The Romanticization of Controversy: Part 2
In my first post, I argued on the grounds that romanticization of divided media is rooted in corporate gain. This divide is grounded on the entertainment-based media we have adapted to love in American society; corporations thriving for every extra click they gain through big headlines. Everyday media has evolved into partisan battle grounds where illegitimate facts and one-sided opinions are readily available. The polarity of news channels has now inspired everyday people to generate their own personal conflicts, usually rooted in the argument of free speech. These newly-motivated users, with new technologies, are given loads of different platforms to voice their own opinion: some motivated by their own opinion while others seek popularity or financial gain. The argument here is whether society as a whole benefits from the romanticization of controversy present in our everyday lives.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/10/30/2020-election-gen-z-tiktok-influencers-mh-orig.cnn
Above, there is a linked video by CNN which I find very well encapsulates the opportunistic point of view that some have about linking social media and politics. Within the four minute video, CNN cites multiple videos consisting of mostly teens who utilize TikTok to express their political opinions. From matters like presidential approval, COVID-19, and current events, CNN expresses the new manner in which information and opinion is travelling. The “#republican” hashtag has over 3.7 billion views alone, ever increasing with time and popularity. Political advocates everywhere are turning to platforms like TikTok, Twitter, and YouTube to express their opinions; but is this a good thing?
It is one’s civic duty to participate in society, whether that be through advocacy for things they believe in to voting, and it can be argued that this new presence of media invites people of all ages to express themselves with the click of a button. Never in history has it been so easy to transmit information, never in history has humanity been offered this powerful of a tool for communication. To be given this opportunity to truly experience all points of view in a corporate system grounded in the argument of First Amendment rights, it would be stupid not to utilize it to its full extent, right?
Giving citizens platforms like TikTok, usually grounds for posting dance or comedy videos, users have the opportunity to do and say (to a certain extent) what they please. At the same time, however, corporations like TikTok make unforeseeable profit; TikTok literally exceeded their 2020 revenue by 142%, making $4.6 billion in 2021. You can imagine, with the increasing popularity of TikTok, it only got better for the corporation. Statistics last year show that TikTok made 9.4 billion dollars. Social media is spreading like wildfire, along with the intent to make profit, shared by both corporation and user.
A vast majority, approximately 34.9%, are users ages 18-24, are present on TikTok; citing the rise of people who can now vote. Is this trend of young people in media associable with likelihoods to vote? Statistics say: yes! As reported by Teen Vogue, over 50% of young voters, aged 18 to 34, asserted their intent to vote in the 2020 election. In fact, more people than ever voted back in 2020, with over 159 million votes cast in total. It had never reached these heights, with voter turnout percentages incomparable with the entire century prior. All these facts point to a clear idea, social media is provoking people, especially younger people, to get out there and vote.
If controversy is motivating people to follow their civic duties, is it so bad then to romanticize it in media? On one hand, it clearly gives immense benefit to corporations that divide society in hopes that controversy generates popularity for their platform. It thrives off a system which is eating away at our society: partisanship. Political stance has become more popular than ever, and Lincoln’s ideas about “a house divided” are starting to become more relevant every day. At the same time, it is giving people opportunity to express themselves in a new method almost similar to a public sphere, a somewhat closed environment that allows for dialogue and creates change. With the momentum of social media, I would argue that this new setting for debate does function in the same manner as a public sphere, a concept which is proven to have beneficial effects on society. Is the profit of corporations worth getting to experience true, broad-minded discussion in society?
Tiktok revenue and Usage Statistics (2023). Business of Apps. (2023, January 9). Retrieved February 28, 2023, from https://www.businessofapps.com/data/tik-tok-statistics/
Cable News Network. (2020, October 30). Meet the political pundits of Tiktok | CNN politics. CNN. Retrieved February 28, 2023, from https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/10/30/2020-election-gen-z-tiktok-influencers-mh-orig.cnn
Council on Foreign Relations. (n.d.). The 2020 election by the numbers. Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved February 28, 2023, from https://www.cfr.org/blog/2020-election-numbers
Layla,
I really like how you examined both sides of this controversy over the course of your blogs. Your last post focused more on the corruption and lack of democracy that has come with a polarized media space, but this one explored the positives of more citizen involvement in the political sphere, as a result of the media.
