As an increased reliance on technology continues to shape the landscape of social interaction in the United States, the 2020 presidential election is no exception, as campaign efforts and communication between candidates and the public shift to a virtual format. Similarly, social media platforms are taking on a bigger role in political influence than ever before, with 55% of adult social media users revealing they feel “worn out” from political discussion on these entertainment applications. 

Charles Fink, a Chapman University lecturer who teaches “The Landscape of Emerging Media,” told The Panther that technology’s implementation in the political sphere exaggerates tribalism among all generations. This political polarization, he argued, has been occurring in slow motion for most of the past 20 years as a result of social media, beginning from the creation of artificial intelligence.   

“Artificial intelligence was developed to sell products and advertising. They were just trying to get to know your preferences,” Fink said. “It didn't start out with evil intent, but nobody understood the unintended consequences of creating a political echo chamber and mixing it with your social graph.”

These echo chambers are further emphasized on social media platforms such as TikTok, which filters a user’s timeline, also known as the “For You” page, through curated video content based on past likes and interactions on the app. This type of personalized marketing prevents many younger audiences from accessing political information from news organizations. According to Reuters Institute and the University of Oxford, the Gen Z group has a weaker connection to news organizations and is more likely to gather news through social media. 

Because platforms like TikTok and Snapchat service Gen Z and millennials through this medium, they are catering to the consumer with the ultimate goal of making money rather than informing, Fink said.

Filtering through social media is a way of anesthetizing the masses, Fink argued, saying that social media platforms should be regulated by a nonpartisan commission that is affiliated with the federal government in order to prevent companies from further dividing the public through technology.

With an increase in social media use comes an increase in “fake news,” which influences the public’s trust in how the media reports federal, state and local politics. Kate Kilcoyne, a junior communication studies major, mentioned that the increase in fake news comes from clips taken out of context to deliberately create construed messages. However, that phenomenon should not prevent one from educating themselves, Kilcoyne and Fink said.

“I don’t think (fake news) hinders individuals from becoming politically educated, as everyone has the capability to access all information on the internet,” Kilcoyne said. “It’s the individual that can hinder themselves from becoming educated correctly through ignorance, or a blatant disregard to look for said correct information.” 

When asked how an increase in social media will affect people’s political affiliations, Fink said social media platforms allow people to see what they want to see, rather than seeking the truth. Fink argued that an increase in online news sources has caused an increase in biased journalists who exhibit specific political agendas in their writing and reporting. Because of this, the need for detecting “fake news” and gatekeepers is important now more than ever, he emphasized.

“What do you do when you see writing and opinions that you don’t like? You discredit them,” Fink said. “You use social media platforms to create false equivalencies and to legitimize the illegitimate. That is what needs to stop.”

In addition to the filtering of social media platforms and the increase in fake news, social media platforms also provide politicians the opportunity to speak directly to their supporters in an instant. President Donald Trump’s unfiltered connection with the American public on Twitter is one such example. 

“These unmediated interactions with the public can be beneficial for politicians if used appropriately,” Kilcoyne said. “Trump abuses platforms like Twitter to divide our country and contribute to his political agenda.”

Although many voters believe politicians are the reason for America’s current political division, social media may be a perpetrator that serves to further polarize politics.

“Donald Trump is a symptom; Donald Trump is not the disease,” Fink said. “The disease is being actively injected into us every day by social media … It’s destroying our democracy.”