Internet and Global Governance research paper. Research Paper

Internet and Global Governance
Name
Institution
Due Date
Internet and Global Governance
Advancements in technology are fast changing the political landscape of the world. At the superficial level, technology is integral in revitalizing personal, professional, and political lives. This impact has advanced into the manner in which people view their world. Aspects such as interpersonal communication have currently changed to conform to particular ideologies. One then question whether technological advancements have overtaken agenda setting in global governance. Take for instance the advancements in social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram to mention a few. These platforms are defining people in terms of what they like, the people with whom they interact, and even their places of residence. All that information is embedded on one platform where people could use it to their like. In the context of communication in the media, the agenda is changing and the internet is the fuel. This research explores the growing role of social media platforms in shaping the political debate and popular opinion among the society through events like The Arab Spring, The Brexit referendum and the U.S. presidential election in 2016. Using the agenda-setting theory and the multiple case studies, it is evident that the political landscape and global governance are changing due to the influx of uncontrolled use of social media tools.
Background Information
The influence of the new media in the lives of private citizens keeps attracting more debates. That is because people are still divided on the positive and negative prospects associated with the consumption of information in the new media platforms (Seigler, 2017). The prevailing debate concerns some Americans who believe that social media sites have the capability to improve the quality of news bearing the fairgrounds that they instill in the prevalence of modern data. That argument is rooted in the traditional understanding that the mainstream media set the agenda. The mainstream media would skew information so that people could only consume what they (the media) wanted. That made it easy to influence some people to follow in specific aspects of the community. The use of agenda-setting in the traditional mainstream media had a considerable influence on political outcomes. Media outlets would use their information platforms to portray political candidates as good or bad. That made it easy for the media to choose political leaders for the citizens. With the evolution of social media, that prospect has changed considerably. Currently, more emphasis is embedded in how fast information can flow and how that information cannot be skewed to befit a specific agenda. That is what people thought initially. It turns out that things have changed considerably and Americans are becoming pessimistic about the viability of social media outlets to deliver objective news without setting the agenda to befit a specific individual or group.
The consumption of news on social media platforms keeps increasing. In the US, 62% of adults believe that they actively rely more on social media tools for news than any other platform. The number of people who access and use social media sources also keeps increasing. Currently, Facebook is the platform that most Americans explore for news. About 52% of adult Americans resort to Facebook to access news (Seigler, 2017). The other popular news platform for Americans is YouTube that accounts for 28% of the population, Twitter at 17% and Instagram at 14%. There are also other smaller outlets such as Snapchat, Reddit, and LinkedIn that are fast gaining popularity in as far as dissemination of news is concerned. With these increasing numbers showing a presence on social media, one cannot believe that social media plays a feeble role in the socio-political and economic agenda of society. The impacts have been implied in the 2016 US presidential elections, the Arab springs, and the Cambridge Analytic leakages. One is poised to question the use of big data in the world. With social media becoming the primary source of big data, it is superficially agreeable that cunning individuals would employ the opportunity to skew the public opinion to their favor. Questions are still asked if that is really possible and if anything could be done to revitalize the trends. Unfortunately, the communication landscape is changing fast and people are only obliged to conform to the new trends. Exploring the role of social media on the global political agenda or governance is an avenue into understanding how the new streams of information are employed in changing the political landscape. Probably, people all over the world do not even have the ability to choose their leaders objectively anymore.
Hypothesis
This paper hypothesizes that the Internet through its social media platforms is changing the space of global governance by being the primary tool of agenda-setting in modern times. The popularity of social media keeps escalating. More people are resorting to platforms such as LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram to access various pieces of information. If such trends continue, it will be impossible to tame the advancements that the internet takes in influencing people’s opinions. In the long-term, the influences extend to setting the political agenda. It is believable that the internet influences global governance even though most stakeholders in the political arena would prefer to ignore that topic bearing the benefits they gain by influencing the people to their ideologies.
Literature Review
Theoretical Framework
The agenda-setting theory has been employed in the media space to determine what could be more relevant to the people. Developed in 1972, the theory has been used in the mainstream media majorly to influence the information that people consume. In the context of agenda-setting, one is asked what is important to him/her. A further analysis extends into determining whether what one considers as important is really important or the individual is having influence from some unforeseen sources. The agenda-setting theory opines that the media directs how people think and even what they think. Using that tool, it becomes easy to influence the manner public opinion is formed. While developing the theory, the correspondents believed that the manner in which people perceive various political prospects depends squarely on how much they are influenced. The theorists employed the 1968 American elections in which they noted just how much time the media spent on popularizing a candidate who would end up winning the elections even though he was not the best candidate. In the shape of agenda-setting, the media shapes reality instead of reflecting it. Also, agenda-setting theorists believe that whenever the media puts focus on only a few unimportant issues, the public grows to perceive those issues as important. In the long-term, people end up not thinking independently. What people see as reality could not be the reality and what they value most maybe the thing they need not value at all.
