electoral campaign in 2016 the term fake
news has become a public concern and a part of the political discussion (Jang et al., 2019,
p. 5; Grinberg et al., 2019, p. 374). Further, there is no system that conducts a fact check.
In many ways fake news had a big impact on the presidential election in 2016. On the one
hand Donald Trump himself said that several news articles were spreading fake news,
and on the other hand, studies (see Bessi and Ferrera, 2016) showed that large part of
reports that circulated on Twitter were indeed false (Jang et al., 2019, p. 5). The study
conducted by Jang et al. (2019) even found out that “fake news was propagated for a
longer period gradually but constantly compared to real news” (p.19).
There is a further mechanism that plays an important role regarding the distribu-
tion of (fake) news, namely, social bots. According to Ferrera et al. (2016) social bots can
be defined as “a computer algorithm that automatically produces content and interacts
with humans on social media, trying to emulate and possibly alter their behavior” (p. 96).
They have traits such as artificial intelligence which can be used to act autonomously on
social media platforms (Grimme et al., 2017, p. 6). They can be useful tool and even

13
helpful to a certain degree, however, in the context of political discourse this technology
has been veritably abused (Tran, 2021, p. 712). Thus, scholars also refer to them as polit-
ical bots since they have been ascribed the ability to manipulate the public opinion, polit-
ical discourses, and communicative processes by mimicking human social media users
(Tran, 2021, p. 712). They are also low-cost programs since even medium experienced
developers can do this easily and anonymously (ibid.). Political bots’ purpose is to alter
political discussions and opinions and to influence users. Their main goal is to promote a
certain person or ideas by trying to generate likes and follows. The most important char-
acteristic of social bots is that they imitate human communication. Furthermore, they are
goal oriented. Depending on the operator of social bots they can spread content or even
participate in conversations (Grimme et al., 2017, pp. 8-10).
The study conducted by Bessi and Ferrara (2016) researched the use of social bots
in the presidential election 2016 and found that 19% of the Twitter posts that were related
to the presidential election were coming from social bots. This proves that they are ac-
tively present on Twitter. About 400.000 bots were found to be involved in political dis-
cussions about the presidential election and they generated about 3.8 million tweets (p.
2). The study found that most of the tweets of trump supporters are rated as more positive
than of those of Clinton supports. Around 200.000 bots posted tweets supporting Trump.
The study also concluded that social bots are more effective in retweeting information
and distributing it among human users than in engaging in discussion with other users. In
fact, the study showed that social bots engage more with other bots (ibid., p. 8).
The sentiment within those tweets as also a part of the research. A striking finding
is that tweets of Trump supporters were far more positive than Clinton’s. Yet, the presi-
dential election was characterized by a negative tone (Bessi & Ferrera, 2016, p. 8). Those
systematically created tweets contained positive content, and distributing those positive
tweets creates a different and biased image. This leads to a different perception of a pol-
itician, when in fact, it has been artificially created by social bots (ibid.). Scholars argue
that social bots have the power to alter the public opinion. They threaten the integrity of
political elections and ultimately, create a danger to democracy. In fact, the use of social
bots to jeopardize elections has already been done before (Tran, 2021, p. 712).
Hashtags are also a popular feature of Twitter which were used by Trump as well.
Twitter (2022) defines a hashtag (#) as “the beginning of an unbroken word or phrase”
(para. 1). That means if a user creates a hashtag, it is automatically linked to other tweets
that include that exact same hashtag. It allows users to follow topics that they are

