Social media has significantly impacted politics by allowing for more direct communication between politicians and citizens. It has enabled new forms of political organization and activism online. While social media has increased political transparency and participation, it also introduces new challenges. Politicians must now operate in a context of constant public commentary online. Some argue this reduces opportunities for compromise and limits bold policy ideas. Overall, social media is changing how political discourse and campaigns are conducted, with platforms like Twitter and Google+ growing in importance. It remains unclear whether these changes will strengthen democracy or introduce new problems.

1. Title
Name
Author’s Name
Subject
Organization

2. Introduction
Sports, Business, Theatre or Drama; change seldom discriminates. It resonates in each
and every walk of life. On the brink of a terrific change is Politics, courtesy the social media.
Social media has rapidly grown as a forum for political discourse and activism. Its various
platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Youtube etc. are providing a plethora of new
ways to engage citizens in politics (Benkler, 2006). A great advantage inherent in social
media is the possibility of personal, ie., one to one communication. Politicians as well as
political parties are seemingly benefitting with this new found ability to reach out to their
potential voters. It has become possible for politicians to reach voters in a well targeted
manner without relying on the media as an intermediary (Gentle, 2012). Various reactions,
messages, feedbacks and debates are generated online. In addition to this, support for offline
causes of a political party are also generated through social media petitions.
Background on Social Media and its Impact on Politics
As the presence of social media is spreading, online political activities are largely
restricted to those people who are already active in politics as well as on the internet. Other
audiences, such as those not having access to internet are less responsive (Jue et.al., 2010). It
is imperative to state that the Social media has reshaped structures and methods of
contemporary political communication by altering, to a large extent, the way the politicians
interact with the citizens. But still, the role that this phenomenon is playing in increasing
political interests and engagement as well as electoral participation is still debateable. The
debate has also been largely about the power of mass agitations and protests to make the
government lend an ear and pay heed to the public’s concerns (Li, & Bernoff, 2008).
For eg.- On the 17th
of January, 2001, when the Philippine President Joseph Estrada
was conducted, loyalists in the Congress had voted to set aside key evidence against him. In

3. less than 2 hours after the decision being announced, thousands of locals, angry that their
corrupt President might be let off without facing stringent punishment, gathered on Epifanio
de lod Santos Avenue, a major square in Manila. These protests and gatherings were
arranged, to a great extent, by forwarding of text messages, e-mails and other means. The
crowd increased phenomenally and in the next few days, over a million people registered
their presence at the protests, thus bringing the traffic in Manila to a halt (McHale & Garulay,
2012).
This astonishing ability of the masses to coordinate a protest of such humongous scale
so alarmed the country’s Legislator’s that they reversed the course of the proceedings and
allowed the evidence to be presented (Li, & Bernoff, 2008). This significant event marked the
first time that social media had helped force out a national leader. Funnily, the President
himself blamed the tech-savy generation for his downfall. Ever since the advent of internet in
the early 1990’s, the world’s ever growing population has also begun to stay ever connected.
Social Media and Politics: The Case of United States
Over the period, social media has become a fact of life for the civil societies
worldwide, seeing active and responsible participation from activists, non-governmental
organisations as well as celebrities (McHale & Garulay, 2012). It is being increasingly
observed that as the communication landscape is becoming more participatory and inclusive,
the masses are rather gaining much more access to information than they earlier could. In the
political arena, as the above mentioned demonstrations indicate, the increased freedom to
undertake collective action can help politics return to its original purpose, i.e. serving the
people.
Another scintillating instance of the immense strength of social platforms is the US
Presidential Debate. Just like the idea of Presidential debates, the new form they took the last

4. time they were conducted is novel too (Kamales & Fuchs, 2013). The first debate held
between the Presidential candidates Barrack Obama and Mitt Romney on Oct. 3 set a record
for tweets-11 million, Twitter reported. While millions viewed the debate on Television,
social media enabled people to share their own point of views in real time. The public didn’t
have to wait for the analysts to scrutinise the debate. Many have begun to call the Presidential
Debates an altogether different beast from the one it used to be 12 years ago.
Social Media and Youtube
Whether it is watching campaign ads on YouTube or following the candidates on
Twitter and Facebook, or getting the latest updates regarding their whereabouts, the
dissemination of information has begun to cross all leaps and bounds in this Social media
driven generation. Interestingly, when George W. Bush vied for the White House in 2000, the
Internet was in its nascent stage as a campaign tool. The mere fact that a candidate had his
own website was a revolutionary concept. (Jue et.al., 2010)
The message use to largely go out through television ads, print ads and in-person
campaigning. In the past, candidates got their messages delivered through TV ads, which
were expensive. Not only did candidates have to pay ad agencies to produce a campaign ad,
they also had to shell out more to get the ad on TV (Jue et.al., 2010). Although still, ads are
being run on Cable TV, they are also increasingly being put up on websites like YouTube and
Vimeo as well as the personal sites of candidates. This has acted as a great money saver.
Online ads are not as expensive as TV ads and can also be made quicker.
Candidates are increasing their social media presence, which allows them to get out
their message 24/7 without having to rely upon traditional print or broadcast media. With
Twitter, campaigns can send out stream of messages to supporters, debate on a hot issue and
also take quick pot shots at rival candidates. Facebook is another convenient platform for