Technology has found a way of influencing the agenda. At the onset of the agenda-setting theory, the focus was on radio and print media. People resorted to the media outlets with little direct interactions to set the agenda. The advancements in technology, however, changed the paradigms. There are unlimited sources of information and entertainment currently. The print media and radio are complimented with television, film, and various social media outlets. In the US, the impacts of social media in setting the agenda was evident in 2011. The Occupy Wall Street Movement was formed in July 2011 with the motivation to create socio-economic and political equity in the US. The movement used Facebook and Twitter to mark their presence. The target was that they would be having 20,000 followers by September of that year. This movement was ignored by the mainstream media and it did not gain any popularity until late September 2011 when a video emerged on YouTube of a member of the group being pepper-sprayed by a New York police officer. The ensuing popularity that the outlet gained instilled questions on whether agenda setting is finding its way into the social media platforms. The New York case is just one among the many cases implying that the trends of agenda-setting are fast delving into the social media realm.
There are multiple reasons why social media outlets would easily fuel agenda setting. Principally, these platforms are popular. People are fast adopting Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram in their lives. The popularity marked by these platforms means that only a few traditional outlets could reach the number of viewers that they attract. Another important aspect of the new media that could ease their ability to skew information is entertainment and the illusionary control that they accord their followers. Social media allows people to choose what they really want to consume in terms of the news or even the people with whom one would like to interact. This is different from the traditional media platforms in which the outlets controlled all the information. Whenever people feel like they can control whatever they consume, autonomy makes it easy for such people to explore more. Ultimately, social media platforms do not have the geographic barriers that limited information in the traditional mainstream media. Using social media tools, individuals can send information far beyond their countries. Often, most people around the globe can consume a video posted on YouTube or Facebook. With such capabilities, social media tools have the potential to set the agenda even better than traditional media outlets. The question remains on whether the owners of social media tools and other big data outlets have exploited the new capabilities. In the answer to that question is yes, then the next question is on how they do it and what political impacts the new social media outlets could instill in society.
Trends in the New Media Usage
Multiple studies have been conducted in the recent past to explore the changing space of information flow with the influx of social media platforms. In a study conducted by Pew Research Center’s American Panel (PRC), so much could be unearthed about social media and the influence that it has on the prevailing news trends. The PRC study was conducted on July 21, 2019, and accommodated 5,107 American adults spread throughout the country (Shearer & Grieco, (2019). The majority of the participants (62%) indicated that social media outlets seem to have too much power and control over the news that travels through their platforms. With social media becoming a primary diet of news among an increasing amount of Americans, if it is proven that the outlets control the amount of news displayed on their platforms, it can be dangerous for the changing trends in news consumption. Only 21% of the participants believe that social media outlets have the right amount of control on their sites (Shearer & Grieco, (2019). At the same time, 15% of Americans believe that social media outlets do not have enough control of the news spread on their platforms. This last category of individuals believes that the information trending on social media platforms is highly encrypted and people control the amount of information that they access. The debates on the issue are poised to continue deep into the future.
The Americans’ perceptions of the problems when it comes to news development and consumption continue into deeper prospects. News rank prioritization is a common concept in social media news management that could instill challenges on people’s perceptions. 88% of the participants in PRC believe that social media outlets have ways of skewing data to befit particular demographic segments. That is, big social media outlets such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter employ computer algorithms to rank and prioritize information to each of their users. In that sense, users have no control over the information that they read online. Instead, the websites skew their thinking and influence them into reading some information. In the recent past, social media platforms have been offered the autonomy to control the news on their feeds. More Americans still feel uncertain about why some types of information and news appear more on their timelines than others. That happens often on Facebook. An individual with 1000 friends on Facebook, to a big extent, is only able to see 40% of the information posted by his/her friends (Shearer & Grieco, (2019). The other posts are not available on the feeds thereby triggering the worry about who controls the news feeds on Facebook. In an attempt to revitalize things for the best, Facebook also introduced a fight against fake accounts and false information. Much of that fight is embedded in the reports that they receive from their irritated users. In the PRC study, it was indicated that the efforts instilled by social media platforms to make the news on their sites better only worsen the experience of Americans on those sites. A majority of 55% of the participants indicated that the changes that the media outlets have instilled in an attempt to tame fake accounts, fake news, and newsfeed management are only irritating. The results also culminate in a worse mix of news. Only 15% believe that the changes instill some positive impacts. 28% of the participants believed that the changes do not make any real difference in the manner in which information is shared on social media platforms (Shearer & Grieco, (2019). Using these results, probably no amount of changes on the social media tools will trigger any positive changes concerning information shared on social media platforms.
The major political formations in the US have also had their inputs included on the amount of influence that social media outlets have on the prevailing trends of information flow. Republicans tend to be more negative about the information on social media platforms than their democratic counterparts (Anderson, Toor, & Raine, 2018). Three-quarters of Republicans believe that social media outlets have too much control over information consumed on their platforms while half of Democrats and their independent leaners believe that information shared on social media platforms is skewed by the parent companies. In analyzing the impacts of the recently introduced changes, 66% of the Republicans who participated in the study believe that the new changes only worsen the already terrible situation while 49% of the Democrats also do not believe in any positive impacts of the newly introduced changes (Shearer & Grieco, (2019). The influx of skeptics even in the political showcases how the changes that the media has on the people could bear different perceptions. One is then obliged to question whether there are any positive changes that could correct the manner in which information is utilized and shared on social media platforms. Even more challenging is on how much energy will be invested in accommodating skewed news platforms in the society.