14
interested in. By doing that, users can connect with other users and join discussions. If
they become popular they can even appear in Twitter’s trending topics (Twitter, 2022).
Trump was known to use hashtags including #maga (Make America Great Again) and
#trump2020 for his campaigns in 2016 and 2020. Further hashtags were #BuildtheWall
and #BuildthatWall. A study by Parra-Novosad (2020) found that those hashtags were
used in right-leaning tweets more often than left-leaning using anti Trump hashtags.
Viewing those tweets creates an illusion of a powerful movement whereas left-leaning
tweets such as #nowall appeared rather random because they were not used as frequently
as the right-leaning ones (p. 39). Those mechanism and instruments promote a selective
perception since users are mainly surrounded by content that they agree in. This is further
enhanced by the algorithm (Darius & Stephany, 2020, p. 2).
An additional dangerous aspect is that the dissemination of false news and the use
of certain hashtags have been associated with racist attitudes towards minorities. Espe-
cially, during Covid-19 Trump’s racist tweet sparked heated discussions and reinforced
those racist attitudes. After his tweet, discussions on Twitter about the pandemic and the
use of racist hashtags such as #ChineseVirus increased. A growing number of crimes
against Asians was noted as well. A correlation between hashtags and hate crimes seems
plausible because many of those tweets that included anti-Asian hashtags implied vio-
lence (Hswen, 2021, p. 960, 961).
Twitter’s influence on the political discourse cannot be denied. Around 35 million
tweets about the U.S. presidential election 2020 were posted between October and No-
vember 2020. These tweets contained a massive amount of information which had the
potential to influence users’ decision. However, Trump did not win the presidential elec-
tion in 2020 despite being center of media attention (Tran, 2021, p. 726). He was even
suspended from Twitter (Twitter Inc, 2021, para. 1). Zhang et al. (2020) go further and
argue that politicians, including Joe Biden, have mimicked Trump’s social media style in
order to connect with people and mobilize voters (p. 1279).

15
5. Conclusion

This term paper aimed to analyze the influence and power of social media platforms in
the new wave of populism and investigate how populist leaders like Donald Trump
(mis)use the platform Twitter and its features to promote their populist agenda. This was
done by presenting Twitter’s key characteristics and analyzing Trump’s Twitter presence.
In addition, digital mechanisms and features of Twitter were examined and analyzed in
how far they promote populist ideas.
The term paper found that Twitter is the ideal stage for populist leaders to present
themselves, reach their target audience, make controverse statements and generate atten-
tion. Twitter’s logic is based on followers, likes, tweets, and retweets and offers hereby
populist leaders the possibility to directly engage with their followers and to spread pop-
ulist ideas. Compared to other politicians Trump retweeted tweets of his followers the
most. This promotes his relationship with his voters and followers and contributes to the
image of a leader who cares about his people and makes them feel heard and understood.
Moreover, Twitter is a place where shocking and polarizing tweets generate the
most attention and go viral. Trump used the platform to insult and viciously attack an
uncountable number of people. By doing that, he generated so much attention and rein-
forced the image of the political leader who is fighting the establishment. His Twitter
activity ultimately turned him into a media spectacle. Furthermore, nothing and no one
could prevent him from posting what he wants since Twitter is basically a broadcasting
and blogging platform where any impulsive thought can be posted at any time, providing
populist leaders a suitable stage to voice their thoughts. Additionally, there is no need for
populist leaders to engage in constructive, rational discussions as Trump’s tweets showed.
Not only, because Twitter’s character limit will not allow a complex discussion, but also
because populist leaders have the choice to ignore any kind of criticism. Trump did not
use Twitter in a strategic way or to discuss policies which was also underlined by empir-
ical studies.
Furthermore, this paper examined certain digital mechanisms and features of
Twitter and analyzed in how far they promote populist ideas. Twitter’s retweet function
has facilitated the dissemination of news and any other imaginable content. Nevertheless,
the research has demonstrated that the distribution of fake news is no exception. In addi-
tion, hashtags like #trump2020, #buildthewall or #maga can also be included in those
fake news or artificially created content. The dissemination of fake news and other right-

16
leaning tweets is reinforced through social bots who tweet and retweet such political con-
tent to alter the public opinion. Empirical studies already proved that social bots had been
actively involved in political discussion about the presidential election in 2016 and that
they purposely disseminate content in favor of a party or politician. Studies confirmed
that social bots and fake news have the potential to influence individuals’ decisions and
endanger democratic processes. Lastly, the whole logic of Twitter relies on its algorithm
which constantly personalizes the feed of users and presents content that they are likely
to agree with or enjoy. This leads to filter bubbles and echo chambers that keep people
with right-wing tendencies in a digital community where they meet like-minded people.
This reinforces their perceptions and their right-wing perspectives even more.
On the base of the analysis, this paper concludes that Twitter has opened new ways of
communication in the political discourse. It has facilitated news and opinion sharing, po-
litical interaction and participation, but it has also created a space where populists can
thrive, and where Twitter and its features can certainly be misused to promote right-wing
attitudes. This was illustrated by the examination of Trump’s tweets and empirical stud-
ies. Nevertheless, it is unclear in how far new voters have actually been mobilized through
social media. Especially, since Biden has won the presidential election in 2020. There-
fore, further empirical studies are necessary to research the influence of social media plat-
forms on political decision making.