Before I read your second entry, I was totally against a polarized media space. However, now I’m beginning to see how it encourages people to get involved. Just from a personal point of view, I know I’ve been encouraged to look up current events and become more involved in politics from the things I see on the media (even if I only do research because I know what’s in the media is so biased, it can’t be true).
A study by Tufts University showed that engaging in political activism on social media is directly correlated with political activism in real life, like attending protests, petitioning, and voting for children under 18. That study suggests that if there are more people (especially young people) involved in online activism, there should be more people involved in political activism in real life. In that way, I think the polarized media space could be a major positive. More people, and more demographic groups in the political sphere can only help democracy by adding more opinions to the mix. The dramatization of stories in the media draws people in and encourages them to post their own opinions in response. Then,people are exposed to more political content and encouraged to become more active. Social media activists may be driven to post by/ in response to polarization, but does it really matter if they’re still getting involved and sharing their opinions?
The same study by Tufts University showed that social media platforms could be beneficial in encouraging people to vote by reaching people who other parties and platforms don’t traditionally focus on. Snapchat and Instagram encourage users to get to the polls, regardless of those users’ political views. That is a difference from traditional voting propaganda, rolled out by each respective party and targeting primarily that party’s “loyal” voters. I think social media, again, can help bring more people to the polls, regardless of the polarization involved. The media draws people in with its romanticized controversies, but it can actually be an encouraging factor for people to get involved politically, regardless of how they feel about certain issues.
However, there are still negative effects of people sharing their opinions in the media. Although people may be driven to vote by content they interact with, I think it is also important to think about the reasons they’re driven to become politically active. We don’t need voting or being extremely opinionated to become “trendy” due to the fact that political involvement is frequently in the media. It is important to ask if the people being brought to the polls truly have the interests of the country at heart, or if they are only interested in furthering their side of an argument. It makes me think of the deliberations we’ve had in class versus a more traditional debate. I think we want to encourage people who want to deliberate, not debate, into the political sphere. The polarized media, in my opinion, is better for attracting people with stronger opinions who want to debate, not necessarily the people “in the middle” of the political spectrum, who are more willing to have civil conversations and examine all sides of a possible issue.
Social media and the ability to share opinions and controversies online has many drawbacks, but, as you pointed out, controversy motivates people to become more active citizens and the internet makes it easier than ever to share opinions. Overall, there is a lot to think about with the polarized media, and I really don’t think we can definitively say if it is good or bad for political involvement. I really like how your blog looked at the positives and the negatives, considering the various ways the media can affect citizens’ daily lives.
https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/five-takeaways-social-media-and-youth-vote-2018
This was a really good reply! Not only did you comment on your thoughts on the original blog post, but you also took it further in terms of discussion. Polarized media is an interesting topic with multiple sides of each story. The commentary on the political aspects of polarized media was very engaging. Media and politics have always been difficult to navigate. Whether it is the amount of coverage each political side gets on television, the disclosure of what is biased and not, or something else, politics are and have always been a controversial topic to address in media. Social media, while biased due to algorithms, has proved to encourage others to vote and act on civic duties. However, with the spread of misinformation, it is hard to tell if this is an entirely good thing. Not only are people in ‘bubbles’ that show only things they agree with or interact with only to argue, but misinformation spreads faster than actual information on social media platforms. Meaning, that people could be voting on inaccurate information. While it is a good thing for people to vote, is it still good if people are voting on incorrect information? Polarized media has a lot of questions we as a society must begin to answer as it grows in popularity. I enjoyed the way both pros and cons were addressed in this comment. I really enjoyed your commentary on this blog post as well!
I’m glad I have helped to expand your view! I hope I appeared to remain neutral in opinion and simply just cited statistics and use rhetorical argument to display logic analyses. Your response was a great read, very well said. Thanks for all you positive feedback and opinion on the issue!
Great post, Layla! Your last Civic Issue Blog really intrigued me so I was definitely excited to read your second one. I really enjoy how you were able to discuss both negatives and positives to heightened controversy. I think, without a doubt, we realize that social media sites and news companies blast wild headlines to gain a buck, but the idea that it actually increases young voter turn-out is one I have never thought of. I think it’s a very insightful way to look at the rapidly increasing controversy. According to an article from Tisch College, voter turnout for ages 18-24 for the 2022 midterm election was the second highest in the last 30 years. The idea that more people are voting for presidential candidates is somewhat understandable, but it is impressive that young people are even voting during midterms. This proves that young people are becoming more involved in politics as a whole, not just during presidential election years. As you said in your post, I think this increased involvement is arguably a benefit of controversy and political presence on social media.
