Social media are forms of electronic communication, for instance, websites, microblogging and social networking, through which online communities are created by users to share ideas, information, personal messages and other contents, in the form of videos, posts, and others. Today, there are a number of social networking tools in place that are accessible all over the world. For instance, people are conversant with Twitter, Facebook, Messager, MySpace and Whatsup, among others and can use them to post, comment and respond to posts without government interference. Many people are connected with the social media. In addition, they are free to receive information, reason and contribute back as advocated by the Libertarian theory. However, despite the lack of control by the government, the social media are still controlled by corporate interests; therefore the need for protection against external pressures- thus the application of the social responsibility theory. Therefore, it is possible to connect and engage with the public via the social media networking tools. Politics is about connecting with the mass. In modern world, there is no better way of connecting and engaging the public that by using the social media. Through these tools, polling, fundraising and communicating with the public is made easier while looking for feedbacks. The following essay describes the role of campaign advertising in US politics in social media world using the Libertarian theory and the social responsibility theory.
Role of campaign advertising in US politics in social media world
The role of digital campaigning and online presence
Advertising through digital means reinforces other means of outreach to voters. As a result, campaigners have been allocating more resources in their budgets to the support of social media advertising. According to a report released In December 205 by The New York Times, the use of digital advertising through social media estimated to grow by more than 50% in the next five years ( Boulianne, 2015 ). The cost of using social media in campaigning is a cost fraction in comparison to the traditional mediums.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The presence of online opportunities is a legitimate form of campaigning. Internet has become a permanent artifact for human beings. Currently, more than two-third of the world adult population has access to internet- this helps them to freely gain access to the social media ( Kushin & Yamamoto, 2010) . Most of the people are free to use social media as a source of information and for gathering news both nationally and internationally. Not only do online ads put campaigns in powerful position by efforts bolstering, but also offer a convenient way of communicating relevant messaging and news to a large number of audience. Lack of online presence available to a candidate would definitely mean that he or she does not exist in the eyes of a voter. Through social media, social movements have blossomed across the world. Specifically, Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter have found their way to the eyes of the public through social media- they have gained popularity in addition to constant demonstrations.
Social media has increased the level of accountability
The available social media platforms makes it possible for the voters to experience a deeper connectivity level with a campaign, and each post, policy stance and tweet is analyzed by the targeted audience. Internet serves all people regardless of race, gender, level of income. It is a great equalizer. Research indicate that more than 39% of US citizens connect with the politics trough social media networking sites. The social media is an effective means of connecting with the voters since it takes a split of second for a post to circulate around the world. The candidates engage with the voters on different trending topics and issues. When an issue comes up in the campaign, the candidates takes to the social media to announce their position. If the position does not elicit the expected outcome, it is the responsibility of the candidate to explain his or her position to his audience. As a result, the candidates have been forced to be more accountable in their posts.
Social media drives action
Social media has created a good platform for a voter to engage with the campaign. By simply clicking a button, a voter can donate campaign money, RSVP an event, complete a campaign poll or even sign a petition in demonstrating support for a given candidate. An example of such campaign was launched by Twitter in 2015 ($Cashtag) which is an online platform that makes it possible for users to make direct donations to political causes or campaigns via a Tweet. President Obama took advantage of online advertising to raise $504 million digitally in his 2012 campaign ( Tumasjan, Sprenger, Sandner & Welpe, 2010 ). This shows how the social media are controlled by corporate interests through the social responsibility theory.
The campaigners and candidates are able to make accurate estimates on the number of votes expected to support them in an elections day by engaging the social media. They are able to tell their allies, oppositions and as a result, they do not need to allocate a lot of time, energy and money experimenting on strategies that will eventually fail to yield the expected results. Whether the goal of a social media is to target an online program, congratulate a voter, influence a policy, “a targeted online program enables campaigns to be more effective by serving specific messages, to specific voters, on the devices and social networks best suited for them” ( Groshek & Koc-Michalska, 2017 ). Eventually, the effort promotes civic engagement which translates to a win on either side: both the campaigners and the voters.
