How are the campaigns and their
supporters using websites and social media in this campaign and how does it
differ from previous campaigns? What kind of impact is online campaign
communication having on the 2016 campaign? Along with referring to the class
readings, use examples from the social media accounts and websites of each
candidate to support your response.
In this election year campaigns and the candidates have taken social media by storm. So much so, that their presence has taken over. It is hard to scroll through any social media platform without seeing a post from or referencing either of the candidates showing just how much of an impact the web is having on the election.
ReplyDeleteLooking back on previous campaigns social media accounts used to seem as an afterthought. The website was pretty much the bulk of a campaign’s internet presence. Chapter four of Campaigns on the Cutting Edge looks back on the ’08 and ’12 campaigns when it came to online media. “There was an understanding that the Internet made giving- and soliciting donations especially- easy to do. Most paid Internet advertisements was focused on fundraising, and relatively little was done to take advantage of the Internet for persuasion messaging (Semiatin 43).” It’s clear that with the newfound emphasis on online presences that fundraising although still on both Clinton and Trump’s websites, is just one of the functions of the websites. The websites replay videos that campaign has put out on YouTube, while up to date twitter feeds can also be found on the homepage. The opportunity that social media platforms present that websites do not is that candidates, reporters and voters can engage with each other in real time.
Political Campaign Communication, credits the Obama campaign with the large shift towards utilizing all the internet has to offer in terms of voter outreach. “The Internet, broadly defined, offers numerous “tools” and opportunities for campaigns to reach specific audiences (Trent et al 293).” When the 2008 election cycle started many of the social media sites that are common today were fairly new. Obama used these sites to his advantage. Now in 2016 people of all ages utilize these sites to engage with and track the candidates.
When it comes to Clinton and Trump they are both very active on the platforms they use, but they have vastly different styles. Trump’s twitter feed has often been deemed controversial, while some think Clinton’s is impersonal. Clinton subtly and not so subtly calls out Trump, while Trump takes every chance to call out anyone from journalists to political officials. Clinton’s latest tweet is a quote from a speech she gave at a CHCI event. While Trump’s latest series of attack tweets are aimed at The New York Times and its’ journalists.
Clinton and Trump both have fundraising, apparel and information gathering tactics throughout their websites but a fundamental difference is the content. Clinton’s homepage video features a women talking about her previous correspondences with Clinton. Painting Clinton as a likeable and dedicated candidate. Trump’s video is of a CNN news report on a poll that has him beating Clinton. When it comes to policy Trump’s website outlines surface level policy while Clinton’s features pages of in depth and detailed policy.
Both candidates utilize social media to their advantage this campaign season. It’s clear that even though the tactics used are vastly different from each other what each candidate is doing works for them. They’re playing to very different audiences and voter bases but are hoping that their tactics will resonate with the majority of voters.
WORKS CITED
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Social media is a huge part of political campaigns. They allow the candidates to “maximize the effectiveness of [their] campaign messages” (Semiatin, 49) as well as give the people a platform to participate in the campaign. Historically, as new technologies emerge campaigns jump on them quickly in order to effectively communicate with participants. Television offered a sense of intimacy to viewers since they were able to see the candidate (Trent et al, 290). The introduction of the World Wide Web offered a whole new era in political campaigning, voters and participants were able to interact in some way with the candidate and other participants. During the 2004 campaign the use of websites and digital tools as a platform for campaigning “surpassed viewers on major television news networks coverage of the campaign”(Trent et al 291).
ReplyDeleteThis election year the candidates, Trump especially, have utilized social media extensively to reach out to their respective audiences. It is absurd to think about how much campaigns spend on new media. In 2008 the Obama campaign spend $25 million (Trent et al 292) and the RNC spent $200,000 to purchase a promoted hashtag that could be viewed by all Twitter users (Andrews, On Social Media…Trump Have Different Styles). Trump has spent very little money though on social media campaigning but is still one of the biggest online presences in the campaign. Trump utilized Twitter constantly and in a way that no other politician has in the past to get his voice out there all for free. He tweets a minimum 10 times a day and “has been retweeted more than 3.5 million times since entering the presidential race in June” (Phillips, The Surprising Genius…Twitter Account). Whether you are following the election or not, there is no way that you haven’t heard about Donald Trumps twitter account.
More people than ever are utilizing social media to get their news and information on candidates so it is extremely important for candidates to make their presence on it. There is only so much that candidates can add to their websites on a daily basis so social media allows candidates to access voters at any moment. Republican political strategist Patrick Ruffini states that “this election cycle is the first I’ve seen (where) candidates realize social media is their direct pipeline into mainstream media coverage and to voters” (Lang, 2016 Presidential Election Circus). Having a large social media presence is important for both candidates in reaching out to younger voters, an area where both are struggling. Over the summer, a lot of the news I was gaining about the candidates stemmed from tweets and post I saw on social media. The candidate’s use of social media is changing the way we interact with the election, we no longer need to tune in to news stations to get access to the candidates, we can do it now right from our cell phones while standing in line at the store. The candidate’s websites both have links to all their social media accounts as well as the ability to get text and email updates, which offers more access for voters.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
DeleteTrent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Lang, Marissa. “2016 Presidential Election Circus: Is Social Media the Cause?” GovTech. N.p., 5 Apr. 2016. Web. 18 Sept. 2016.
Andrews, Natalie. “On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles.” WSJ. Wsj.com, 28 July 2016. Web. 18 Sept. 2016.
Philips, Amber. “The Surprising Genius of Donald Trump’s Twitter Account.” Washington Post. The Washington Post, 10 Dec. 2015. Web. 18 Sept. 2016.
Throughout history, political campaigns have become more and more dynamic as a result of newer technologies, and therefore new media platforms. As stated in Political Campaign Communication, “the 1924 Democrat convention was broadcast to more than five million Americans who had radio receivers…radio was the dominant medium for politics until 1952, after the invention of television.” (Trent, 289). With the introduction of television, debates were brought to the voters’ living rooms, ramping up the competitive edge of politics. In 2008, social media completely altered the typical presidential political campaign. Campaign websites became extremely important to campaign donations, as “John McCain made headlines by raising more than $7 million online (through his campaign website.” (Trent, 290) The Obama website required that visitors “had to provide an e-mail address and postal zip code” before being allowed to even access his website, which would give the Obama campaign a way to further reach the voters; this tactic would give the Obama campaign more direct communication as they could send out mass emails to those who visit the website, further drawing their attention to the campaign. (Trent, 293) In 2012, Obama and Romney both used mass amounts of social media, Obama using more than Romney; they both used the largest social media platforms, being Facebook and Twitter, as well as Spotify, a music sharing app (Trent, 293). Even still, in 2008 and 2012 Obama used his website MyBarackObama.com to connect voters with each other through its “ability to organize, but more importantly (its) ability to allow supporters to organize themselves. The campaign gave supporters the ability to create their own groups and freely coordinate amongst themselves.” (Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, Turk, 51).
ReplyDeleteIn the current election, social media continues to dominate the political campaign scene. Donald Trump has controlled the twitter-verse of politics, with 11.6 million followers, and daily tweets. According to Political Campaign Communication, “the primary function of twitter is ‘authentic personal communication.’ From a campaign perspective, it’s about writing a speech in 140 characters,” which proves true for Trump (Trent, 298) However, Hillary Clinton shouldn’t be counted out from the twitter war that is the 2016 campaign season, what with her direct tweet at Donald Trump asking him to “delete his account.” According to Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, “as of June 25, 2015, Twitaholic, which tracks online usage of twitter, found that Hillary Clinton had 3.7 million followers raking her 630th in the world. No other candidate was that close.” (Turk, 53) Because social media has become so important, it has revolutionized political advertising; rather than running TV ads, Trump is “spending money on social media. On the final day of the Republican convention last week, the campaign spent more than $200,000 to purchase the promoted hashtag of the day, an ad that could be seen by all Twitter users in the U.S.” (Natalie Andrews, On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles). Clinton has been active on all types of social media, running a very active Facebook and Twitter, a blog that allows Clinton and some of her surrogates to answer direct voter questions through the “Q and A” platform Quora, and a snapchat, which makes the behind the scenes access to the campaign even more intimate. (Natalie Andrews, On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles). Both candidates are still fully using campaign websites. Clinton’s features different articles highlighting her entire political career, putting an emphasis on how she has worked for children and family policies, contradicting the Trump Campaign’s statement that she has no child care policy. As the article “Trump’s team claims Clinton has no child care policy. It’s been on her website for a year points out,” “HillaryClinton.com is virtually buried in policy proposals for child care, family leave, and elder care.” (Nelsori, Trump’s team claims Clinton has no child care policy. It’s been on her website for a year) Trumps website, on the other hand, largely features articles slamming Clinton, as well as ways to donate and support the campaign. However, Trump has also supported a second website, LyingCrookedHillary.com, which features all of Hillary Clinton’s faults and “lies,” while also allowing you to donate to the Trump campaign. At the bottom of the page, in big red white and blue letters reads “Make America Great Again!” and “paid for by Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.
