How Has Social Media Changed The Nature Of Presidential Campaigns?

It’s not an understatement to say that since its conception, social media has irreversibly changed the nature of presidential campaigns. The first instance of such strategy was demonstrated in 2008, with Obama and McCain both effectively utilizing platforms such as Twitter and Facebook to engage with a broader demographic, particularly the younger voters with the proclivity to use such platforms.
However, in the eight years leading up to 2016’s election, social media had contorted itself from such roots and grown into a prolific beast. Far more than just a greater audience, social media had gained a certain propensity for misinformation, propaganda, and targetted advertising.
In light of such developments and advancements in the digital space,

Utilizing Twitter, YouTube, FaceBook, and the now defunct MySpace, Obama was capable of engaging with and updating his supporters far more than any candidate had before.
Furthermore, he was able to utilize it for fundraising, organizing events, and engaging with younger voters, tactics that also followed into the 2016 election, the last of which being the most unique to social media. With younger voters already familiar with the platforms used, the 2008 campaigns were tapping into a far greater demographic than they would’ve been able to with the tools of previous generations.

Entering 2016, the digital space had evolved greatly since 2008. Social media had become far more integrated into society by then, with the user bases of Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube expanding greatly. The potential of social media, then, had grown exponentially since 2008, when it already could’ve been considered a

Certainly, to someone who’s used to the way social media can embellish and deceive, a less seasoned user would be less inclined to question information more likely to accept it at face value.

To examine how these tools can be used in action, we can look at one of the most egregious examples in recent history: the Insurrection.
We start at the lie, the idea that the election was stolen. With social media as a megaphone, this message was broadcasted to hundreds of thousands, from which followers would spread the message on their own.
Moreover, extremist ideologies were also being parroted and amplified at the time leading to echo chambers, reinforcing ideas of violence and “protest”.
From there, we reach coordination and organization. With social media as a medium, the logistics of the “Stop the Steal” rally were easily formed. In addition to the rally, targets and strategies were also discussed.
Ultimately, this escalated into the Insurrection itself, the impact of which was also amplified by social media, with livestreaming, photos, videos, etc. of the event all being a click away, causing the event to be considered nothing less than a terrorist