Social media plays a large part in the daily life of many individuals across the globe and has affected almost every avenue of life including, just recently, our political life.
This election, regardless of the outcome, will make history, whether it’s because we will have our first female president or our first billionaire president. Even if Election Day were to provide a twist and a third-party candidate were elected, whoever wins will have been impacted heavily by their role and influence on social media.
Videos, memes, tweets and posts have been shared among numerous social media outlets such as Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.
The majority of these push very straightforward messages — “Vote for her,”“Vote for him” and, the most popular, “Vote for this candidate so this one doesn’t win.”
Both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton — as well as popular third-party candidates Gary Johnson and Jill Stein — have had committees create multiple memes and social media-friendly ads to be shared among their supporters.
The New York Times even printed, “Bernie Sanders, the 73-year-old senator from Vermont, has emerged as a king of social media early in the 2016 presidential campaign, amid a field of tech-savvy contenders,” in their May, 2015 article titled “Seeking the Presidency, Bernie Sanders Becomes Facebook Royalty Through Quirky Sharing,” by Nick Corasaniti.
The article ends with the option to share the story via Facebook, Twitter and various social media outlets, adding to the trend of social media being used to inform the public on presidential candidates.
While it can be stated that the popularity of social media has increased since the summer of 2015, its impact has to be explored to pinpoint whether the effect is positive or negative.
How has social media impacted the citizens that have come to vote for their respective candidate, and how the candidates themselves are viewed?
Historically, both Trump and Clinton have taken the title of most disliked candidates in the history of U.S. elections.
I have to stop and think, “Why is that?”
While Trump’s language is often viewed as offensive and his temperament has been brought into question, is that really something new for a presidential candidate?
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
While Clinton has been accused of dishonesty and been repeatedly attacked for her unauthorized use of her personal server, are her actions any worse than some of the worse candidates who had even larger connections to corruption?
After all, our $20 bill features the portrait of Andrew Jackson, whose connection to the Trail of Tears has caused much controversy. So much so, that moves to replace him with someone less controversial have been made.
This isn’t to say that both Clinton and Trump haven’t earned the distaste from much of the American public, but it does seem that people are starting to zero in more on their actions.
I would like to argue that perhaps the increased popularity of social media outlets may be, in large part, to blame.
While memes, posts and articles are often shared through social media, the accuracy of the message is often shaky at best.
Websites that give clear warnings that their articles are to be viewed as parodies are often shared as facts and, despite the rise in websites that encourage fact-checking, not everyone on social media follows this advice.
When this social media content is shared often enough, the legitimacy of the content seems to increase, even if the facts do not line up.
This may, for instance, be part of the reason both Trump and Hillary have drawn the ire of the American people, through the sharing of not just facts but also of half-truths, and sometimes outright lies.
If you are given information by a trusted family member through their page, you may be more inclined to believe it.
This, of course, is not always the case, as certain social media articles can lead one to think twice about their accuracy.
After all, although not everyone uses fact-checking sites, many individuals still do.
Perhaps this year’s presidential candidates are receiving the hardest treatment ever on social media because the generation that invented it is finally old enough to participate in the election.
The Millennial generation is the generation that created social media, and the candidates of this election were trying more than ever to reach out to them, which was an intelligent move, but also a double-edged sword.
Alongside the widespread coverage that comes with social media comes the potential for the spread of vicious and false information.
After all, anyone can create a meme, anyone can create a false article and do so without the consequences many journalists face.
In news, quotes must be accurate and facts must be attributed. There is a name attached to every article, broadcast and news outlet.
Memes do not require that level of accountability, and so the information provided can be as true as the creator decides — and with the ease of access to these memes, half-truths and lies can spread as easily as facts.
While both frontrunners for the presidential campaign must be held responsible for their actions — the ones that can be proven as fact — they are equally going to be held responsible for actions that cannot be proven, or are downright false. Regardless of whether this is fair or not, it seems to be the new reality.
Nichole Harwood is a news reporter at the Daily Lobo. She can be reached at news@dailylobo.com or on Twitter @Nolidoli1.
