Wether or not we are better voters because of the development of digital/social media or not really depends on a couple of factors. Wether the canidates effectively use social media or not and wether the voters use social media or not. These two factors vary all across politics which makes answering are we a better republic and better voters difficult. Overall I would say social media does make us better overall voters, although not all voters and not all politicians utilize social media for those who do it most certainly enhances the overall voting experience.
Digital/New Media is changing politics, almost every action and every word politicians say can and usually is put up on the internet for the world to see. This creates a very "informed" public, a lot of the information is valuable and helps make better voters but some of the information is useless and, if anything, makes us worse voters. For example in the forum on tuesday when the guests were asked who utilized social media the best out of the three canidates there was an agreement that Romney was utilizing it best out of the republican party. He tweets and shows useful information about his politics and where he stands on certain issues. Canidates like Romney help create a much more informed voting public and its because of people like him and Barack Obama that I beleive the social media is making better voters overall. Where the counterarguement comes in is when the public receives social media from politicians such as Sarah Palin. When her name was brought up at the social media forum the three guests laughed and basically said her social media was entertaining but in no way was useful to their political mindset. Other then the actual content I think more people need to get involved with social media for it really to become a factor in the way we vote. I for one, was not really aware of the social media options available to me, I didn't know there was so much political information and knowledge waiting to be learned from simply making a twitter and following the right people. I feel as though many people are in a similar situation and they need to be shown, as I was, the usefullness and information that social media can offer. Overall I think social media does help us become a better republic and better voters but if we could also improve on the content and the amount of people using social media it would be an even bigger factor to our republic and our voters.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Digital media differs from social media in that it allows information to be posted online instantaneously, and this definitely helps people become more informed voters. With access to all this information voters learn about every single thing that a candidate does, and can make a much more informed decision when voting.
ReplyDeleteAs we learned in the social media forum, candidates are beginning to recognize the benefits that come with social media sites like facebook and twitter. A site like twitter allows the candidates to post things which may not always relate directly to the campaign, but allow the voters to get a better sense of the type of person they are. Social media allows for a more personal connection with the candidate, when face to face time is not available.
I agree completely with what Katie is saying in that social media definitely facilitates an efficient communicative network where politicians and voters have a more personal connection. This in turn helps voters to make educated decisions in the voting process.
ReplyDeleteI think James has a point though: it's difficult to find that balance between entertaining the voters with personal tidbits and informing the voters of who the politician actually is. It's really down to what the audience wants from the politicians - whether they want practical information that could determine votes, or whether they want entertainment. Either way, having both options be available in moderation can be a very useful tool to politicians as it can present another facet to their identity.
- Amy
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWithin these responses, there seems to be an important demographic being overlooked- those who are not as technically savvy as America's youth; such as seniors, those without frequent access to the internet, many blue collar workers who do not always have the time to spend hours browsing Twitter, CNN and Facebook, and those with families to provide for and look after. For those people this new media revolution prrobably has an adverse affect. Since there are myriad opinions available online and on television at the digression of people who may have polar views, for the large groups of people who do not peruse the web or frequently watch the news, yet still vote, their opinions of candidates may be easily skewed when they overhear talk of one candidate's remark out of context. Since every action and word of every candidate for political office has become available at our fingertips, never have there been so many miscommunications, non-contextualized bashings of candidates, or uninformed conclusions drawn. As a result, the many informed people who are used to this kind of instant and constant political attacks from all sides, new media can help them to be better informed. For those who may only hear about one or two of those slanderous remarks every week, new media has done the opposite for them. Of course, these groups are becoming a smaller and smaller minority every year as sites Twitter and Facebook become more universally accessible, but even in 2011, they make up a large enough percentage of the vote that their vote affects the outcomes of elections.
ReplyDelete-Luke
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Katie and Amy that Social Media definitely has a positive effect between the politicians and the voters. Through Facebook, Twitter, Youtube a "relationship", in a way, is created between the candidate and the voter. The voter can connect and feel more on a personal level with the candidate, which can really make a difference when someone is deciding on who to vote for. By politicians using social media it creates a dialogue among the voters. If there is a comment or reply to a tweet that is negative towards a candidate the candidate's followers will likely back him/ her up. With this dialogue/ sense of pride with the voter's choice in candidate creates a loyal fan base.
ReplyDeleteI partially agree that the demographic being overlooked is the non-technically savvy Americans. However, when it comes down to it the people who are not using Twitter/Facebook/ Youtube are definitely in the older generation. These people have been through a lot of elections and stand solidly behind what they believe in. It is not likely that this older generation will be persuaded to change their views through Social Media; they know what they want and know what they believe in. The generation who is utilizing these Social Media sites are the younger generation who don't really know what they believe in yet and their opinions are more likely to be changed. The younger generation is where Social Media really comes into play with the outcome of the election. The younger generation builds the future.
-Brittany