Moving to another one of your points about political candidates moving to social media. It’s odd to see political campaigners on my Tik Tok ‘For You Page’ but it is becoming much more common. I do believe that it’s another reason why younger people are becoming more involved though. Being seen on social media sites that are used primarily by young people will improve their chances of being remembered and understood by those potential voters. I think, in the end, it just helps reach a wider audience rather than getting involved in controversy. To touch on another one of your points, social media does allow information to be transmitted so quickly. I do believe that is a downside because lies can spread just as fast (or faster) than the truth. I think the ability to constantly view and post new information is one reason why controversy is spreading. Different people view different information, believe different things, and therefore argue about what is true. I do see this as a downside, but I don’t see anything stopping it unfortunately.
Overall, I think your post was very insightful and exciting to learn about. I think that it’s very important that young people are taking importance in their civic duties. I think that arguable benefit outweighs the obvious downsides of increased controversy. I don’t really see a way that anyone can fix the crazy headlines, false narratives, and heightened controversy.
https://circle.tufts.edu/2022-election-center#youth-turnout-second-highest-in-last-three-decades
The spread of misinformation is certainly disheartening, and it really makes finding a standpoint on unrestricted media. Thanks for all the positive feedback, and I’m glad it created some great talking points which you displayed! And I definitely find the amount of political TikToks quite strange as well, but I agree completely with your stance on such!
Hi Layla! First off, I loved how you incorporated the video! It is such a great touch to your post and I am inspired to try that for my next post! In addition to this, I think the way you repeated phrases to drill it into your readers minds was extremely smart and it prevented me from zoning out when I was reading your writing. For instance, you had a moment when you said “never in history” twice in the same sentence and that kept me engaged and interested in your writing! Also, the use of asking questions I think makes your readers more engaged with your content! I find it interesting how social media has affected voting. Platforms, like TikTok, have so many opinions thrown on the app all the time and young people are digesting it. They become more passionate about getting their voices heard and this leads to having so many people get involved with Democracy. Is it good, though, to have so many young people interested in voting when they most likely haven’t considered both sides of the argument? According to a Pews Research article, states that the Americans that use social media to get their news from, tend to be less engaged and knowledgeable. On top of this, something that was fascinating to me was that these young adults “who rely most on social media for news tend to be younger, are less likely to be white and have lower levels of education than those who mainly use several other platforms.” It’s unfortunate that depending on where you were raised, the education you got, and the color of your skin are all components that can affect how you access news. I would argue that it is the State Education System that is failing us and not so much TikTok. Social Media platforms are just amplifying the issue and not actually causing the main issue. The main issue is that across the nation the education is not equal. Communities with higher incomes give their children more educational opportunities, while communities with lower incomes have trouble funding for anything that is not a basic need. On top of this, how a family raises their kids to value education completely affects how the children use social media. These issues are only dramatized on social media, where anyone can get caught up on the nitty-gritty details of a topic. With that said, I think you did a great job for your second post and I enjoyed reading it a lot!
Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2020/07/30/americans-who-mainly-get-their-news-on-social-media-are-less-engaged-less-knowledgeable/
Hi Layla,
I really enjoyed how engaging your blog was to read, particularly with how thought-provoking the questions you asked were. The blog clearly set up both sides of the argument and left the reader to discern whether or not the pros of attracting children to be politically active outweigh the cons of benefitting corporations. I also appreciated the infographic that you inserted in the middle of the page; it was eye-catching and really corroborated what you were saying.
That being said, I really wanted to delve more into how this misinformation that was coming from these social media platforms was being spread. Media literacy and understanding misinformation has become an increasingly important topic to teach younger students as well as older generations (The New York Times). It is especially difficult to hear something that is very attention-grabbing and do my own research about it rather than discuss it with others. As you have mentioned, it is easy to click a button and add to the ever-expanding information space that TikTok has become; however, it is just as easy to click a button and share posts with friends and families. Not only does this contribute to the spread of misinformation but it further profits Tiktok, as they are able to keep promoting their app.
