Social Media Influence in US politics: a tool of Soft  Persuasion

Social media serves as a tool for subversion and surveillance, impacting policy-making, the interests of allies and friends, and the political landscape. The use of social media data is sometimes employed for political manipulation, influencing the general public during electoral polls by shaping the agenda of national politics and altering the narrative for the masses through easy connectivity. This includes the brainwashing of political followers to serve immediate interests. The relationship between citizens and politics becomes intricate, where citizens may use politics for their own interests, or politics may exploit citizens for their own gains. Understanding the domestic political persuasion of any country in the development of a few decades is a complex task.  Diehl, Barnidge, and Zúñiga have focused on "The connection between political persuasion and social media news on social-technical platforms is objectively motivated by political discussion disagreement, and the proper or pro-active consumption of social media news eventually promotes political persuasion."

 

A Threat to the Right to Privacy and the Patriot Act 

Under the provisions of the Patriot Act, the government is now empowered to petition a federal court, specifically the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, in cases where it is necessary to assist in an ongoing investigation. This petition may entail the acquisition of records akin to those obtainable through grand jury subpoenas.

It is important to note that this federal court is authorized to issue such orders only after the government demonstrates that the records in question are being sought for a legitimate investigation of foreign intelligence information. This must not pertain to a U.S. individual, nor be aimed solely at activities safeguarded by the First Amendment, and should either be geared towards safeguarding against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities.

The implementation of the Act served to eliminate significant legal barriers that had hitherto impeded effective communication and coordination among law enforcement, intelligence, and national defense sectors. This, in turn, has enhanced their collective capacity to safeguard the American populace and fortify their national security. In 2001, the USA Patriot Act granted unprecedented authority for surveillance of both American citizens and individuals globally, bypassing the conventional safeguards of civil liberties.

Top of Form

In 2013, public outrage and heated discussions on privacy reached a climax when Edward Snowden, a former CIA employee and government contractor, disclosed information about the extensive surveillance activities conducted by the National Security Agency. In response, Congress took measures to fortify the constitutionality of these actions. They mandated that the government must affirm that its intention was not to specifically target Americans; any gathering of Americans' communications would be considered as an unintentional by-product.

To "minimize" the dissemination and preservation of Americans' communications, the NSA frequently distributes unprocessed Section 702 data to the FBI, the CIA, and the National Counterterrorism Center, all of which retain this data for a minimum of five years. Each agency partakes in the process of scrutinizing Section 702-acquired data for traces of Americans' communications. Notably, the FBI routinely conducts such searches even in cases strictly confined to domestic matters unrelated to foreign intelligence.

The weaponization of the Public realm

When disinformation is used to disenfranchise or demobilize electors and block civic involvement, it is most damaging to democracies. Fabricating misleading narratives about election results may also destroy faith in institutions. The 2016 presidential election in the United States was a good example of misinformation being utilized during an election. The Directorate of National Intelligence concluded in its 2021 report that Iran sought to have an impact on the 2020 presidential election by disseminating falsehoods about US election authorities.

Misinformation is defined as inaccurate data that is not meant to cause harm. Mal-information is true information that is utilized inappropriately to influence or harm others. Disinformation is false information meant to influence, harm, or deceive individuals, organizations, and governments. Those who spread false information might be motivated by various factors, notably power and financial incentives.

If false information narratives catch on, disinformation may become more prevalent around important events. If platforms make event-related design improvements that limit the dissemination of false information, it may also decline. For the forthcoming US Federal election in 2024, a few American community organizations are concerned about preventing the spread of false information and political agendas inside certain communities. 

 

 sOURCEs: Pew RESEARCH institute, Report, DECEMBER 6, 2022,

URL: https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2022/12/06/social-media-seen-as-mostly-good-for-democracy-across-many-nations-but-u-s-is-a-major-outlier/#:~:text=Across%20the%20countries%20polled%2C%20a,has%20been%20a%20bad%20thing.    

By denying the allegations in congressional testimony and other public statements, Facebook may have clouded the public's and lawmakers' understanding of the situation.  As the country works to make sense of what happened on January 6 and gets ready for  2024, and beyond, it's critical to comprehend the potential detrimental impact popular online platforms may have on American politics. It is made clear how online platforms and the kind of extreme polarisation that might lead to political violence and the erosion of democratic principles are related. 

The quest for social and racial justice in the United States has engendered resentment and partisan animosity. However, the existing state of pronounced polarization, especially within the political right, carries consequences that portend a substantial threat to the democratic fabric. Prominent figures associated with Silicon Valley's temporal movements argue that social media applications and digital media devices exhibit addictive and deleterious attributes. Primary apprehensions have predominantly revolved around the diverse adverse political ramifications at a broader societal level. Notably, there is a heightened concern( as the “Protecting Kid on Social Media Act 2023”) regarding the exacerbation of political polarization attributable to social media's capacity to cultivate ideological "echo chambers" within affinity groups that share similar perspectives.

