American Politics and Media: At a Crossroads
2016 was a watershed year in American Politics. The election featured two candidates using fundamentally different approaches to political electioneering and communications. The differences were stark, and have ramifications for the country going forward.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ran what many would characterize as a traditional campaign-lots of fund-raising, large campaign staff (both field and campaign headquarters), spending money on television (broadcast, cable), and having a significant presence on digital and social media. Despite securing close to 3,000,000 votes in the popular vote, Clinton failed to win the Electoral College (Clinton 227, Trump 304) and lost the election. Even today there is debate among campaign consultants and political reporters about how she did, and this won’t be discussed here.
It is the campaign and communications style of President Donald Trump which are the subjects of discussion here, and how social and traditional media played a role in his election. Trump was the most unconventional candidate to seek office in America ever. His blend of anti-establishment politics and nationalism (Make America Great Again) captured the collective imaginations and aspirations of voters who felt closed off from the political system. The Trump campaign spent less money than the Clinton campaign, had fewer television commercials on the air, and still won the Presidency. He leveraged his celebrity status and his use of social media (Twitter) to speak directly to his supporters and they became some of his most ardent defenders. Trump’s use of social media was revolutionary, and did much to control the media narrative, placing all of his political opponents in a posture of reaction and denouncement.
Donald Trump’s candidacy is the culmination of two things: political polarization and the decline of traditional sources of media acting as arbiters of news. He uses Twitter to directly communicate with his supporters and to attack the press, while attempting to use the same media he frequently attacks to spread his message to a broader audience beyond his supporters. Let’s explore in more detail the fragmentation of traditional media and the rise of social media, and how Trump exploited both to win the 2016 election.
Until recently, broadcast media journalism (regular and cable television) relied on an advertising-driven model to create revenue and relay news to the masses. However, in the last twenty-plus years three trends appeared. One trend is the rise of social media as an ideological and cultural alternative to traditional media. People now can post articles, videos, to directly speak to their supporters online. This reinforces ideological loyalty and makes it difficult present credible refutations to what’s posted online. The second trend is a rapid decline in the trust of the media as an institution. In a report on Media Trust and Accuracy published by the Pew Research Center in July 2016, 22% of Americans surveyed said that they trusted the information they receive from local news sources, while national news sources were trusted by 18%. As for news media and partisanship, 27% of Democrats have “a lot of trust” in information from national news organizations, which is larger than the Republican (15%) and Independents (13%) who responded to the questions from the survey.
The third trend is the nature of how news is delivered and reported. Much of today’s media model is geared towards conflict and outrage (which generates ratings), leaving little room for fact-finding and accurate reporting. In an article published on the online website named Wired (www.wired.com) Mr. Jason Tanz (who is Wired’s Editor), states that the concentration on conflict and outrage, plus politicians speaking directly to supporters via Twitter and other forms of social media (Facebook, Instagram) has lead to the news media as we know it to be “on the brink of collapse”.
It is clear that these trends are not going away, and this has broad consequences for politics and politicians. One consequence is that the traditional way of communicating, fund-raising, and campaigning will never be the same. If a nontraditional candidate like Trump can come in to disrupt, dissemble, and name-call his way to a nomination and electoral win, then who else can? Another consequence is that the truth is now held hostage to cultural and ideological forces determined to win at all costs. With such a focus on shaping reality now in place, our democratic system is under direct attack. In this environment, Hillary Clinton was ill-equipped to take on Donald Trump, whose anti-establishment and anti-media stances appealed directly to a voting electorate desiring to express itself openly-heedless of the consequences.
Where do we go from here, in this fragmented, post-truth era? One solution is to police the social media commons, making fact-finding and fact-presentation the norm instead of posting things based on opinion and innuendo. Facebook and Google attempted to engage in this, but faced criticism from people who feared censorship and the loss of advertising revenue. Another recommendation would be to put more time, money, and effort into an integrated communications system where all forms of media (broadcast, cable, digital, and social) have a strategic use, and where both elected officials and candidates for office can communicate along all these lines. Reducing expense for such an integrated platform must be a priority, as well as educating and training of elected officeholders and candidates in the use of social media.
The last recommendation I have is something that’s already taking place since President Trump took office in January. In response to a White House determined to spin every bit of news to its advantage, and not tell the truth, reporters have resorted to a time-honored tradition in journalism: investigative reporting. Since January, there’s been a focus by reporters to dig deep and investigate claims by the Trump Administration on a variety of issues, resulting in a number of pieces by reporters on topics from President Trump’s taxes to his campaign’s ties to Russia. This may turn out to be a golden age for journalism, since they are facing a man who lies, exaggerates, and uses personal invective to distract and confuse.
American Politics is at a crossroads. The norms politicians followed in the past are under withering attack from inside and outside the political parties. We are living in areas of the country where we only agree with people, and hold in disdain others who have differing opinions. The breakdown of the Democratic and Republican parties ability to guide and control the process of nominating and recruiting candidates has led to the rise of activist-centered politics, where only the most committed will prevail over others who are more pragmatic in their approach to consensus and coalition-building. Donald Trump is a result of the failure of establishment politics, the fragmentation of the news media into many pieces, and lastly the lack of trust in the media and our system of government. In this time of challenge and norm-changing, a press and social media dedicated to the truth is essential to the health of our national body politic. Without this, we will be subject to the whims of any individual who disregards the truth, and the forging of consensus.
