More politicians today are using social media and technology to communicate with potential voters. Facebook and NBC announced that they will be co-hosting the Republican candidate debate before the presidential primary in New Hampshire next year. Obama held a twitter town hall a couple weeks ago and talked to viewers on facebook live with the founder Mark Zuckerberg in April. These tools provide immediate and increased interactions with voters, for better or worse. The 'Weinergate Effect' led to a 27 percent decrease in tweets by Republicans while posts from Democrats fell 29 percent. A report analyzing the scandal states "part of the danger of using social media is that a thoughtless comment can go viral and spread around the world within a matter of minutes." Thus, Tuesday’s discussion over the growing use of social media to engage Americans in the political process demonstrated the potential benefits as well as the dangers it may have on formulating the reputations and careers of our future elected officials.
Generation z (the first generation born into society that has never been without the internet) proves that social media is an essential mode of communication for politicians to grow close to their constituents. Cynics might point out that increased visibility of politician and voter interaction may not translate into power of the people through political or civic action. However, one high-profile example, NY State Senator Joseph P. Addabbo Jr. reportedly changed his opinion and supported same-sex marriage legislation because of the sheer number of people who contacted him to vote for the bill. Many of those people were encouraged by a convenient tool on gay-advocacy websites that connected users after they typed in their address and phone number to receive a call from the Senator's office. By giving more options for people to have their voices heard, these type of relatively simple technological tools have proven effective in getting past the inertia that prevents them from engaging in the political process. With the differing needs and viewpoints of people from various backgrounds, technology and social media can help mobilize people to work together. The power of facebook groups and twitter conversations to organize people to act toward a common goal can be seen in plenty of examples this year from all over the world, particularly in Egypt and part of the Middle East.
It's undeniable that technological tools continue to help break down the barriers of political participation. But in order to gain and improve voter turnout for this segment of the population, politicians are stuck with a dilemma: how much attention and effort should be expended to win over the attention of twitter followers and facebook friends? These sites are a symbolic order that allow politicians to transgress between spoken and written language, political life and personal life. Weiner, like other politicians and celebrities, found liberation from traditional cultural restraints in social networking. When Anthony Weiner first got involved with Twitter in 2009, he started without telling his “minders” who might monitor his message. New media also helps shape how politicians want to be seen by the public. On twitter, “conversations” among users are staged for a broader audience. In the past, Weiner used twitter to shout out to fellow twitterer Congresswoman Meghan McCain over mutual support of gay marriage. Like an idol obliging fans with signed photos, a politician follows back some of their diehard fans and manages to create an online persona using the same trick.
As the explosion of social networking sites like google+, facebook and twitter takes place, politicians experience an increased risk of having inappropriate messages and pictures being leaked out to the public that could ruin their careers and relationships. In the case of Rep. Weiner, he was exercising his right to free expression under the guarantee of privacy that should not have been of concern to anyone outside of the immediate situation. The twitter scandal had nothing to do with his policy-making decisions and abilities, but the incessant news reports and jokes ultimately led to his resignation. Like Bill Clinton, Anthony Weiner had his private life invaded. In both cases, persecution was justified because they had lied. They did not lie to cover up a crime, but to cover up embarrassment. Although polls suggested Weiner’s constituents still supported him, he was banished by his party, Nancy Pelosi, and the President on the practical grounds of being a distraction from work that need to be done in Congress. As one student during class pointed out, the effect of a written confession verses a picture is drastically different. A viral photo posted on facebook of a presidential candidate doing drugs would definitely jeopardize his or her chances of winning, especially with the tendency of Americans to judge politicians based on their morals and lifestyle.
So where do we draw the line in social media political speech and ethics? Is Rep. Weiner's behavior merely inappropriate, unethical or is it protected by the First Amendment? As Congress makes internet privacy and regulation a legislative priority, legal and political discussion of how social media and the freedom of expression collide must be addressed in the future.
Once a promising candidate for mayor of New York City, Mr. Weiner showed himself an adept politician in his policy-making, but was insecure, needed constant affirmation of his importance, and (as seen in his twitter blunder) recurrently occupied our headlines for all the wrong reasons. In his apology speech, Weiner urged the media not to blame twitter for his personal and sexual habits. We definitely shouldn’t. Weiner made a common, somewhat trivial mistake of broadcasting an intimate self-portrait to the twitter world. Like other men in their forties, politicians like ex-Congressman Weiner “lie in the sweet spot that makes them unusually prone to this sort of Social Media gaffe: too young not be fully engaged in this hyper-fast, hyper-linked world, but too old to be fully, intuitively understand its hazard.” Even the CEO of twitter admits that the microblogging company currently lacks a “clear long term vision” If we don’t know what twitter is even used for, we can’t know who puts it to the best purpose. To those who are in it, twitter is spellbinding, while others see it as a huge waste of time.