17
Bibliography

Adewuyi, E. O., & Adefemi, K. (2016). Behavior change communication using social
media: A review. International Journal of Communication and Health, 9, 109-116.
http://communicationandhealth.ro/no-9-2016/

Barbaro, M. (2015). How Donald Trump Uses Twitter (Hint: Impulsively). The New York
Times. Retrieved September 26 2022, from https://www.ny-
times.com/2015/10/06/us/politics/how-donald-trump-uses-twitter.html

Bessi, A. & Ferrara, E. (2016). Social Bots Distort the 2016 US Presidential Election
Online Discussion. First Monday, 21, No., 11 –7. URL: https://ssrn.com/ab-
stract=2982233

Bowd, K. (2016). Social media and news media: Building new publics or fragmenting
audiences? In M. Griffiths & K. Barbour (Eds.), Making Publics, Making Places (pp.
129–144). University of Adelaide Press. http://www.jstor.org/sta-
ble/10.20851/j.ctt1t304qd.13

Bruns, A. & Nuernbergk, C. (2019). Political journalists and their social media audiences:
new power relations. Media and Communication, 7, No. 1, 198–212. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i1.1759.

Clarke I. & Grieve J. (2019). Stylistic variation on the Donald Trump Twitter account: A
linguistic analysis of tweets posted between 2009 and 2018. PLoS ONE, 14(9), 1–27.
e0222062. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222062

Conley, R. S. (2020). Donald Trump and American Populism (New Perspectives on the
American Presidency). Edinburgh University Press.

Conway, B. A., Kenski, K. & Wang, D. (2015). The Rise of Twitter in the Political Cam-
paign: Searching for Intermedia Agenda-Setting Effects in the Presidential Primary. Jour-
nal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(4), 363–380.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12124

18
Dakers, C. S. (2020). The Power of Right-Wing Populism in the Twitter Age: Analysis
of Donald Trump's Tweets During the 2016 Election. Inquiries Journal, 12. Availa-
ble: http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1817

Darius, P. & Stephany, F. (2020). How the Far-Right Polarises Twitter: „Highjacking“
Hashtags in Times of COVID-19. SSRN Electronic Journal.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3709988

Enli, G. (2017). Twitter as arena for the authentic outsider: exploring the social media
campaigns of Trump and Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election. European Journal
of Communication, 32(1), 50–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323116682802

Farenthold, D. A. (2016). Trump recorded having extremely lewd conversation about

women in 2005. The Washington Post. Retrieved September 26 2022, from
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-recorded-having-extremely-lewd-con-
versation-about-women-in-2005/2016/10/07/3b9ce776-8cb4-11e6-bf8a-
3d26847eeed4_story.html?itid=lk_inline_manual_2

Ferrara, E., Varol, O., Davis, C., Menczer, F. & Flammini, A. (2016). The rise of social
bots. Communications of the ACM, 59(7), 96–104. https://doi.org/10.1145/2818717

Flaxman, S., Goel, S. & Rao, J. M. (2016). Filter Bubbles, Echo Chambers, and Online
News Consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(S1), 298–320.
https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw006

Gil de Zúñiga, H., Koc Michalska, K. & Römmele, A. (2020). Populism in the era of
Twitter: How social media contextualized new insights into an old phenomenon. New
Media & Society, 22(4), 585–594. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819893978

González-González, P., Marcos-Marné, H., Llamazares, I. & Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2022).