US Political Parties: Social Media Management for political interests

During the last Federal Election in the United States, the populist leadership and emerging progressive factions within the political landscape extensively utilized TikTok. This choice, however, faced considerable criticism from several renowned American think tanks, as they vehemently opposed the use of Chinese social media platforms for political campaigns.

In the realm of American politics, there is a discernible shift in the approach toward utilizing TikTok as a means of connecting with political supporters and voters. This move, despite criticisms from both Democratic Strategist K. Bardella and a former Republican congressional adviser, underscores the recognition that, in terms of political correctness, engaging on these platforms is crucial. Bardella aptly emphasized the importance of actively participating in these channels, stating, "If we aren't on those channels flooding the zone with an alternative, we are essentially surrendering that playing field to the bad guys." Consequently, a faction of politicians led by Jackson has now embraced TikTok use at an official and campaign level.

(i) US Federal Election 2020, Social Media Influencer

The contemporary landscape of political influencers is explored, emphasizing the relational power derived from the utilization of small-scale influencers, partisan variations in the adoption of influencers, and the logistical intricacies involved in orchestrating a political influencer campaign. Several key motivational factors driving influencers are identified:

a) Face icon/ Personal Political Activism: The current surge in personally motivated political activism has reverberated across the social media landscape, eliciting reactions and inspirations from others and thereby establishing an anticipation for political discourse. b) Target audience Expectations: Interviews consistently revealed a discernible shift in Instagram's influencer culture over the past year, reflecting changing expectations within the audience. c) Follower Growth factor: Social media platforms have historically served as fertile ground for the dissemination of conspiracy theories, and in 2020, numerous "mainstream" influencers experienced increased engagement and follower growth.

Advocates for paid political influencers often concentrate on disclosure, but they tend to overlook the more profound problem of digital astroturfing. This involves the coordination of accounts with the deceptive aim of emulating authentic discourse. User-generated content proves highly effective in influencing public opinion while simultaneously creating the illusion of a genuine grassroots movement. Even though orchestrating real individuals to share political content is a more labor-intensive approach, it serves as a tactic to evade detection.

In the aftermath of the 2016 election, heightened scrutiny from Facebook and Twitter towards foreign actors did not preclude the success of the Kremlin's Internet Research Agency. Notably, the Agency adeptly targeted black Americans on Instagram in 2017, employing a disinformation campaign characterized by the emulation of influencer behavior.  During the 2020 election, there were reports of Turning Point Action remunerating adolescents in Arizona to engage in replying to tweets disseminated by Democratic politicians and news entities on Twitter. This strategic maneuver aimed to exert influence over conversations within the platform.

 (ii) US Mid-term election 2022

According to a study by the Pew Research Center on September 20, 2022, 53 percent of Americans obtain their news from digital platforms. The research reveals that a substantial majority of U.S. adults (82%) frequently or occasionally receive news through digital devices. Despite the prominent social media platforms unveiling election policies ahead of the U.S. Midterm elections, the efficacy and applicability of these policies came under critical scrutiny. This skepticism arose due to the utilization of social media platforms by American political lobbies in mobilizing narratives related to the Ukraine War during the midterm election, diverting attention from domestic concerns affecting the general public.

Leading up to the 2022 midterm elections, various U.S. organizations, such as the Open Technology Institute, Centre of Digital Democracy, and the Centre on Privacy and Technology at Georgetown Law, collectively called upon the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Their request was for the committee to allocate a minimum of $1 billion to the Build Back Better Act. This funding would be designated to establish a new division within the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) with the specific mandate to safeguard data privacy and prevent security abuses.

Congressman Ro Khanna and Senator Mark Warner, both vocal critics of major technology corporations, have articulated apprehensions along similar lines. The significant technology firms are not engaged in a novel Cold War-style arms race against China; instead, numerous companies are closely interconnected with China. This integration arises due to the intertwining of markets and the state in China. Such a scenario raises national security concerns for the U.S. government, prompting a call to foster investment in smaller tech enterprises rather than fostering heavy dependence on a limited number of large tech corporations.

Conclusion

The presence of influencers introduces challenges to the transparency, accountability, and informational integrity of political campaigns. Posts by political influencers, exempt from the stringent regulations governing political advertising on social media platforms, are not subject to these platforms' stricter rules because of the financial transactions.

Now, the main problem that has emerged is the trust deficit gap between the legislature, and judiciary, the conflicting interests of big tech companies, and the lack of actual positive will from US elite politicians to save their own political interests, either in the background or by portraying a balanced approach to preserve the essence of free speech and establish strict laws for regulating social media. Usually, within a few years, social media has hurt US civil society and national security in terms of "Truth Decay" and the changing information ecosystem.