DeleteIt is clear that the ways in which both candidates are campaigning through social media are similar in the social media platforms they are using, but how they are using them are very different.
Sources:
DeleteTrent, Judith, S, et al. Political Campaign Communication. 8th ed., New York, Rowman and Littlefield, 2016.
Semiatin, Richard, J, editor. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. 3rd ed., Thousand Oaks, SAGE
Publications, 2016.
"Join the official campaign—and help stop Donald Trump!" Hillary Clinton, Hillary for America,
www.hillaryclinton.com/. Accessed 19 Sept. 2016.
"Lying Crooked Hillary." Lying Crooked Hillary, Donald J Trump for President, Inc.,
www.lyingcrookedhillary.com/?utm_campaign=djt0904202114_0&utm_medium=ad&utm_source=0_google_text&utm_content=0_hillarydterms&utm_
term=0_persuasion_cpc&gclid=Cj0KEQjw0_O-BRCfjsCw25CYzYoBEiQAqO9BDH3egA4xoAsutL1eG832U3mv5WNlusKXkh9BE
h40IQ0aAhyc8P8HAQ. Accessed 19 Sept. 2016.
Nelson, Libby. "Trump's team claims Clinton has no child care policy. It’s been on her website for a
year." Vox, 14 Sept. 2016, www.vox.com/2016/9/14/12914688/clinton-child-care-ivanka-trump.
Accessed 19 Sept. 2016.
Andrews, Natalie. "On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles." Wall Street Journal, 28 July 2016, blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/07/28/
on-social-media-hillary-clinton-and-donald-trump-take-different-approaches-to-connect-with-voters/.
Accessed 19 Sept. 2016.
Trump, Donald J.Twitter, twitter.com/realDonaldTrump. Accessed 19 Sept. 2016.
Clinton, Hillary. "Delete your account." Twitter, 9 June 2016, 1:27, twitter.com/hillaryclinton/
status/740973710593654784.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNisa Villareal continued..
ReplyDeleteSocial media is definitely one of the major reasons why the 2016 campaign is less focused on the issues. Though the two candidates have different styles, the use of Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and the like are extremely influential sources to communicate directly with voters. According to Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, social networks “have given rise to a new type of influential – social media mavens, [who are] people who attract large groups of followers, as sources of news and information and developing reputation for the quality of the information they curate,” and “draw a significant audience composed of younger voters,” (Semiatin, 54). Social media is able to bypass gatekeepers and filters. Stories and statements can go viral in a matter of seconds. For example, Hillary Clinton tweeted at Donald Trump, ‘delete your twitter’ and according to the Wall Street Journal, “The tweet has been retweeted more than 482,000 times — the most-shared tweet of either candidate since the 2016 campaign started,” (Andrews). It’s interesting to see that comments alone are what is generating major buzz around the campaign. Regardless of the strategy used, it is evident social media is working as a way to communicate clearly and effectively on what seems to be a more personal level for the candidates although disappointingly the majority of the time, it is not about issues.
Works Cited
DeleteAndrews, Natalie. “On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles,” Wall Street Journal. 28 July 2016.
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/07/28/on-social-media-hillary-clinton-and-donald-trump-take-different-approaches-to-connect-with-voters/
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Social media plays a vital role in the upcoming Presidential Election. It’s impossible to go on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, or even Youtube and not see something posted by either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. Both candidates have been presented with an opportunity to really make an impact on younger and middle age voters on social media platforms and as Michael Turker said in Campaign’s on the Cutting Edge, “as campaigns have evolved over the years, changing media platforms have challenged the unprepared and presented opportunities to the bold and innovative” (Semiatin 43). I went on both candidates main websites and found multiple links to Facebook where potential voters could see any post made by the candidate, Instagram where you are able to see any pictures that the candidates are in, Twitter, which is constantly being updated by both candidates, and lastly Youtube where voters can find numerous new and old videos featuring the candidate. Richard Semiatin puts this in simple terms, “the very nature of the voter is changing as campaign platforms and the Internet have become open platforms through which voters can direct their own activities” (Semiatin 51). Social media and other websites that voters use has created communities in which supporters for both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton can communicate with one another and voice their opinions. This can help the candidates see what topics people are talking about and then focus their efforts on said topics. The last thing I’d like to say about the current candidates websites that I found interesting is that all of the links to the various social media websites are at the bottom of the page. I don’t know if this was intentional or not but in my opinion these should be at the top so that it is one of the first thing that voters see when visiting each website.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, the social media usage of previous candidates is very different than the current candidates. This is apparent during the 2008 election with President Obama. “The Obama presidential campaign was first to utilize all the new communication technologies” (Trent et al 293). Not only did President Obama use Facebook to interact with his supporters, they used it to “create parody ones about the opposition as well” (Trent et al 295). Another difference regarding the usage of social media and the web that I found interesting is the fact that Obama didn’t use email to connect with his supporters, but present Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton uses email a lot. An example of this was when you (Professor Burns) showed us the email you received signed H for Hillary regarding the recent debacle of her pneumonia. I think that it sets the candidates apart because Hillary is getting in touch directly with her supporters, which gives her campaign a more personal touch. After reviewing all of the social media accounts of each candidate, it’s pretty clear that both Trump and Clinton are utilizing Web 2.0 to their advantage. This campaign more than past has definitely made social media a standard when communicating with supporters and potential voters. It will be interesting to see how they utilize during the day of the actual election in November, as I’d like to see how they update everyone.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
ReplyDeleteSemiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Honestly, this election has definitely been the "technology election". I say this because social media in particular is widely used now and it's an easy way to reach the young adult demographic. Both candidates have twitters, snapchats, facebook pages, instagrams, and their own personal websites. Just from that alone, we know this is a different election than the one in 2008 or even in 2012. Social media was vital in both of those elections. In 2008 it was facebook rallying the young adult demographic and in 2012 it was twitter. However, I believe both of those platforms (along with other platforms) are even more important in this election than in the past.
ReplyDeleteGoing onto Hillary's website, the first thing that popped up was a message that said, "Donald Trump is temperamentally unfit for the presidency". Not only was I shocked to see that message but it was also really aggressive and I wasn't expecting that at all from Hillary.
After looking through both of their websites, it's clear that Hillary uses it to get her policy out to the country whereas Trump seems to be using his to gain support without really talking about anything important.
Hillary and Trump would be dumb to not take advantage of social media platforms like Twitter and Instagram. As social media becomes more prevalent in our world, it's a great way to draw out the young adults. According to Pew Research Center, "In January 2016, 44% of U.S. adults reported having learned about the 2016 presidential election in the past week from social media, outpacing both local and national print newspapers" (Pew Research Center, 13). That's honestly how I learn about the election. Checking the World Wide Trends on Twitter or looking at the candidate’s personal websites, there's always something to see. The best part about social media, is that people skim over everything, "The assumption is that Internet users are not easily categorized. They skim many topics and hit many sites" (Trent 243). Speaking from experience, this is very true and a good thing for candidates to keep in mind. Hillary and Trump having things like Snapchat and Instagram shows that they're trying to reach every corner of the social media crowd.
