How media affects elections 2016 U.S. presidential campaign as OBAMA 2008 "Were it not for the Internet, Barack Obama would not be president. Were it not for the Internet, Barack Obama would not have been the nominee," Arianna Huffington, editor in chief of the Huffington Post1. - Took advantage of YouTube for free advertising, more effective that television ads because viewers chose to watch them or received them from a friend instead of having their television shows interrupted. - Obamas campaign material was watched for 14.5 million hours. 2 https: ttttbits.blogs.nytimes.comtt2008tt11tt07tthow-obamas-internet-campaign-changed- politicstt - Clinton was seen as an obvious front runner in becoming the party nominee with her experience and big name, Obama was only senator of Illinois but his use of media helped him to gain this popularity' TRUMP V CLINTON CAMPAIGN source 3 Distribution of expenditures of Donald Trump's 2016 U.S. presidential campaign as of August, 2016 (in million U.S. dollars) DOWNLOUD - https: ttttwww.statista.comtttopicstt3723ttsocial-media-and-politics-in-the-united-statestt Controversies: - Electorates bad side is reflected by social media - Social media can spread propaganda and misinformation (fake news) about political candidates. · Media bias can be hard to determine and observe underneath the scripted presentation and glossy appearance of a news program. Journalists may seem like unbiased observers, but they are often told what and when to report on a certain topic. An example of one news organization that has been 1 2 3
routinely accused of bias is Fox News. The media as a whole has shifted towards a model of analysis and opinion, rather than straight news, which can now be found easily with an internet search. Hypothetically, if the owner of a media organization has financial interests in a particular company or business, there will more than likely be no negative coverage of that company at all. . In another study from Harvard University, the mainstream media coverage of President Trump's first 100 days was examined. Fox News had significantly more positive coverage than negative coverage (52% negative coverage compared to 80% negative coverage by other networks). This kind of bias has the power to influence political beliefs and even more importantly, the power to change people's minds when they enter the voting booth4. In other academic studies of the media, Fox News viewers have been found to believe outright lies such as the fact Saddam Hussein was involved with 9/11. One can also link President Trump's incredibly low approval rating to the constant negative media coverage from other networks besides Fox. https: ttttwww.worldatlas.comttarticlestthow-does-the-media-influence-the-outcome-of-an- election.html 4