The Informational Consequences of Populism: Social Media News Use and “News Finds
Me” Perception. Politics and Governance, 10(1), 197–209.
https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v10i1.4772

19
Grimme, C., Preuss, M., Adam, L. & Trautmann, H. (2017). Social Bots: Human-Like by
Means of Human Control? Big Data, 5(4), 279–293.
https://doi.org/10.1089/big.2017.0044

Grinberg, N., Joseph, K., Friedland, L., Swire-Thompson, B. & Lazer, D. (2019). Fake
news on Twitter during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Science, 363(6425), 374–378.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau2706

Grover, P., Kar, A. K. & Dwivedi, Y. (2022). The evolution of social media influence -
A literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Information Manage-
ment Data Insights, 2(2), 100116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jjimei.2022.100116

Hameleers, M. (2018). Augmenting polarization via social media? A comparative analy-

sis of Trump’s and Wilders’ online populist communication and the electorate’s interpre-
tations surrounding the elections. Acta Politica, 55(3), 331–350.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41269-018-0119-8

Hswen, Y., Xu, X., Hing, A., Hawkins, J. B., Brownstein, J. S., & Gee, G. C. (2021,
May). Association of “#covid19” Versus “#chinesevirus” With Anti-Asian Sentiments on
Twitter: March 9–23, 2020. American Journal of Public Health, 111(5), 956–964.
https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2021.306154

Huszár, F., Ktena, S. I., O’Brien, C., Belli, L., Schlaikjer, A. & Hardt, M. (2021). Algo-
rithmic amplification of politics on Twitter. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci-
ences, 119(1). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2025334119

Jang, Y., Park, C. H. & Seo, Y. S. (2019). Fake News Analysis Modeling Using Quote
Retweet. Electronics, 8(12), 1377. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8121377

Jiao, Y., Yang, J. & Xu, S. (2013). A Study of the Impact of Social Media Characteristics
on Customer Adoption Intention of Social Media. Proceedings of the 2013 International
Academic Workshop on Social Science (IAW-SC-13). https://doi.org/10.2991/iaw-
sc.2013.252

20
Klymenko, O. (2019). Twitterverse: The birth of new words. Proceedings of the Linguis-
tic Society of America, 4(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.3765/plsa.v4i1.4507
Kruse, L. M., Norris, D. R. & Flinchum, J. R. (2017). Social Media as a Public Sphere?
Politics on Social Media. The Sociological Quarterly, 59(1), 62–84.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00380253.2017.1383143

Manning, J. (2014) Social media, definition and classes of. In K. Harvey (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of social media and politics (pp. 1158-1162). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Miller, D., Costa, E., Haynes, N., McDonald, T., Nicolescu, R., Sinanan, J., Spyer, J.,
Venkatraman, S., Wang, X. (2016). How the World Changed Social Media. London: UCL
Press.

Mudde, C. (2017). Populism. An Ideational Approach. In C. P. Rovira Kaltwasser, P.

Taggart, P. Ochoa Espejo & P. Ostiguy (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of populism (pp. 46
– 70). Oxford University Press.

Mudde, C., & Kaltwasser, R. C. (2017). Populism: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short
Introductions) (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Ott, B. L. (2017). The age of Twitter: Donald J. Trump and the politics of debase-
ment. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 34(1), 59–68.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15295036.2016.1266686

Ott, B. L. & Dickinson, G. (2019). The Twitter presidency: Donald J. Trump and the
politics of white rage. Routledge, Taylor & Francis.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429054259

Parra-Novosad, N. (2020). Social Bots versus Real Humans: The Framing of “Trump’s
Wall” on Twitter. Master’s Thesis, University of Missouri-Columbia. Colum-
bia ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. Retrieved September 26 2022, from
https://hdl.handle.net/10355/78599.