Both candidates use, for example, Twitter very differently. It seems as if Hillary uses hers more to promote the fact that she's better than Trump. Also she seems to use more links with a catchy quote or phrase to get the viewers attention. Trumps twitter seems to have more tweets coming directly from him. I also scrolled through both twitters and found that Trump tweeted about the Chelsea bombing that happened a few days ago in NYC and I did see a tweet about it on Hillary's twitter. I thought this was interesting because as president, it's part of the job to address the nation when something terrible happens on our soil. The fact that Hillary didn't post was really surprising to me. According to the Wall Street Journal, “Mr. Trump’s account shows his personality more so than more so than Mrs. Clinton’s shows hers, as he tweets, or dictates to someone else, a majority of the tweets” (Andrews). I agree with this statement because it’s not hard to see the different styles the candidates use on their pages.
At the end of the day, this election is all about social media. Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, the newer generations are coming into their time to vote and they’re known as the “technology generation” so it makes sense that the election is social media heavy.
Darcy DiModugno Continued:
DeleteWorks Cited:
Andrews, Natalie. “On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles,” Wall Street Journal. 28 July 2016.
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/07/28/on-social-media-hillary-clinton-and-donald-trump-take-different-approaches-to-connect-with-voters/
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
"Election 2016: Campaigns as a Direct Source of News." Pew Research Center 16 July 2016. Web."
"Hillary Clinton 2016." Hillary Clinton 2016. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
"SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR DONALD J. TRUMP." Make America Great Again! N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
Clinton, Hillary, twitter.com/HillaryClinton. Accessed 19 Sept. 2016
Trump, Donald J.Twitter, twitter.com/realDonaldTrump. Accessed 19 Sept. 2016.
Social media is playing a part in this election unlike it has in the previous ones. Some people are even arguing that if Donald Trump were to be elected he would be the Twitter president much like President FDR was the radio president. And this is important to the American people as Judith S. Trent, Robert V. Friedenberg and Robert E. Denton put it in their book Political Campaign Communications: Principles and Practices, “By 2012 , the role and impact of the internet and social media had become a central part of any national campaign” (Trent et al 290). This idea becomes even clearer when you look at the Twitter of presidential candidate Trump where has posted a massive 33.2 thousand tweets as compared to presidential candidate Clinton’s measly 8,204 (as of September 19th). Not even to mention that Trump has had his account far longer than Clinton, 2009 vs 2013. That being said, not all tweets and communications on social media on part of both of the candidates are beneficial to them.
ReplyDeleteIt is stated in the book Campaigns on the Cutting Edge edited by Richard J. Semiatin in chapter four written by Michael Turk that, “Technology has changed the way voters get information as well as the way campaigns provide it” (Turk 47). This makes it easy to see then how the content of a candidates twitter becomes extremely important, especially when that candidate has a particular affinity for insulting others. Jasmine C. Lee and Kevin Quealy of the New York Times published an interactive article titled “The 258 People, Places and Things Donald Trump Has Insulted on Twitter: A Complete List” in which they do exactly what the headline suggests. People go to Donald Trump’s twitter all the time to get a little glimpse at what his presidency might entail and what they see are insults targeted at anyone and everyone, including but not limited to both major political parties and individuals from them, countless news organizations and countless celebrities like Whoopi Goldberg. Debatably these insults are not the thing that Donald Trump wants to base his potential presidency on. However, this strategy may also be working to presidential candidate Trumps advantage. These rapid fire comments about whatever pops into his head garners a significant amount of interest in his social media. Whether they agree with him or not people are always waiting to see what Trump will say next.
This same thing can’t be said about Hillary Clinton who uses her social media accounts much more traditionally, that is aside from some of the meme’s she decides to partake in. Which leads to the fact while Trump may have Clinton beat on followers, Clinton has Donald beat for the most retweets with her famous “Delete your account” (Clinton) tweet. This potentially two is not a tweet that Hillary would like to base her presidency on, but in this day and age a tweet like this got her way more attention than talking about any one policy would. Further, a tweet like this could get people to discover her twitter so that when she does make a post about policy new followers will see it.
"Hillary Clinton 2016." Hillary Clinton 2016. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
Lee, Jasmine C., and Kevin Quealy. "The 258 People, Places and Things Donald Trump Has Insulted on Twitter: A Complete List." The New York Times. The New York Times, 27 Jan. 2016. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
"SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR DONALD J. TRUMP." Make America Great Again! N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
Clinton, Hillary, twitter.com/HillaryClinton. Accessed 19 Sept. 2016
Clinton, Hillary (HillaryClinton). “Delete your account.” 9 Jun 2016. Accessed 19 Sept. Tweet. 2016
Trump, Donald J.Twitter, twitter.com/realDonaldTrump. Accessed 19 Sept. 2016.
Historically campaigns have used the Internet to raise funds and make one-way announcements about their campaigns. However with the advent of social media the existence of one-way communication was a thing of the past. Now voters could reach out to the candidates and voice their opinion about the campaign in real time. The changes in social media have “allowed for micro targeting of undecided voters by finding and connecting them with like-minded voters” (Trent, Friedenberg and Denton Jr. 301). We see that recent campaigns have broken the mold in what the Internet can do for a campaign. 2008 was a record-breaking year in the number of campaign funds raised. Harnessing the power of the Internet both McCain and Obama raised a large amount of funds. This election is a groundbreaking one in what Trump has done with Twitter. One of my personal favorites is “This election is a total sham and a travesty. We are not a democracy” (Trump). Besides the irony behind this tweet, the fact that the candidate can voice these sentiments in real time is something never seen before. Throughout the campaign Trump has made headlines with his tweets alone. The ability to use social media as a headline-grabbing tool is a vital new weapon in a candidate’s arsenal.
ReplyDeleteTimely tweets or posts can make a huge difference in how energetic a campaign can be. Trump has used this to make his campaign massively entertaining. It is so vital that “maximizing the effectiveness of those campaign messages can mean the difference in election outcomes” (Turk 49). Candidates can have all of their slogans fine-tuned and ready, but if there isn’t a buzz around those slogans than they will be ineffective. The best strategy is to create your slogan, for example “Make America great again”, and then ruthlessly enforce it on social media. Hillary’s twitter is much more policy driven. It references recent political happening and also quotes from other supporters in the political realm. Though the thought behind the tweets are respectable, it does lack some of the fire that Trumps twitter continues create.
One final aspect of social media and the Internet is its ability to create what Turk calls the “social media mavens.” They are defined as “people who attract large groups of followers and are seen as sources of news and information” (Turk 54). These people can pull large groups of people toward or away from the candidates. If they are powerful enough, candidates must work with them as allies. Similar to the trusted new anchor in the golden age of television, these mavens are well trusted by their supporters. The Maven’s separation from the mainstream outlets of politics and news has made them popular outsiders. They can harness the power of the distrust with the current political process and make themselves public opinion leaders.
ReplyDeleteWork Cited
Trent, J. S., Friedenberg, R. V., Denton Jr., R. E. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Trump, Donald (realDonaldTrump). “This election is a total sham and a travesty. We are not a democracy!” 6 November 2012, 11:33 PM. Tweet.
Turk, Michael “Social and New Media-The Digital Present and Future.” In Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. 3d. ed., Richard J. Semiatin, ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 2016.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAndrews, Natalie. "On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles." WSJ. Wsj.com, 28 July 2016. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
ReplyDeleteBereznak, Alyssa. "The Hillary Clinton Campaign Website: A Review." The Hillary Clinton Campaign Website: A Review. Yahoo! News, 13 Apr. 2015. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
Nelson, Libby. "Trump's Team Claims Clinton Has No Child Care Policy. It's Been on Her Website for a Year." Vox. Vox, 14 Sept. 2016. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
Levey, Noam, and Michael Memoli. "Clinton Has Enough Policy to Fill a Book, While Trump Has Said Little About How He'd Govern." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 14 Sept. 2016. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
Trent, Judith, Robert Friedenberg, and Robert Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Social media plays a crucial role in any modern presidential campaign. Never before could a message be blasted to millions of followers in a matter of seconds. Barack Obama in 2008 is said to have been the first candidate to truly utilize the tool to its full potential. Natalie Andrews of The Wall Street Journal notes, “Social media was an integral part of President Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign. The campaign used Facebook to rally young voters through an app that gave it access to the lists of supporters’ friends (Andrews, 2016).” Nowadays, it’s an essential piece of firepower, and something that the candidates actually spend a lot of time, effort, and money making the most of.
