Understanding the effects of social media in the political world: UNC Hussman experts share their research and experience
By Beth Hatcher
Politicians and political movements are leveraging the power of social media more than ever, and the effects on civil discussion and debate can be dramatic and consequential.
UNC Hussman School of Journalism and Media faculty and alumni on the front lines of examining media and politics joined Dean Susan King for the virtual conversation — “The Changing Landscape of Social Media and the Influence on Politics” — on Feb. 25, 2021, to explore the issues.
Assistant Professor Joseph Czabovsky, whose research on social media audiences includes their relationship with politics and political communications; Assistant Professor Shannon McGregor, who has been a sought-after expert on social media’s influence in the 2020 election; and alumnus Michael Steel ’99, a partner at Hamilton Place Strategies and former press secretary to the U.S. Speaker of the House, shared their thoughts and social media savvy on topics ranging from former President Donald Trump’s tweeting to the increasing segmentation of online audiences — and what that means for the nation’s politics.
During the conversation, panelists touched on the challenges American audiences face as they navigate ever-evolving platforms amid worries of misinformation and a lack of trust in media.
“People don’t have a good idea of what’s news and what’s opinion — because it has become so much more blurred than it used to be,” said McGregor, who serves as a senior researcher with the Center for Information, Technology, and Public Life (CITAP), an interdisciplinary initiative founded in 2019 to study how today’s electronic environments affect our world. The center helps scholars, policy makers, corporations and the public cope with the challenges of the digital age.
The discussion also noted the positives of social media, such as easy-to-obtain platforms giving voice to the powerless and creating a more multipronged dissemination of news.“There’s a richness in the digital realm I find really enhances my experience of getting the news,” King said during the conversation.
However, with that richness comes a duality. Social media’s pluses are often its minuses. For example, easy-to-obtain accounts and lightning-quick information cycles may give voice to the powerless but also to tyrants.
Needed information — such as how to vote — spreads more easily, but so do false claims of widespread election fraud.
Combating misinformation, effects on local news outlets and further splintering of audiences also emerged as themes during the hourlong conversation.
Czabovsky — who has run the political analytics website CabPolitical since 2012 — said the splintering of audiences as new platforms arise empowers misinformation campaigns and fuels distrust in journalistic narratives. Czabovsky pointed to the proliferation of new social platforms, such as TikTok and Parler, and increased filtering of content by more established platforms like Facebook as factors that splinter audiences.
“We’re always going to have more and more platforms — we’re going to have more segmented audiences … a lot of the impacts [on information] are often done on these little tiny local levels, whether that’s geographically speaking or in these little micro communities online,” Czabovsky said.
Steel said he worried about social media’s effect on traditional local news outlets and lauded a recently passed Australian law that will require Google and Facebook to pay local outlets when they link to their news stories. “Anything that starts shifting resources to local news is a good thing,” he said, noting that he saw the decision as a market-based solution for struggling local news outlets.
McGregor discussed her opinions on banning certain speech from social platforms. McGregor and UNC Hussman Associate Professor Daniel Kreiss, who is also part of CITAP, recently penned a piece for Wired urging the Facebook Oversight Board to uphold Facebook’s January ban on Trump, which was initiated due to concerns Trump’s posts might incite further violence after the storming of the U.S. Capitol.
During the UNC Hussman panel discussion, McGregor noted: “Freedom of expression for one person has to be balanced against whether that voice silences others.”
In the Wired article, she and Kreiss wrote: “There is perhaps no more flagrant attempt in recent US history to silence the people than former President Trump’s months-long campaign of lies about mail-in ballots, illegal voting, and voter fraud and his statements that the election was ‘fraudulent’ and ‘stolen.’”
But what are best practices to combat misinformation?
Each case is different and must be treated as such, McGregor said — questions like “Who is putting out the misinformation?” and “For what goals?” must be asked, because research shows that combating misinformation with the truth alone is not enough.
Research shows that misinformation that targets someone’s social and/or political identity is also best met with questions, such as “Why do they believe the misinformation, and what value does the information give them?” McGregor said.
These questions, along with the others raised throughout the night’s discussion, will remain in the national conversation. Two certainties the panelists agreed on: Social media is around to stay, and it will continue to change.
“The speed at which new platforms can come at any given time is new [in history],” Czabovsky said. "There are going to be new platforms for 2022 and 2024 that we don't even know yet."