Social media campaigning is more effective because of availability of “Trust Filters”
Modern society has access to information compared to ancient times- before internet invention. People are increasingly and freely using their connections to check the authenticity of claims and evaluate information quality. Besides, they are able to use their connection in checking important world claims. According to Lee Rainie, the director of Pew Internet & American Life Project, these developments allow social media users and their networks to act like publishers and broadcasters ( Enli, 2017 ). As a result, the nature of political communication has been transformed. Those interested in engaging citizens and get their attention in the political process must be trusted in the social networks and be influential in the contemporary period. The social networks provide the best platform for the evaluation and filtration of the political information. Therefore, unless apolitical candidate can get past the filters, it will be impossible to be engaged with the public and hence make positive influence on the electoral events.
Grassroots networks are in control of electoral discussions
The 2012 US political campaign was more decentralized with reference to control of debates topics by the politicians with more focus around social networking. The voters have been using the social media networks to ask questions to the politicians that they are not prepared to answer. However, due to public image, the politicians have no choice but to answer the questions. The political advocacy have been using social networks in setting up agendas and in driving civic discussions. This entails all aspects starting with all questions that are asked in debates to the nature of the elections as shaped by journalists. Research indicate that if news sources are trustworthy, they are effective means of persuading the voters ( Enli, 2017 ). This is applicable in national conversations using social networks.
Civic conversations are triggered through social media posts
According to a survey conducted by Pew Internet & American Life Project survey, more than 22 percent comment on other people’s posts and 20 percent comment on somebody’s photo (s). 40 percent of users of social media are said to be making posts and updating their status at least once per week. The percentage is higher among the young adults, especially those aged between 18 to 22 years. The personal and frequent interactivity portrayed by this behavior makes it possible for the candidates, advocacy groups and non-profit making organizations to have direct engagement with people freely and trigger civic conversation. Through MySpace, Facebook and other tools for social media networking, it is possible to continue the conversations and get in touch with larger groups of people.
Social media Create Virtual Opportunities for Citizen Deliberation and Feedback
According to a paper published by IBM Center for The Business of Government, Matt Leighninger, a long-term serving member of the Deliberative Democracy Consortium reported that the use of forms and periodic surveys by government agencies are very effective especially when conducted using social media networking tools ( Bessi & Ferrara, 2016 ). When the voters are asked to provide views on social media, there is increased engagement between the public and the government; which shapes the output of a campaign event. Lee Rainie refers to modern increased use of social media as ‘era of feedback’ ( Riff, Lacy, Fico & Watson, 2019 ). As a result, the politicians get feedbacks regardless of whether they are interested or not. Therefore, politicians and government agencies have developed feedback mechanisms that allow voters to contribute and communicate with politicians and political elites. At times, the citizens feels the need of dis-engaging with political propaganda and debates. They feels alienated and left-out on political agendas. However, getting in touch with them through social media networking tools has proved effective in regaining confidence and interest on voters on matters politics. As a result, they develop a sense of responsibility and accountability.
Conclusion
The main reason for advertising is to sell policies and/or ideas to potential or existing customers. Politics involves sale of ideas to the general public with the aim of captivating their interest and secure their votes in the elections day. With the invention of internet, there is no better way of achieving this than by using the social media. This is because, more than three quarters of the world population has access to the internet. Therefore, any communication via the social media is likely to reach a lot of people at ones. Not only has the use of social media enabled the politicians to be accountable but has also given them room to be responsible. They have to be extra careful with their public image as presented in the social media. Therefore, the social media has shaped the political landscape by increasing connection between government, politicians and the voters.
References
Bessi, A., & Ferrara, E. (2016). Social bots distort the 2016 US Presidential election online discussion.
Boulianne, S. (2015). Social media use and participation: A meta-analysis of current research. Information, communication & society , 18 (5), 524-538.
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.
Groshek, J., & Koc-Michalska, K. (2017). Helping populism win? Social media use, filter bubbles, and support for populist presidential candidates in the 2016 US election campaign. Information, Communication & Society , 20 (9), 1389-1407.
Kushin, M. J., & Yamamoto, M. (2010). Did social media really matter? College students' use of online media and political decision making in the 2008 election. Mass Communication and Society , 13 (5), 608-630.
Riff, D., Lacy, S., Fico, F., & Watson, B. (2019). Analyzing media messages: Using quantitative content analysis in research . Routledge.
Tumasjan, A., Sprenger, T. O., Sandner, P. G., & Welpe, I. M. (2010). Predicting elections with twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. In Fourth international AAAI conference on weblogs and social media .