ReplyDeleteMichael Turk in Campaigns on the Cutting Edge claimed Rand Paul was the most trolling candidate. “Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) earned the nickname “Troller in Chief” for the amount of time he spent trying to engage opponents in random comments and on social platforms.(Turk, Ch. 4, 154)” The publication likely predates who ultimately became the true Troller in Chief, Mr. Donald Trump. So in that regard, I respectfully disagree with Mr. Turk. Any casual scroll through Mr. Trumps twitter account, and you’ll see tweet after tweet of unabashed mockery of journalists, current and former candidates, and entire demographics of the American population. Indeed, on September 17th Trump tweeted: “The failing @nytimes has gone nuts that Crooked Hillary is doing so badly. They are willing to say anything, has become a laughingstock rag!” This is the kind of statement from a candidate that would have traditionally been dismissed as sophomoric and condemnable by any other standard. However, this is exactly the kind of message the Trump base comes to expect from this candidate. The low-blowing, policy absent quips is likely what propelled Donald to political stardom, so it’s almost certain to continue until election night. The Los Angeles Times concurs, “It remains unclear whether Clinton’s more detailed approach will have much effect, especially in a year when emotion seems to be driving much of the electorate (Levey and Memoli, 2016).” The authors continue by saying, “Heading into the first debate Sept. 26, which will probably highlight contrasts between how the nominees present their agendas, other Trump policies remain largely a mystery(Levey and Memoli, 2016).” The voting public will have to wait and see how much longer Trump can get away with being policy-silent
Website-wise, their portals are truly as different as night and day. Clinton has dozens of issues with in-depth solutions. Donald barely boasts nine. I say barely because one is about the fairytale wall with Mexico that has plagued the airwaves since the day he announced—the number of issues mentioned really aught to be eight. Hillary Clinton’s website is rich with media and endorsements and Trump’s is simply the opposite. It’s nothing short of mind-boggling that this man has made it this far by running the shoddiest campaign in modern history.
Personal opinion aside, both campaigns do indeed have a very strong digital presence, and have done fairly well at energizing their bases through social media. This election is the most digitally present of any previous presidential election, and only further emphasizes the importance of running a well-oiled social media machine when running for president.
Works Cited
DeleteAndrews, Natalie. "On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles." WSJ. Wsj.com, 28 July 2016. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Levey, Noam, and Michael Memoli. "Clinton Has Enough Policy to Fill a Book, While Trump Has Said Little About How He'd Govern." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 14 Sept. 2016. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Turk, Michael. "Ch. 4: Social and the New Media--The Digital Present and Future." Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. By Richard J. Semiatin. Washington, D.C.: SAGE Publications, 2016. N. pag. Print.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles. Sage, 2016.
ReplyDeleteBarbaro, Michael. “Pithy, Mean and Powerful: How Donald Trump Mastered Twitter for 2016”. The New York Times. 10.05.15. Web.
The 2016 election campaigns are the campaigns that have been the most influenced by social media and the Internet by far. Social media usage by Clinton and Trump in the past year leading up to the elections has very much shaped the way that campaigns are strategized today. Four years ago, 2012 campaigns were not merely as influenced by Twitter, Facebook and Snapchat as they are today. Candidates used them to tweet about their rallies and self-promote; but nothing further than that. Today, the two candidates – especially Trump – utilize Twitter and other social media outlets to draw attention to the issues and points that they want us to talk about. By tweeting something “catastrophic” they never fail to occupy every single news channel, and generate talks about their campaign.
ReplyDeleteOne major reason why social media has become so popular is that it is free of cost. When a candidate tweets, he/she pays absolutely zero dollars to gain millions of retweets, and have his/her voice echo all throughout the world. As can be imagined, “with the increasing social media, the shape and scope of reportage can change instantly” (Trent, 127) In the past, a candidate would have to pay something near half a million dollars to create such big influence, and that wouldn’t even be guaranteed. Now, when Donald Trump tweets something that gets 3 million retweets, mainstream media has to carry that onto the TV screens. This way, he gains media coverage that gets people to talk about his campaign, which ultimately gets him votes and financial contribution. Looking at financial data from Govtech.com the amount of coverage that Trump has gained from the media amounts to $380 million. The amount that the Trump campaign has actually spent on ads is $8.2 million, as opposed to Clinton’s $91.1 million. Trump’s wise usage of Twitter is the key role player in this discrepancy. Having so much money that is saved from being spent just by using social media, campaigns naturally allocate it to other areas like rallies, merchandise, traveling and staff; which all contribute to the campaign’s success.
In addition to the social media being free, it also makes the candidate appear more sincere to supporters. When it is 10:30 pm on a Tuesday and your candidate tweets something that falls onto your newsfeed, you know that they are also home, probably having a rather usual night and just tweeting out ideas with no further planning. This makes the candidate appear as someone that is one of us and it gives them an aspect of authenticity, something that they may often lack at their speeches at rallies when reading a prompter. “We [the public] are vaguely troubled by the thought that those who aspire to lead us often do so by mouthing the words of others.” (Semiatin, 149) Social media gives the candidates a chance to directly speak to the people, and share their views with no prompter. With that being said, having such a powerful source of communication at the fingertips of a presidential candidate can have irreparable consequences. In this sense, with the speed that social media offers us, candidates have to pay attention to what they put out there. Before social media became so dominant in campaigns, the communications team could at least foresee any potential risks, whether it was an attack ad, or rally that was coming their way. This gave them time to prepare. Today, with social media being so speedy and widely influential, such an incident creates instant reaction where the candidate’s chances may be greatly hurt. This was the case when Trump tweeted about KKK, or the star of David; and also when Hillary tweeted about the “deplorables.”.
The 2016 campaigns were just the starting point of social media’s gigantic influence on political communication, and both candidates, very much aware of this, have been shaping their campaigns around the influence of social media. In the elections in following years, this influence may grow, and even turn into a new form of media.
Works Cited
DeleteLang, Marissa. "2016 Presidential Election Circus: Is Social Media the Cause?" 2016 Presidential Election Circus: Is Social Media the Cause? N.p., 6 Apr. 2016. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Murray9, Mark. "Clinton Campaign Now Outspending Trump on Ads -- $52 Million to 0." NBC News. N.p., 9 Aug. 2016. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles. Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith, Robert Friedenberg, and Robert Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTurk, Michael, ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
ReplyDeleteTrent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOnline campaigning has been utilized in this campaign more then any other. Donald Trump has used every social media outlet to bash Hillary and show the people why he should be the next president. Hillary Clinton has used social media outlets to show her plan more so then attacking Trump. Both are methods to show who is better for this country. In past campaigns mainly the Obama campaign; social media was the fine line between both candidates. Many believe the reason Obama beat Mitt Romney and John McCain was because of his usage in social media. In 2008 the Obama campaign had nearly ten times the number of online staff compared to John McCain and he benefitted heavily from it. In the 2012 Obama Campaign he had 750 online staff members compared to Romney’s 87. According to Ryan Cohn, “whether through advertising, search, messaging or community development, these two Presidential campaigns are pioneering the use of social media unlike ever before.” That was speaking for the 2012 election and it has played a larger factor in the 2016 race. In recent years Facebook was the main focus of online campaigning, “Facebook is an open megaphone to your community” (Trent, Friedenberg, Denton Jr. 295). In this years election the main outlet is Twitter. As big as Facebook was to the 2008 and 2012 elections, Twitter is double that. Studies show that twitter users are viewing their page several times a day. Catching up on news, the election, and generally what is happening around the world. Studies such as these make it rather easy as to why we see an increase in online campaigning. If a candidate can reach their supporters by posting a tweet or Instagram picture, it seems clueless not to utilize it. According to Campaigns on The Cutting Edge, In the spring of 2011, just 35 percent of Americans used a smartphone or tablet to go online. In 2015, that number jumped to 65 percent, and will likely jump to 75 percent by the time of the 2016 elections (Turk 46). That number doubles in the usage of smartphones and other handheld devices. The consumption of digital media has also reached around five and a half hours per day. Despite the average of eight hours of sleep per night that consumes more then half a day using digital media to access information and news. With all the digital media consumption todays voters have, online campaigning is one of the most strategic beneficial strategies a campaign could have. Nationwide supporters have the opportunity to see what their candidate is doing by tapping a screen and scrolling. Since the sources are at supporter’s fingertips, it seems as though online campaigning will only play a larger roll in elections to come.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
ReplyDeleteSemiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
By Tom Rosenstiel, Jeff Sonderman, Kevin Loker, Maria Ivancin and Nina Kjarval Published 09/01/15 10:30 Am. "How People Use Twitter in General - American Press Institute. American Press, 01 Sept. 2015. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
ReplyDeletePhilips, Amber. “The Surprising Genius of Donald Trump’s Twitter Account.” Washington Post. The Washington Post, 10 Dec. 2015. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
Andrews, Natalie. “On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles.” WSJ. Wsj.com, 28 July 2016. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
Trump, Donald J. "While Hillary Said Horrible Things about My Supporters, and While Many of Her Supporters Will Never Vote for Me, I Still Respect Them All!" Twitter. Twitter, 10 Sept. 2016. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
"Hillary Clinton 2016." Hillary Clinton 2016. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
“ Donald Trump 2016.” Donald Trump 2016. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
The 2016 presidential election has been completely run by the media, and more specifically, social media. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are both proving that this year’s election is one to go down in history. It is the first of it’s kind to incorporate a whole new social platform to communicate with voters. Through online websites such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, voters are now able to directly interact with each candidate through tweets, online direct messages, and wall posts.
