By Kyra Lieberman
According to Facebook, nearly two-thirds of Americans use its site each month. And most of its 214 million users in the United States see many posts in their feed about politics, whether in the form of a meme, argument or article.
A large percentage of users engage with this content willingly, liking and sharing what they agree with. Across various social media platforms, Facebook and Twitter in particular, people are able to choose what content they see, which often results in a majority of red or blue politics.
With rapid globalization via the Internet, civic political engagement is taking new forms because anyone can now “educate” themselves and others on politics. While protests are often effective and still take place all over the world, those who are unable or unwilling to participate in political movements can virtually follow, like, learn and partake online. While at times problematic, social media activism often leads to offline political participation, including voting.
President Obama’s meticulous use of social media in the 2008 election revolutionized the traditional presidential campaign. He made his ideas and principles easily accessible to anyone with an internet connection. Instead of placing campaign signs in people lawns, he concentrated on reaching the masses online. Those unable to attend his rallies could learn as much about him on Twitter or Facebook. Obama pushed much of his campaign in the South in particular, where he appealed mainly to the youth and African-American populations. His social media campaign was focused on engaging and informing, which, according to most experts ultimately won him the 2008 presidential election.
The most valuable thing politicians and political groups seek is your time. That includes staying on their sites and social media profiles, and eventually voting their way. Social and mass media work hand in hand for politicians, who try to gain as many mentions as possible to increase news coverage. Social media users choose what and how much they consume, so being engaging and exciting is key to maintaining the short attention span of today’s audiences. Politicians who use such platforms strategically and competitively gain valuable attention that ideally translates into votes.
Some social media activists demonstrate that they can be powerful on their own, but in nearly every case the strength is in numbers. Facebook, for example, is home to large groups such as Occupy Democrats with a following more than three-million strong. Some news sources that originated on Facebook are meeting and even beating the “follower” counts of traditional media sources. Take the case of left-leaning Facebook group US Uncut, which had roughly the same amount of followers as MSNBC at 1.5 million reached and counting, reports the New York Times Magazine.
The Facebook groups’ sole goal is bringing attention to their posts, driving users to their page to follow and engage with their content, without leaving Facebook.
It should be noted that areas with high percentages of inhabitants with internet access are generally the ones who can take advantage of resources offered by politicians and political groups. Those in suburban or urban areas have a higher percentage of internet access than rural citizens and are statistically more likely to be informed. The peer-reviewed, scholarly journal New Media and Society finds that in the 2008 presidential election, Democrats, more than Republicans, educated themselves using online materials provided by candidates.
Media experts speculate that the polarization of social media and the current state of affairs combined will improve young voter turnout, which was an estimated 23.7 million in the last election. That is about 50% of voting youth under 30 voted in the 2016 general election.
More youth getting involved with politics online is improving young voter turnout and just in time for the upcoming midterm election Tuesday, Nov. 6.