The Poynter Institute for Media Studies conducted a study and learned that half of the young adults who were spreading misinformation did so because they believed it to be true and a third did it because they were too busy to fact-check the information they were spreading (The New York Times). Furthermore, the Tiktok algorithm supports this partisanship, as they tend to push political information in whichever way the user leans. This means, on this social media platform, users are only really getting information that supports their own bias, whether it is factual or not, which contributes to misinformation.
Many organizations have had ongoing efforts to teach younger students to be more skeptical of the information that they see online (The New York Times). For example, Google has created a game called Interland, in which a robot is tasked with separating facts and misinformation (The New York Times). Teachers have also had to correct instances of wrong information in the classroom such as one that incorrectly claimed that the coronavirus vaccine caused infertility (The New York Times).
While this misinformation has become more widespread as a result of social media platforms, such as Tiktok, the awareness that these apps have raised cannot be discounted. On the other hand, it is really intriguing to see, as someone who uses Tiktok, what the direct consequences of misinformation can do and what steps have been taken to prevent it.
Overall, great post!
Source:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/08/technology/misinformation-students-media-literacy.html
This poses a great conversation about whether social media companies should have control over what exactly is posted, and is insightful in how restrictions in media can prevent misinformation. At the same time, people like you who are literate in media can insightfully avoid this misinformation, which makes it hard to take an exact stance on the matter. I really appreciate this comment and overall you made some really thoughtful points!
I enjoyed reading your blog! I also liked how it tied in with your former topic as if it were a continuation. While there is a portion of us all talking about the media, I find it interesting how we manage to come up with a variety of topics that all correlate to each other. Social media is not only becoming the face of journalism in our society but a place for discussion, which your blog talked about.
Civic duty requires participation in conversations to better the society we live in. Normally these conversations were through televised debates, newspapers, letters, in-person meetings, etc. However, the internet created a new realm of communication. As the internet and inventions advance, so does the level of communication that takes place online. The newest discussion is being found on social media platforms. Apps meant for entertainment and connection is beginning to shift into domains of public debate. However, there are multiple flaws in social media becoming the central platform for communication.
One of these issues is algorithms. Companies, to make the most money, use special algorithms tailored to control a person’s feed. These algorithms work against the idea of free and open speech because it shows people a bubble of the information contained in each app. The second issue is the money flow. The money from social media platforms goes to huge corporations. These corporations are then fueled by the income of money to continue dividing our society. Meaning our society is paying the people that work to separate us.
While there are drawbacks to social media becoming a source of national communication, there are also benefits. On social media platforms, it is easy to make change. People can easily influence and inspire others to help bring more positivity into the world. For example, the hashtag #stopwillow has become trending on Tiktok. This hashtag is referring to the bill that approves drilling in Alaska on the North Slope. People are going viral by raising awareness for the harm this project could do to the world. Without TikTok, many people would not even know of the Willow Project and many others would not be able to have their voices properly heard. Social media allows for communication and promotes civic duty, such as voting, even if there are drawbacks to it.
There are pros and cons to social media and its usage. I enjoyed how your blog mentioned a fair amount of both sides. I felt very informed after reading, but also curious to explore the information more. Good job!
Source: https://www.tiktok.com/tag/stopwillow
Hi Rayann!
I completely agree with how a large portion of the issue of misinformation is caused by the algorithm. However, this would be a difficult issue to fix. The reason people enjoy scrolling through Tiktok as much as they do is that the posts they see are representative of the information that they support. This does mean that they will not get well-rounded sources of information. This also ties into the money aspect, because people would not support the app as much if they were constantly seeing information that they do not support. Furthermore, people definitely have to learn to be more open-minded and positive in the information that they share. However, again, this may be even more difficult because positive information is never as interesting as controversy. I do fear that people have become so polarized from TikTok and social media that it will be difficult to make that reverse to positivity.
Great comment!
I love how you take both sides here; it puts you in the position of mediator which is a great place to be when speaking to an audience. TikTok is a strange platform: the algorithm and ability to connect videos without hashtags is more than concerning, but at the same time it really does connect people with common interests! Super insightful comment! Thanks for the feedback!