ReplyDeleteIt has been very important for both the candidates to have a strong, predominant online presence with the public. It looks good, especially to younger voters, to have official, verified accounts on as many sites. It’s also relevant to have a high number of followers as well. As of Tuesday September 20th, Hillary Clinton has 8.88 million followers on Twitter, and Donald Trump has 11.6 million followers. There has been question throughout this campaign if the number of Internet followers will have any affect on who’ll end up winning the presidency. From this statement already it shows how prevalent social media is within this race.
In American presidential campaigning history, candidates have used communication platforms of their time to their advantages. A popular example of this is the John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon race, in which the debates were first ever televised to the American public. This was the first time it mattered to viewers at home how each candidate presented them selves on camera. It is a classic example of political communication in a presidential election because it affected the vote in the end. Nixon presented himself poorly on camera appearing sweaty and nervous, darting his eyes back and forth through the audience while completely disregarding the cameras in front of him. JFK on the other hand remained poised and confident on camera and spoke mainly into the lens to the viewers at home, which allowed for a closer connection to voters.
Fast-forward to present time where that same close connection has moved its way onto computer and smartphone screens. According to a blog post in the Wall Street Journal, “Social media was an integral part of President Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign. The campaign used Facebook to rally young voters through an app that gave it access to the lists of supporters’ friends. In 2012, Twitter was in the spotlight as a way for people to follow the election (Andrews)”. Again, here we see the Democratic candidate using social media to attract younger Americans to vote. To also make a point, his competitor of the Republican party John McCain, did not make it much of a point in his campaign to reach out to the younger demographic through an online presence. The result of this was the presidency of Democratic nominee Barack Obama. From this example it begs the question said once before if online presence and number of followers has any connection to the presidential win of 2016. It had been predicted that “[B]y 2012 , the role and impact of the internet and social media had become a central part of any national campaign” due to the standard of campaigning set by president Obama (Trent et al 290).
The media, and public, have kept close tabs on each of the candidates’ social media interaction and presence. Many think it contributes to the opinions formed by voters of each candidate because it opens up a new level of personal ideals for the public to look into. This race is definitely one to remember moving into future elections and I personally think this is one to learn from as well.
Works Cited
DeleteAndrews, Natalie. "On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles." The Wall Street Journal 28 July 2016. Web.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Works Cited
ReplyDelete"Election 2016: Campaigns as a Direct Source of News." Pew Research Centers
Journalism Project RSS. Pew Research Center, 18 July 2016. Web.
Phillips, Amber. "The Surprising Genius of Donald Trump’s Twitter Account."
Washington Post. The Washington Post, 10 Dec. 2015. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, Robert E. Denton. Political Campaign
Communication: Principles and Practices. 8th ed. New York: Praeger, 2016. Print
During this election, the campaigns are using social media for the first time as a direct pipeline into mainstream media coverage and to voters (Lang). According to Republican political strategist and founder of digital media firm Engage Patrick Ruffini, social media has “really opened the floodgates of candidates being able to tap into an ecosystem of voters and news consumers who are getting information about these candidates 24/7” (Lang). Supporters are using social media to read about candidates on an extraordinary scale. In fact, in 12 months the country has collectively spent more than 1,284 years reading about Donald Trump on social media while spending roughly 874 years on social media reading about Sanders and Clinton combined (Lang). This shows that supporters are spending a significant amount of time getting their political information from social media. The candidates are using social media not only to broadcast messages and build excitement around their respective campaigns, but also as a means to save money. According to Infogroup Media Solutions President Gretchen Littlefield, the candidates are using “Twitter and social media to avoid big TV advertising spends and reduce the cost of campaigning significantly” (Patterson). If Trump, for instance, sought similar attention by buying ads, his social reach would cost $380 million. Instead, he's getting it for free in tweets, likes and shares (Lang). This kind of free exposure show just how influential social media has become in this election, and it’s cost efficiency can lead some to predict that social media could be one of the more powerful political tools used by candidates in future elections.
ReplyDeleteThe candidates also use social media to collect donations. There was an understanding that the Internet made giving – and soliciting donations especially – easy to do (Semiatin 43). With social media, however, the candidates can add donate buttons on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube making donating to a campaign easier than ever. After these users make donations, they also have the option to post about it on their given platform, causing the donation to go viral across their networks (Patterson). For example, in 2012, John McCain made headlines by raising more than $7 million online (Trent, 290).
Works Cited
ReplyDeleteAndrews, Natalie. “On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles.” Wall Street Journal. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Bereznak, Alissa. “The Hillary Clinton Campaign Website: A Review.” Yahoo News. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 8th edition. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, 2016. Print.
Turk, M. “Social and New Media- the Digital Present and Future.” Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. 3rd ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2016 Print.
“Hillary Clinton 2016.” Hillary Clinton 2016. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
“Make America Great Again!” Donald J. Trump for President. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
In the past elections, public speaking was the main outlet campaigns used to gain popularity and success (Trent et al 289). With the advance of social media, it is not solely about public speaking anymore, it is about websites, Twitters, and all of the social media outlets. Overall, media and technology “has impacted the creation, collection, and dissemination of information” (Trent et al 290).
DeleteDuring this election, campaigns are utilizing social media outlets such as websites, email, Twitter, Facebook, blogs and Instagram to target a specific audience and capture supporters’ attention. Each candidate is using their website as a way to tell supporters why they are qualified, but more obviously, why their opponent is less qualified. On both Clinton and Trump’s websites, there is negative information about each other. In this election, it is evident that the candidates are utilizing social media to bash their opponent, instead of stressing the importance of their policies or goals, which is having a large impact on the 2016 campaign as a whole.
Trump’s website is very serious, tidy, and America themed. Everything is in big print and emphasized, more specifically how to sign up for text alerts, the email list and donations. There are news articles from The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Times that highlight his accomplishments and bash Hillary. Trump uses social media to gain and sustain his supporters by bashing Hillary and making himself look superior. At the bottom of Trump’s website, there were his most recent tweets displayed and press releases describing his “pro-growth economic policy” and yet again, bashing Hillary. In addition to his website, Trump has a huge following on Twitter. Since there are over 140 million Twitter users, it is easy to reach supporters and attempt to sway other’s opinions (Trent et al 298). In the past, the Obama campaign used Twitter an enormous amount and used it as a way to inform the public where he was (Trent et al 298). Trump utilizes Twitter well because he attracts attention and entertains the public. With that, it is no surprise that Trump has more of a following on social media compared to Hillary (Andrews).