The other aspect of the debate on the influence that social media has on the consumption of information is about favor to particular news organizations. There is a strong belief that social media platforms favor particular news outlets over others when it comes to delivering information. 82% of the people participating in the PRC study indicated that some news outlets or individuals are favored on social media than others. Only 16% of the participants indicated that social media tools treat all its users equally (Shearer & Grieco, (2019). Different social media outlets have established subjective policies aimed at addressing the flow of information on their platforms. One strategy that they employ to favor others is using their monetization policies to discourage some individuals from publishing on their sites or simply discouraging some behaviors. Hence, people or publishers who post pieces of information that social media sites believe to oppose their agenda are easily eliminated from the platforms. The other strategies include banning or limiting some publishers and prioritizing certain news sources. Among the individuals who agree that social media sites favor specific publishers, there is an agreement that they favor three types. The majority 88% of the participants indicated that those publishers with attention-grabbing publications are accorded more viewership than others (Anderson, Toor, & Raine, 2018). Another 84% of individuals indicated that publishers with high numbers of social media followers are accorded more publicity than those without many followers. Ultimately, 79% of the cases of favor are adduced to political stands (Shearer & Grieco, (2019). Those publishers with some specific stance on some political issues are accorded more publicity on social media outlets than others. Bearing that information, one understands how easy it can be for the social media outlets to set the political agenda. These sites have the information, the people, and the control to skew who consumes what information on their platforms. The new trends of political agenda-setting through social media sites could be worse than traditional techniques (Anderson, Toor, & Raine, 2018). The current debate on favoring specific publishers extends to what has been done to rectify the situation. The sites believe that they have to take control and ensure that users are only subjected to high-quality publishers. The PRC research indicates that most people do not believe in the efforts with a majority 56% still believing that well-established media outlets will be favored over the upcoming ones. Also, politically neutral coverage and high reporting standards seem to play little roles still on the choices of publishers that social media outlets favor.
There is an increasing concern about the quality of news spread on social media outlets. The escalating debates on censorship and efforts to monitor information shared on social media sites have not tamed the concerns about the increasingly low-quality news being shared on such platforms. Of the 7 areas of concern emphasized in the study, 53% of the concern goes too one-sided news (Shearer & Grieco, (2019). Americans believe that the news shared on social media platforms is mostly one-sided. Various individuals or political formations are allowed the opportunity to enjoy themselves being portrayed positively than others in such platforms. At the same time, 51% of the concerns go to inaccurate news. People have found social media platforms as soft spots for fake news (Anderson, Toor, & Raine, 2018). Americans are fast becoming concerned that in the near future, it will be impossible to dissociate accurate from fake news. Censorship of the news or the fact that some influential personalities are being banned from the platforms is not of bigger concern to most Americans. The other area of concern in new media platforms is the changing tone of political debate. Bearing the interactive nature of various outlets, people can easily share information on these tools. The challenge is that the discussions trigger political tensions more than they create environments for constructive political debates (Shearer & Grieco, (2019). 35% of adult Americans believe that uncivil discussions on social media are a big problem while 27% understand that the emerging trends in which journalists and other influential personalities being harassed online could pose the biggest political challenge in the future.
Political formations manifest notable disagreements on the issues that come as the biggest problems with the increasing influence of social media. Censorship is one of the issues that mark the differences in political ideologies. On social media, 43% of the Republicans view censorship as a big issue. Only 30% of democrats believe that censorship is the biggest issue on social media content consumption (Anderson, Toor, & Raine, 2018). Notably, 36% of the Democrats believe that harassment of journalists is a big problem while only 17% of the Republicans consider harassment of journalists as a big issue. Some areas of agreements among the two major political formations are one-sided news and fake news being the leading problems in the American political arena following the increased influence of social media. The news media consumed on social media also tend to lean on the left ideologically. Almost half (48%) of the American adults who consume news from social media platforms believe that the information that they consume is either liberal or extremely liberal. Only 14% of the individuals believe that the news that they meet on social media platforms are conservative or very conservative. The rest 36% believe that social media tools deliver news with moderate political inclinations. On the political formations, Republicans (67%) are highly likely to meet liberal news than the Democrats (37%) (Anderson, Toor, & Raine, 2018). It translates to the ability by social media outlets to skew information and determine what users consume.
Social Media and Politics
One can tell that there is a strong interaction between politics and social media trends going by the trends analysis above. Politics and global governance are some of the most important prospects for humanity currently. People rely on politicians to develop policies that affect individual lives. No matter how conservative an individual would want to be, it is impossible to believe that their lives are not politically influenced in one way or the other (Burke & Şen, 2018). The political landscape has changed considerably in the past few decades. The evolution of the internet is attributed to be a primary factor in the changes that the world has experienced in governance and politics by extension. Analysts agree that currently, social media is having a massive say in governance. People can point leaders whose suc...