5. politicos to present their issues, ask for donations and to communicate with supporters.
Facebook and Twitter are also increasingly being incorporated into presidential debates with
questions for candidates coming directly from Twitter and Facebook (Johnson, 2005).
Many analysts, though supportive of the use of social media in main stream politics,
don’t budge from calling it a double edged sword. For every President Obama breaking
records with his zillion followers worldwide, there are thousands of examples of politicians
falling flat on their digital faces (Piskorski, 2014). The protuberant case of the European
Union being accused of racism, sexism in its Vimeo campaign videos stands out as utterly
shameful and makes the politicians careful about treading the treacherous path of social
media. Again, such gaffes and policies, unintentional or not, have always been a part of
politics.
The question now arises- Is social media bringing anything new to politics? In what
way is it changing it? According to Obama’s social media strategist Adam Conner, when it
comes to paying heed to advices, the Leaders find it more fitting to listen to what the people
they wish to govern have to say rather than far-detached from life financers, for whom raking
in immense profits is the ultimate concern. Social media has a great potential in bringing
democracy to every citizen’s home, however it is essentially imperative first to get the people
motivated to participate. In the absence of any such motivation it is immensely difficult to
venture beyond the Likes and Shares of the people (Piskorski, 2014).
Changing Trend of politics with social networking websites
Social media, will and always should, continue to play an important role in the
political discourse. But taking a look back, it isn’t hard to observe that the trend has grown so
quickly that no one has stopped to consider the implications of moment by moment, real time
transparency (Kamales & Fuchs, 2013). It is argued that what we have got is a trade-off and

6. the jury is still out on whether what we have lost is worth more than what we have gained in
the process.
The web and social media has created a level of transparency that never before existed
in our country. To begin with, the US is not a democracy. Instead, it is a republican state,
where the people are elected to take the difficult votes and make the most difficult decisions
for the civilians. In a way, the politicians should be given some amount of credit and
flexibility while casting their votes, without their each and every action being treated as a
referendum via Facebook and Twitter (McHale & Garulay, 2012).
Someone very truly said “The American Republic would endure till the day Congress
discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money”. In the present day and time,
the same is true about the issue of shutting up the naysayers on Facebook and Twitter. A lot
of politicians are nowadays not voting their actual conscience; instead they are casting their
votes in order to placate the blog commenter’s, which is not one of the best way to run the
Government.
The second thing is the domino effect when we talk about the transparency of the
system. In the policy making procedure, a lot many ideas are no given any importance just to
set the good apart from the bad, and also to create a position for compromise. The critics of
the system refer to as the “backroom deal-making in a smoke-filled room. But the harsh truth
is that this is exactly how the bills are passed these days (McHale & Garulay, 2012).
Thirdly, the social media has led to an environment where each setting and situation
or politician is supposed to be “on”. Thus, when the politicians are putting out some new
ideas, they can range from anywhere between electorally suicidal and politically untenable.
That is, when they are tweeted by rival politician or journalist, they act like a direct mail, a

7. TV ad or even an email attack fodder. The technology has now rapidly changed the political
system from being devoid of real and practical, controversial, and bold ideas and thoughts.
With the use of social media keeps growing every day, it almost necessitates everyone
to be actually involved in the political process for making sure its power is only being used
for harnessing everything that is good about politics, instead to hasten the political trends
which hurt the sentiments of the public (Jue et.al., 2010).
Overall, the big social media organizations like Facebook, Google, and Twitter would
turn into gatekeepers of dissent and debate. And while some of these online giants like
Facebook are willing to make concessions for accessing markets such as China, companies
like Google on the other hand brace and root for an era of confrontation (Gentle, 2012). As an
example, Google’s chairman Eric Schmidt said in a conference held at Dublin that he
suspected that the company’s tussle with the Government over Internet censorship would be
getting worse, saying that his personal challenge was threat of torture and arrest.
Previous issues with the social media
During the Egyptian revolution of Google, its executive Wael Ghonim, was arrested
and seized for being involved in helping to organize the protests (Benkler, 2006). Many
researchers also argue that if the Government was allowed to shut down the Internet and
other social network platforms, then there is bound to be a backlash which would have huge
social and economic risks. Thus, it is just better to allow people to have platforms for a free
flow of communication, even if it included dissent.
On 12th
June 2009, the White House made an announcement through the White House
Blog that it was joining hands with Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, Flickr and YouTube for
creating an unprecedented opportunity for connecting to the Government. People could now