On the contrary, Hillary’s website is dull and slightly unorganized. Essentially, it is nothing special because she does not have a lot to offer other than a video, a biography of her work, and the addition of a donation button (Bereznak). There are articles on Trump and comparing the two, President Obama’s views on Hillary and facts about Tim Kaine. These articles are handpicked and chosen to sway the public and almost manipulate their views. The first articles visible on the website was a wise choice because it gives Hillary supporters all that they want to hear; it slams Trump, tries to add credibility to her VP pick, and add even more credibility that our current President is on her side. In big bold letters, “join the campaign and help stop Donald Trump” is written on her website, which is upfront and exemplifies how each candidate is out to get each other and uses social media as a way to make the other look weak. Another one of Hillary’s strategies is that she tries to be a friendly and common person to her supporters. For instance, she sent out an email announcing her pneumonia, mentioned her dogs, and signed the email “H.” She is trying to appeal to the common person and seem more approachable than Trump. Online campaign communication is swaying the public’s opinion and is being used aggressively and manipulative. It is surprising to think that the digital campaign was only a tiny part of the overall campaign just a few years ago, considering it is a large part of the 2016 election (Turk 23).
A day does not go by with out a tweet from Donald Trump. The use of the Internet has been helping political campaigns since 1992. Bill Clinton launched an email service that would send out information on his campaign to the public (Semiatin 346). Since then, the use of the Internet in campaigning has evolved into something both amazing and terrifying. Social media is being used as a primary source of information for people in the 2016 election. In the past, the information was received from the news and the candidates’ respective websites. This election has created a social media frenzy in the candidates. Donald Trump has created a new way to campaign that is cheap and very effective. “One of the most central tools to Trump's penny-pinching campaign is Twitter. The 69-year-old uses the tool like a digital native, more prolifically than any other presidential candidate and arguably with much more skill” (Phillips). Twitter may be the main social media platform of this election as both candidates have made their mark on the campaign while using Twitter. The infamous tweet by Hillary Clinton telling Donald Trump to “Delete your account.” has been re-tweeted over 482,000 times. It is the most shared tweet in the election so far. While Clinton has had a few notorious tweets, Trump has had thousands. He has such an amazing tactic where he tweets so excessively that most his tweets are forgotten about. This allows him to say whatever he wants without having consequences (Andrews).
ReplyDeleteTheir websites are still a good platform for information on each candidate’s policies. However, they seem to be getting overshadowed by their candidates’ social media accounts. So much so, that Trump doesn’t even know what information is on Clinton’s website. He accused her of not having a policy on child care when in fact it is on her website. Hillary’s website is covered in policy while Trump’s is almost just for show. His is very surface level and is only there to influence donations. The websites do not really allow for a voter to candidate interaction. This is why social media is a great way to gain voters. Trump has been able to make his Twitter more personable by replying to people and re-tweeting them. The public knows it’s Trump tweeting which helps him connect with his supporters. Hillary is clearly not the person behind her Twitter account and it’s very obvious. Although whoever is in charge of it is still doing a great job at getting Clinton’s message out. All in all, Trump has insulted almost 258 people, places, and things (Lee). The public most likely only remembers his most recent tweets. This makes his strategies more effective than Clinton’s. This may be working for him now but could most definitely hurt him closer to election night. This election is the most interactive one yet and it will be interesting to see what doors this campaign will open up in the future.
Andrews, Natalie. “On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles.” Wall Street Journal. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
DeleteLee, Jasmine C., and Kevin Quealy. "The 258 People, Places and Things Donald Trump Has Insulted on Twitter: A Complete List." The New York Times. The New York Times, 27 Jan. 2016. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Philips, Amber. “The Surprising Genius of Donald Trump’s Twitter Account.” Washington Post. The Washington Post, 10 Dec. 2015. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
The presidential race this year is one for the books, we all know that already. But why is that? Why has this race to the White House garnered so much attention? It could be the nature of it. Its policy-lacking-social-media-heavy-realty-TV-show-esque nature is what causing people to watch it for its drama rather than the future of our country. Being that Donald Trump was once an actual reality TV star; he’s not as politically savvy which leads him to use non-traditional ways during campaigning. A big example, Twitter. Trump LOVES Twitter. The Washington Post, wrote an article about the genius of Trump’s Twitter account and a excerpt from it reads:
ReplyDeleteHistory will be the ultimate judge, but Trump appears to be on his way to becoming the first major U.S. politician to use it in a way that truly shapes — not just amplifies — his message. He uses his Twitter account to make news, lob attacks or wage threats against those who disagree with him and, seemingly most centrally for Trump, create a community of ever-growing people who appear to agree with him wholeheartedly. (Phillips)
The article also states that he’s spent “a tiny fraction of the money that his opponents have” (Phillips). This presidential race has been concentrated a lot online. Both major candidates have used online campaigning more than previous races but that’s probably because people are always online. They haven’t done anything wrong by it since it’s a great way to reach supporters. Both may be doing it, but they’re doing it very differently. An article by the Wall Street Journal describes the difference very simply, “While Republican Donald Trump connects with his fans through insults and statements on Twitter that sound as if they are directly from him, his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton casts a wide net across the Internet, maintaining a presence on several different sites and platforms” (Andrews).
Trump’s non-traditional approach to campaigning is helping him in some ways but hurting him in others. The policy lacking in his campaign is becoming more apparent now closer to election time. The Los Angeles Times wrote an article about how much this race is lacking policy compared to others in the past. The article stated, “In the same week that Clinton released her mental health plan, the Republican nominee delivered a much-anticipated immigration address, only to leave his allies working for days to clarify whether Trump would round up all immigrants in the country illegally or focus deportations on those who had broken other laws. Such a contrast between presidential nominees’ attention to detail is highly unusual… it may reflect Clinton’s long history of working on public policy, as well as Trump’s thin political resume” (Levey, Memoli).
With social media playing a huge role in the race it’s no wonder more people than ever are eyes glued to the screen. One Trump tweet and everyone knows about in a few hours. The candidates are playing more tit-for-tat about personal issues and social media has probably caused this. Social media has never been a place for public policy discussion for a majority of population. It’s where kids post pictures of themselves out on the weekend and people argue on Twitter over the latest episode of Game of Thrones. The nature of social media has changed the nature of the campaigns. An example? When you click this link, https://www.hillaryclinton.com/, for Hillary’s website the first thing that pops up before you can even access her full site a box that says, “Donald Trump is temperamentally unfit for the presidency.” And there isn’t an ‘I disagree’ option, there’s only an ‘I agree’. That’s some serious shade being thrown right off the bat! But again, it’s the nature of the race. They never played nice in the sandbox, Trump came in kicking and Hillary got down and dirty with him kicking sand too. It’ll be an interesting one, for sure, folks.
Andrews, Natalie. "On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles." The Wall Street Journal 28 July 2016. Web.
DeleteLevey, Noam and Michael A. Memoli. "Clinton Has Enough Policy to Fill a Book, while Trump Has Said Little About How He'd Govern." Los Angeles Times 14 Sept. 2016. Web.
Phillips, Amber. "The surprising genius of Donald Trump’s Twitter account." Washington Post 10 Dec. 2015. Web.
Over the passed two decades, social media and the internet have increasingly affected the perception of politics. According to Political Campaign Communication “no other nation in the world consumes more mass media” (Trent el. al. 87). The candidates for this upcoming election have recognized how powerful and influential social media is to their target audiences. The candidates have the ability to engage, interact, and fundraise with the public through a variety of social media platforms. Michael Turk states that “technology has changed the way voters get information as well as the way campaigns provide it” (Turk, 154). In 2008, the Obama campaign brilliantly targeted sports fans and younger voters by strategically placing advertisements in over eighteen different video games. This year’s election is a circus on social media. Trump uses Twitter to his advantage, stating his opinion, and even openly bashing his opponent. Clinton also has made her presence known on social media, targeting demographics of all kinds through an abundance of campaign advertisements. For example, I was scrolling through Instagram, and the Clinton campaign placed an advertisement titled “Hillary for Florida” amongst the posts of friends and family. I find that smart, so no matter what you’re doing online the campaign will be evident. Prior to 2008, elections did not rely on social media and the internet the way that this upcoming election is using it to both parties advantage. In terms of social media, both presidential candidates have opposing approaches when trying to reach supports this campaign season.