It's been around a month (or a life time in the age of twitter) since Weiner resigned and we can now put the event into perspective. There’s nothing intrinsically immoral about social media sites. But the role of federal government regulation in social media ethics must be defined. We live in a world where there is precious little privacy. Everyone from Sony to Citibank and even the CIA has been hacked. Every click of the keyboard on the internet and google search has been used to commoditize users’ information for someone else to sell or steal. It's time for government and lawmakers to keep up with the Internet Age. Considering its impact to change and organize the masses, social media sites shouldn’t be given up, but politicians who use twitter, need to improve their skills and understand how to use it to connect to their followers.
Generation z (the first generation born into society that has never been without the internet) proves that social media is an essential mode of communication for politicians to grow close to their constituents. Cynics might point out that increased visibility of politician and voter interaction may not translate into power of the people through political or civic action. However, one high-profile example, NY State Senator Joseph P. Addabbo Jr. reportedly changed his opinion and supported same-sex marriage legislation because of the sheer number of people who contacted him to vote for the bill. Many of those people were encouraged by a convenient tool on gay-advocacy websites that connected users after they typed in their address and phone number to receive a call from the Senator's office. By giving more options for people to have their voices heard, these type of relatively simple technological tools have proven effective in getting past the inertia that prevents them from engaging in the political process. With the differing needs and viewpoints of people from various backgrounds, technology and social media can help mobilize people to work together. The power of facebook groups and twitter conversations to organize people to act toward a common goal can be seen in plenty of examples this year from all over the world, particularly in Egypt and part of the Middle East.
It's undeniable that technological tools continue to help break down the barriers of political participation. But in order to gain and improve voter turnout for this segment of the population, politicians are stuck with a dilemma: how much attention and effort should be expended to win over the attention of twitter followers and facebook friends? These sites are a symbolic order that allow politicians to transgress between spoken and written language, political life and personal life. Weiner, like other politicians and celebrities, found liberation from traditional cultural restraints in social networking. When Anthony Weiner first got involved with Twitter in 2009, he started without telling his “minders” who might monitor his message. New media also helps shape how politicians want to be seen by the public. On twitter, “conversations” among users are staged for a broader audience. In the past, Weiner used twitter to shout out to fellow twitterer Congresswoman Meghan McCain over mutual support of gay marriage. Like an idol obliging fans with signed photos, a politician follows back some of their diehard fans and manages to create an online persona using the same trick.
As the explosion of social networking sites like google+, facebook and twitter takes place, politicians experience an increased risk of having inappropriate messages and pictures being leaked out to the public that could ruin their careers and relationships. In the case of Rep. Weiner, he was exercising his right to free expression under the guarantee of privacy that should not have been of concern to anyone outside of the immediate situation. The twitter scandal had nothing to do with his policy-making decisions and abilities, but the incessant news reports and jokes ultimately led to his resignation. Like Bill Clinton, Anthony Weiner had his private life invaded. In both cases, persecution was justified because they had lied. They did not lie to cover up a crime, but to cover up embarrassment. Although polls suggested Weiner’s constituents still supported him, he was banished by his party, Nancy Pelosi, and the President on the practical grounds of being a distraction from work that need to be done in Congress. As one student during class pointed out, the effect of a written confession verses a picture is drastically different. A viral photo posted on facebook of a presidential candidate doing drugs would definitely jeopardize his or her chances of winning, especially with the tendency of Americans to judge politicians based on their morals and lifestyle.
So where do we draw the line in social media political speech and ethics? Is Rep. Weiner's behavior merely inappropriate, unethical or is it protected by the First Amendment? As Congress makes internet privacy and regulation a legislative priority, legal and political discussion of how social media and the freedom of expression collide must be addressed in the future.
Once a promising candidate for mayor of New York City, Mr. Weiner showed himself an adept politician in his policy-making, but was insecure, needed constant affirmation of his importance, and (as seen in his twitter blunder) recurrently occupied our headlines for all the wrong reasons. In his apology speech, Weiner urged the media not to blame twitter for his personal and sexual habits. We definitely shouldn’t. Weiner made a common, somewhat trivial mistake of broadcasting an intimate self-portrait to the twitter world. Like other men in their forties, politicians like ex-Congressman Weiner “lie in the sweet spot that makes them unusually prone to this sort of Social Media gaffe: too young not be fully engaged in this hyper-fast, hyper-linked world, but too old to be fully, intuitively understand its hazard.” Even the CEO of twitter admits that the microblogging company currently lacks a “clear long term vision” If we don’t know what twitter is even used for, we can’t know who puts it to the best purpose. To those who are in it, twitter is spellbinding, while others see it as a huge waste of time.
It's been around a month (or a life time in the age of twitter) since Weiner resigned and we can now put the event into perspective. There’s nothing intrinsically immoral about social media sites. But the role of federal government regulation in social media ethics must be defined. We live in a world where there is precious little privacy. Everyone from Sony to Citibank and even the CIA has been hacked. Every click of the keyboard on the internet and google search has been used to commoditize users’ information for someone else to sell or steal. It's time for government and lawmakers to keep up with the Internet Age. Considering its impact to change and organize the masses, social media sites shouldn’t be given up, but politicians who use twitter, need to improve their skills and understand how to use it to connect to their followers.
No comments:
Post a Comment