8. obtain services and information for participating in policy making. This effort of converging
with the social media platforms is an effort to keep President Obama’s call to reform the
politics so that it is more creative, transparent and efficient. In the following September, The
Washington Times broke the news that the White House had started to collect and store
comments and videos posted on these social networking sites, thus getting a lot a criticism in
terms of privacy invasion (Jue et.al., 2010).
The defenders of this act by the Government say that the White House was doing
nothing wrong, in fact it was just complying with the Presidential Records Act, which
mandates the preservation of all the presidential records.
As an example, Bill Clinton can be termed as the most famous American presidents of
all time. However, had social media be up and running at his time, there was no way he could
have been elected (Li, & Bernoff, 2008). The huge amount of scandals hovering around him
at the time of the election in the year 1992, would have been the most talked about issues on
social media, instead of reaching the public as late as in 1993, after the election
. In addition, the example of Trayvin Martin made it absolutely clear social media
turns into a story much before the mainstream media takes any notice (Piskorski, 2014).
Another important advantage of social media in politics is that the candidates who make any
offensive comment about disability, tape, or insulted the veterans paid a heavy price in terms
of respect and popularity. The new trends of mud clinging to a political candidate more
quickly, and for a much longer would persist for a much longer time.
Conclusion
Social media is now being characterized as superficial and transient, by some
researchers. However, there are many sides of the social media, such small and tenuous

9. networks which rise up and relate about some specific topic or event. Such groups
communicate and pass information, keep the debate and issue alive for a long time, along
with reinforcing the beliefs. This aspect of social media overshadows all its ills as these
platforms becomes the perpetrator due its nature itself.
Casting all the negativities associated with such platforms apart, here are a few ways
in which social media is anticipated to change the style of political discourse and
campaigning in the future:
Using Google Plus-: The Google+ user base grew from 33% in June 2012 to 66% in
March 2013, thus making it into the second largest social network in the world. Google has
now also introduced Google Plus advertisements, which are its own versions of Vimeo and
YouTube content which would run on Google Display Network. These advertisements have a
look and feel of Google Plus posts but also appear outside the network, where Google would
allow the customers to comment, reshare or even join Hangout.
Twitter Shall Take the Lead-: Twitter has become a hub for voters to see real time
reactions, responses, and to instantly check statistics referred in debates. It demands
transparency on the part of candidates, knowing that their arguments can be verified instantly.
During November 2013, almost 1 out of 10 Americans relied on Twitter for information.
Thus, it could be easily summed up that Social Media has become an important part
of the present day civilization. It defines the trait of how complicated, integrated and
connected the social interactions in modern times have become. We can attribute the
achievement of the ingenuity of the people amongst us, who, in by creating the social media,
have participated in bringing about the most popular, defining and important changes
happening in the world today.

10. With social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook and Google+ people have become
aware and feel responsible towards the world they are living in. Social networking giants
such as Twitter, Facebook have had a large part to play in the creation of newer world where
the people have the freedom to express their opinion along with being able to share it with
peers and friends. The new world of social media provides scope to one and all for expressing
and sharing ideas; and feelings and thoughts.
Also, social media has now turned into a very significant source of news. While the
authenticity of some sources could be debate, news channel tweeting or giving updates on
significant happening in the world has become a very popular trend. The availability of news
channels on social networks makes information available for people anywhere, anytime. In
addition, the news rapidly gets spread around the network in ways that were never
experienced before.
Social media has also helped on furthering interaction by a huge massive scale that it
is very difficult to just ignore. It helps in keeping people in tough in a more regular and
intimate manner, more than it was ever before because of space and time constraints. Even
people who stay as far as different continents and cities can nowadays keep a tap on the
political happenings all around the world very effortlessly, from the comfort of their homes.
In addition, social media has allowed much greater political organization and
awareness, which also in some cases had absolutely re-written the entire political landscapes.
More specifically, it has played a huge part in President Obama’s reelection for the second
term. Thus, it can be easily concluded that the growth and expansion of social and digital
media has increased the opportunities for political activity and expression all across the
globe.

11. References
Benkler, Yochai (2006). The Wealth of Networks. New Haven: Yale University Press. ISBN
0-300-11056-1. OCLC 61881089.
Gentle, Anne (2012). Conversation and Community: The Social Web for Documentation
(2nd ed.). Laguna Hills, CA: XML Press. ISBN 978-1-937434-10-6. OCLC 794490599.
Johnson, Steven Berlin (2005). Everything Bad Is Good for You. New York: Riverhead
Books. ISBN 1-57322-307-7. OCLC 57514882.
Jue, Arthur L., Jackie Alcalde Marr, Mary Ellen Kassotakis (2010). Social media at work :
how networking tools propel organizational performance (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass. ISBN 978-0470405437.
Lardi, Kamales; Fuchs, Rainer (2013). Social Media Strategy – A step-by-step guide to
building your social business (1st ed.). Zurich: vdf. ISBN 978-3-7281-3557-5.
Li, Charlene; Bernoff, Josh (2008). Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social
Technologies. Boston: Harvard Business Press. ISBN 978-1-4221-2500-7. OCLC
423555651.
McHale, Robert; Garulay, Eric (2012). Navigating Social Media Legal Risks: Safeguarding
Your Business. Que. ISBN 978-0-789-74953-6.
Piskorski, Mikołaj Jan (2014). A Social Strategy: How We Profit from Social Media.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-15339-1.