ReplyDeleteLindsay Rhys (continued)
ReplyDeleteNatalie Andrews, a writer for The Wall Street Journal says, “While Republican Donald Trump connects with his fans through insults and statements on Twitter that sound as if they are directly from him, his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton casts a wide net across the Internet, maintaining a presence on several different sites and platforms” (Andrews, Natalie). Between both candidates, Trump has the largest following on social media, with over 10.3 million Twitter followers, and 9.9 million Facebook likes. His well known presence on the internet and his social media accounts gives Trump the advantage of getting his message across to the audience he is targeting (Andrews, Natalie). Clinton, while having 7.78 million followers, and 4.8 million likes, she takes an alternative route when it comes to sharing on social media (Andrews, Natalie). Her “one liners” such as her tweet to Trump after he publicly criticized Obama for endorsing her; “Delete your account”. Both candidates presence on the internet have an enormous influential effect on voters. Campaigns heavily rely on the candidates websites for voters to seek out information as well. Websites provide information on policies, plans, etc. for curious voters to learn more about the candidate. Websites also provide an option for voters to give the campaign their email address. When I logged onto Clinton’s website www.hillaryclinton.com, the first thing I noticed was a message that popped up on my screen asking if I agree with the statement “ Donald Trump is temperamentally unfit for the presidency” Another brilliant tactic, tallying how many people agree with the statement is a great way to survey interested voters. On Trump’s website www.donaldjtrump.com I felt lots of aggression in his statements such as, “we WILL make America great again” His aggression and relentless behavior has and continues to attract many voters. The candidates have taken over social media this past year, and will continue to create a media frenzy up until November, 8th.
Andrews, Natalie. "On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles." WSJ. Wsj.com, 28 July 2016. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
ReplyDelete"Hillary Clinton 2016." Hillary Clinton 2016. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Clinton, Hillary, twitter.com/HillaryClinton. Accessed 19 Sept. 2016
"SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR DONALD J. TRUMP." Make America Great Again! N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
Trump, Donald J.Twitter, twitter.com/realDonaldTrump. Accessed 19 Sept. 2016.
Turk, Michael “Social and New Media-The Digital Present and Future.” In Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. 3d. ed., Richard J. Semiatin, ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have vastly different styles when it comes to the structure and content of both their social media accounts and their websites. Trump’s tweets are usually mocking his opponents and other individuals. Also, based on his personality, it seems as though a lot of his tweets he writes himself. Secretary Clinton has less of an overall presence on twitter. Her campaign tries to give equal attention to most all social media platforms (Andrews). Considering all the ways that online campaign communication has impacted the 2016 election, it is twitter has probably played the biggest role. At least for the republican nominee. The way that he has been able to get unprecedented amounts of media attention is due significantly to his presence on twitter (Philips). The two candidates have taken very different approaches when it comes to the content of their websites. Looking at Trump’s website, there is not a whole lot stances on specific policy. There is some. But it is noticeable that all of the policy issues on his site are ones that he has talked about frequently during this election cycle. Building a wall, U.S relations with China, and second amendment rights are a few examples of the nine positions that are detailed on his website. They have all been hot button issues during this election, but there are essentially hundreds of policy issues that he completely ignores. Instead, his site includes multiple webcam style videos of him talking about a handful of issues and a really flashy design. This evidence proves that for Trump, winning this election is all about getting to the emotions of the American voter rather than talking about most of the issues. Secretary Clinton’s website is very different. It has much more content overall and has her stance on almost every issue you can think of. It is interesting to think of the vast changes that campaigning and communication technologies have undergone since the beginning of the American political system. From the early pamphlets and newspapers of the 18th century to the explosion of the internet in the late 20th century. In the early years of the internet's popularity, websites were used by political campaigns as online billboards. These were things that were essentially just to printed out as flyers or pamphlets (Trent et al 289-290). The 2016 election has had a massive presence on social media and online in general. American’s have been using the internet to follow the election more now than ever before. Particularly, with the help of handheld devices like smartphones and tablets. About 35% of American’s used smartphones to go on the internet in 2011. Last year, that number was at 65% (Semiatin and Turk 47). This gives cause to the large impact of social media on this campaign because social media websites and applications are most frequently used on handheld devices.
ReplyDeleteWork Cited:
Andrews, Natalie. "On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles." The Wall Street Journal 28 July 2016. Web.
“ Donald Trump 2016.” Donald Trump 2016. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
"Hillary Clinton 2016." Hillary Clinton 2016. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Phillips, Amber. "The surprising genius of Donald Trump’s Twitter account." Washington Post 10 Dec. 2015. Web.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith, S, et al. Political Campaign Communication. 8th ed., New York, Rowman and Littlefield, 2016.
James Conway
ReplyDeletePO348 Blog #3
09/18/2016
The extent to which social media is dominating this election season has never been seen before. Both candidates are consistently tweeting and posting to both Facebook and SnapChat, often times to call out each other on a matter of different issues or comments. Just a couple of elections ago, in 2008, it was still unsure just how much of an impact the Internet could have on an American political campaign. Brilliantly however, Obama seemed to realize the extent to which the Internet could help and fully took advantage. “In fact, the Obama campaign spent $25 million on new media in 2008” (Trent, 292), making the McCain campaign look less prepared. By spending so much more money on the Internet based campaigning and hiring ten times as many online staffers (Trent, 292), Obama was able to connect more directly with potential voters more often. Being able to “touch” supporters is a massive advantage and one that I am sure McCain regrets greatly. That “authentic personal communication”, as Trent puts it on page 298, is irreplaceable and helps candidates “maximize the effectiveness of their campaign messages”. (Semiatin, 49)
Before social media and the internet, candidates were forced to campaign with far less efficient mediums. During the pre Civil War era, “public speaking was the main avenue of political success and public popularity.” (Trent, 289) While that still holds true a bit to this day, it is far more balanced in the contemporary as public speaking is supplemented with blogs, Facebook, YouTube, MySpace, mobile device communication, Twitter, Tumblr and E-mail. By the time the Civil War was going on, newspaper and magazine articles were increasing even though their messages were becoming more concise and to-the-point. (Trent, 289) By the early 21st Century, radio broadcasts began to sweep the nation off their feet. More than five million Americans listened in to the 1924 Democratic Convention (Trent, 289) while watching newsreels and silent films on the side. Television changed the world and so it is no shock to read that it changed the landscape of political campaigns as well. It offered the Presidential hopefuls into the living rooms of America and “provided the illusion of private, intimate, and interpersonal exchanges.” (Trent, 290) This “new eloquence” (Trent, 290) that the candidates developed gave a massive advantage to those than could seem loving, caring and family oriented. Today, Twitter allows candidates to avoid this “nice-guy/girl” tag as we see with Trump and Clinton when they constantly exchange insults since their face is hidden behind a social media account (“Delete your account”!. Twitter, Facebook and all other social media accounts also allow the candidates to “bypass traditional media as well as issues or themes they may desire to ignore.” (Trent, 290) In other words, they are in control of what is reported when using social media and that advantage cannot be mentioned enough. Having good social media accounts is important but the real goal of Internet campaigns is to “develop a good website, an e-mail list and a distribution system” (Trent, 290) In the past few elections, so many donations have been received online and with that additional financial support, modern candidates have far more of an advantage in terms of what they can afford compared to candidates just ten to fifteen years ago.
In the end, online campaign communication is only going to become more and more important. While maybe today it seems like no other election could possibly use social media more than Clinton and Trump’s, it would be ignorant to think that the fastest growing media outlet in the world would stop doing so after one major political decision.
Bibliography:
ReplyDeleteSemiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Works Cited
ReplyDeleteAndrews, Natalie. “On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles.” WSJ. Wsj.com, 28 July 2016. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
Philips, Amber. “The Surprising Genius of Donald Trump’s Twitter Account.” Washington Post. The Washington Post, 10 Dec. 2015. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.