21
Pentina, I. & Tarafdar, M. (2014). From “information” to “knowing”: Exploring the role
of social media in contemporary news consumption. Computers in Human Behavior, 35,
211–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.045

Quealy, K. (2021). The Complete List of Trump’s Twitter Insults (2015-2021). The New
York Times. Retrieved September 26 2022, from https://www.nytimes.com/interac-
tive/2021/01/19/upshot/trump-complete-insult-list.html

Statista. (2022a). Number of global social network users 2018-2027. Retrieved Septem-
ber 24 2022, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/278414/number-of-worldwide-so-
cial-network-users/

Statista. (2022b). Most popular social media apps in the U.S. 2019, by audience. Re-
trieved September 24 2022, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/248074/most-popu-
lar-us-social-networking-apps-ranked-by-audience/

Statista. (2022c). Share of U.S. adults who use social media 2019, by age. Retrieved Sep-
tember 24 2022, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/471370/us-adults-who-use-so-
cial-networks-age/

Statista. (2022d). Countries with the most Twitter users 2022. Retrieved September 27,
2022, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/242606/number-of-active-twitter-users-
in-selected-countries/

Spier, S. (2017). Collective Action 2.0: The Impact of Social Media on Collective Action.
Elsevier Science & Technology.

Tran, H. D. (2021). Studying the Community of Trump Supporters on Twitter during the
2020 US Presidential Election via Hashtags #maga and #trump2020. Journalism and Me-
dia, 2(4), 709–731. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia2040042

Twitter Inc. (2021). Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump. Retrieved September

27, 2022, from https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension

22
Twitter. (2022). How to use hashtags. Retrieved September 28, 2022, from
https://help.twitter.com/en/using-twitter/how-to-use-hashtags

Varis, P. (2020). TRUMP TWEETS THE TRUTH: METRIC POPULISM AND MEDIA
CONSPIRACY. Trabalhos em Linguística Aplicada, 59(1), 428–443.
https://doi.org/10.1590/01031813683411620200406

Weyland, K. (2021). Populism as a Political Strategy: An Approach’s Enduring — and

Increasing — Advantages. In C. P. Rovira Kaltwasser, P. Taggart, P. Ochoa Espejo & P.
Ostiguy (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of populism (pp. 48-72) Oxford University Press.

Xiao, X., Borah, P. & Su, Y. (2021). The dangers of blind trust: Examining the interplay
among social media news use, misinformation identification, and news trust on conspir-
acy beliefs. Public Understanding of Science, 30(8), 977–992.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662521998025

Zhang, H. & Afzaal, M. & Chao, L. (2020). American Populism in Digital Era: Strategies
of Manipulation in Donald Trump's Election Tweets. Revista Argentina de Clínica Psi-
cológica, 29(3), 1273-1280. 10.24205/03276716.2020.957.

23
Versicherung an Eides Statt

Ich, Maysun, Abu El Haija, 3036386

versichere an Eides Statt durch meine Unterschrift, dass ich die vorstehende Arbeit
selbständig und ohne fremde Hilfe angefertigt und alle Stellen, die ich wörtlich oder
annähernd wörtlich aus Veröffentlichungen entnommen habe, als solche kenntlich ge-
macht habe, mich auch keiner anderen als der angegebenen Literatur oder sonstiger
Hilfsmittel bedient habe.
Ich versichere an Eides Statt, dass ich die vorgenannten Angaben nach bestem Wissen
und Gewissen gemacht habe und dass die Angaben der Wahrheit entsprechen und ich
nichts verschwiegen habe.
Mir ist bekannt, dass im Falle von Zuwiderhandlungen diese Zuwiderhandlungen akten-
kundig gemacht werden, die vorgelegte Arbeit mit 5,0 bewertet wird, ich von der Teil-
nahme an weiteren Prüfungen des Instituts ausgeschlossen oder exmatrikuliert werden
kann, und gem. § 92 Abs. 7 Satz 3 des Hochschulgesetzes NRW eine Geldbuße von bis
zu 50.000 € verhängt werden kann.
Ebenfalls ist mir die Strafbarkeit einer falschen eidesstattlichen Versicherung bekannt,
namentlich die Strafandrohung gemäß § 156 StGB bis zu drei Jahren Freiheitsstrafe
oder Geldstrafe bei vorsätzlicher Begehung der Tat bzw. gemäß § 161 Abs.1 StGB bis
zu einem Jahr Freiheitsstrafe oder Geldstrafe bei fahrlässiger Begehung.

Neuss, 29.09.2022
____________________ ____________________
Ort, Datum Unterschrift

24