Semiatin, Richard J., ed. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2016.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication, 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
The manner of use of media and other media-related technology tools differs amongst the two perspective presidential runners. Hillary Clinton continues to favor the use of media tactics taken from the 1990s. She does not tweet very often, nor has an overwhelmingly outspoken position across any social media platform/medium. The Clinton campaign seemingly continues to favor the use of e-mail solicitations. She also focuses much of her campaign finances towards commercials and signs. Donald Trump takes a different stance upon his social media presence and otherwise use of technology – his favorite social media tool: Twitter. There are more than 140 million Twitter users, properly designated as “followers.” Political Campaign Communication states that, “the primary function of twitter is ‘authentic personal communication.’ From a campaign perspective, it’s about writing a speech in 140 characters” (298). And the Andrews’ reading concluded: “Mr. Trump’s account shows his personality more so than more so than Mrs. Clinton’s shows hers, as he tweets, or dictates to someone else, a majority of the tweets.” Mr. trump understands the value that new media tools hold. Such is the reason why he does not spend nearly as much money as the Clinton camp does because, “Trump doesn't need to spend money to get his message out. He has become an expert at letting media — TV, radio and social media — do it for him” (Phillips). As the modern times approached, “There was an understanding that the Internet made giving - and soliciting donations especially - easy to do” (Semiatin 43). And yet, not every candidate has embraced and manipulated this fact to their future’s advantage. Trump has a leg up over Hillary in media use.
Delete
ReplyDeleteClinton, Hillary (HillaryClinton). “Delete your account.” 9 Jun 2016, 11:27AM. Tweet. 2016
Lee, Jasmine C., and Kevin Quealy. "The 258 People, Places and Things Donald Trump Has Insulted on Twitter: A Complete List." The New York Times. The New York Times, 27 Jan. 2016. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Nelson, Libby. "Trump's Team Claims Clinton Has No Child Care Policy. It's Been on Her Website for a Year." Vox. N.p., 14 Sept. 2016. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Phillips, Amber. "The Surprising Genius of Donald Trump’s Twitter Account." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 10 Dec. 2015. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Semiatin, Richard J. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2017. Print.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 2016. Print.
Years ago, candidates relied heavily upon radio talk shows and broadcast television to get their messages across to voters. But now, campaigns are shifting heavily towards the Internet and social media. Barack Obama’s campaigns of 2008 and 2012 set a high standard for fully incorporated new media technologies (Trent et al. 301). During the 2016 presidential campaign, we have seen a large online campaign communication presence ranging from promoted tweets to website advertisements. The tools for modern digital campaigns have become much more sophisticated and the staff and budget resources devoted to digital operations have increased dramatically (Semiatin 43).
DeleteParticularly Twitter has played a critical role in this election. Donald Trump has nearly 12 million followers whereas Hillary Clinton has 8.8 million followers. Rather than wasting money on television advertisements, Trump takes to Twitter and reaches a large audience since his tweets frequently end up in the news. This platform allows him to shape and amplify his message (Phillips). He often refers to Hillary Clinton as “crooked Hillary” and calls mainstream media “dishonest” and “corrupt” (Lee and Quealy). The end result is the media getting his message out for him, which is a clever tactic. One of Hillary Clinton’s most famous tweets was from June when she told Trump to delete his account after he tweeted about Obama endorsing her. Clinton’s tweet generated nearly half a million retweets. Recently on Twitter, Trump criticized Hillary for running a “policy-free campaign” in regards to childcare (Nelson). Hillary responded by tweeting “it’s literally right here” with a link to her website explaining her policy.
The role of the campaign website is to gather data on supporters as wells as to inform them of campaign activities (Semiatin 51). Barack Obama’s website during his two presidential campaigns were particularly successful because they allowed supporters to organize themselves (Semiatin 51). After looking at the websites of both candidates, it’s clear that Hillary Clinton focuses more on her past experiences in politics as opposed to Trump. Her website also seems more policy oriented whereas Trump’s website is more of a compilation of press releases and news articles written about him.
DeleteOnline campaign communication in the 2016 election is having an incredibly large impact on voters. Whether it’s Facebook or Twitter, it’s difficult to not see information pertaining to the election on social media. The benefit to this is that it allows voters to curate their own content and feel more empowered (Semiatin 53). Social networks allow voters to engage with others and find new networks of supporters (Semiatin 54). The focus is shifting away from direct mail and television and moving towards social media. Modern campaigns cannot exist without a strong online presence. Looking ahead, the Internet will continue to play a vital role in future elections and campaigns need to learn how to use this to their advantage.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhat differentiates this election’s use of new media and social media from prior elections is the purpose behind it, and how different messages are being formed as a result. According to Michael Turk many past campaigns would use, “Most paid Internet advertising [that] was focused on fundraising, and relatively little was done to take advantage of the Internet for persuasion messaging,” but the era we live in now “has advanced well beyond those days” (Turk 43). The modern day campaign uses the Internet to both persuade the audience to vote for its candidate and to provide monetary donations to the campaign. As a result we see content on both new media and social media that aims to achieve this goal. Proof of this is all over Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s campaign websites, which are both, flooded with calls-to-action, and persuasive media. Both candidates’ websites prompt the visitor to “contribute” to the campaign before the he even has a chance to scroll down the page. Once one finally braves his way down the page of either candidate he is asked to join the campaign and help in any way. Whether its Clinton’s prompt to “help stop Donald Trump!” or Trump’s offer to join Trump Talk, a call service for the republican nominee, the candidates’ websites ask for a service from the guest. Also at the bottom of each Candidate’s websites are links to their social media accounts, which are also used to sway the public towards the candidate. Social media does today what the television did for politics in 1952. According to Trent et al, “The medium brought the candidates and leaders into the intimacy of our living rooms. Television provided the illusion of private, and interpersonal exchanges,” (Trent et al 290). Today social media and portable technology allow candidates to provide that same illusion; it just so happens to be whenever somebody wishes to experience it. The social media form of this intimacy comes packages as posts that are similar in style to what a typical social media user would post, but ultimately attempts to persuade or get something from the viewer. Hillary Clinton will post on her Instagram an inspiring picture of a cute child holding up a sign that is captioned by a heartwarming quote about the need for love and kindness in America just like a friend would do. And, Donald Trump will post an image of polls in his favor with a caption showing gratitude the same way some would put up a college acceptance letter on their Instagram. What makes these posts different from the typical social media post is that the underlying message indicates that the person who is posting this is just like any other person one may know; it humanizes them, and creates the same illusion of intimacy that the television did for previous candidates. The sense of intimacy that the viewer gets from the post gets the audience to, “feel as if they truly know the politician, and the frequent ‘conversations’ result in feelings of friendship and trust,” (Trent et al 290). By attaining this level of intimacy with their audiences both candidates prove that we are beyond the days that Turk characterized as having relatively little “done to take advantage of the Internet for persuasion messaging” (Turk 43).
ReplyDeleteWork Cited
"Hillary Clinton 2016." Hillary Clinton 2016. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
"SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR DONALD J. TRUMP." Make America Great Again! N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Trent, Judith S. et al. Political Campaign Communication: Principles & Practices. 8th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Turk, Michael. “Social and New Media—The Digital Present and Future.” In Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. 3d. ed., Richard J. Semiatin, ed.Los Angeles: Sage. 2017. VitalSource Bookshelf Online.
Works Cited
ReplyDeleteBialik, Carl. "Everyone Has Fake Twitter Followers, But Trump Has The Most. Sad!" FiveThirtyEight. N.p., 14 Apr. 2016. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Semiatin, Richard J. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2017. Print.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 2016. Print.
Works Cited
ReplyDeletePew Research Center: Journalism & Media Staff. "How the Presidential Candidates Use the Web and Social Media." Pew Research Centers Journalism Project RSS. Journalism.org, 14 Aug. 2012. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
By Clicking. "Hillary on Health Care." Health Care. HIllaryclinton.com, n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
"Healthcare Reform." Donaldjtrump.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Levy, Noam N., and Michael Memoli A. "Clinton Has Enough Policy to Fill a Book, While Trump Has Said Little About How He'd Govern." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 14 Sept. 2016. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Andrews, Natalie. "On Social Media, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Have Different Styles." WSJ. Wsj.com, 28 July 2016. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.
Http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfiFKBpAaRtVKvzXlQCBOmA. "Hillary Clinton -- Panders Away ... I Roll with Hot Sauce (VIDEO)." YouTube. YouTube, 18 Apr. 2016. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.