APPLIED PROJECT

1

Online Political Disinformation Campaigns and Voting Patterns During General Elections

ISS 501

Literature Review

December 31, 2020

The growth in online technologies like social media networking platforms and sites completely transforms the manner in which citizens express opinions and share information with one another. Some of the most popular, widely accessible, and utilized social media outlets include, Twitter and Facebook. A driving force behind the rapid growth and use of these groundbreaking technologies is that citizens from diverse regions of the world are signing up, creating profiles, and using social media sites to formulate and sustain valuable networks to share events, viewpoints, and perspective. As a result, social media is now a powerful mechanism for developing, sharing, and reinforcing and spreading political ideologies and preferences. Of course, there are other influences, which shape the ability of citizens in various countries to post and share political information, stories, ideas, and opinions. For example, government structures and political systems often impact access and rights to use these platforms to discuss and debate politics, candidates, policies, and news.

Citizens in modern democracies like the United States frequently exercise their constitutional rights and liberties to collect and share information via social media networks. These activities are generally protected under the freedom of speech. However, in certain countries and regions in the international system, state actors limit access to certain forms of expression and information on mediums like social medium networks. Regardless of the composition and rules within government structures and the makeup of civil society, one commonality within the political realm on social media networking sites is the rapid development and growth of political disinformation campaigns being created and shared worldwide. The proposed research study and literature review focuses on current, existing research on the formation, rise, and consumption of political disinformation campaigns during presidential elections. Much of the focus within the framework of current research is on presidential elections. However, one of the interesting trends emerging in recent years is the fact that authoritarian governments and actors are now relying on political disinformation campaigns within their respective countries and cultures to capture and retain massive amounts of government power and prevent dissent and political competition. For the scope of this potential research study, the emphasis of this literature review is existing research surrounding the presence and influence of political disinformation campaigns on social media during presidential campaigns, and the potential effects on voting patterns and preferences for specific candidates.

Today state actors, candidates vying for government office, and citizens as a whole each pay attention to fake news stories and political disinformation campaigns on social media networking sites. The reason that such tactics and strategies used to impact elections are important is because voters actually pay attention to misleading information, and use such stories to shape their views on political issues, candidates, and incumbent office holders. Because of the shocking results of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election, candidates, campaign officials, and state actors realize the power and reach of political disinformation campaigns. However, the presence and growth of political disinformation campaigns and content is concerning because it tends to undermine the quality and legitimacy of elections. There are barriers to trying to counter and offset the development and influence of political disinformation campaigns, especially in modern, free democracies like the U.S.,. which protect constitutional rights like the freedom of speech. Because of this, it is very likely that American voters continue to consume fake news stories, which political disinformation campaigns rely on to reach citizens. It is vital to get an accurate assessment of how these stories influence voting patterns and tendencies during presidential elections.

Literature Review

A primary barrier in trying to determine the impact and role of political disinformation campaigns during general elections is the fact that some of the most innovative, revolutionary technologies thrive on open sharing and access to information. As a result, trying to identify and fact-check stories and information presented on social media networking sites is an endless task. Tools and technologies including, social media networking sites and the Internet are designed to allow and encourage the free flow of ideas, information, and events between the users, The idea is that such expressions and activities boost and promote free thinking, well-rounded ideas, and diverse opinions, which are vital for advancing new technologies and creations. Such processes and patterns support the enhancement, expansion, and evolution of new and emerging technologies (Tiara, 2017). There is an expectation that technologies are used for positive and peaceful purposes and interests, yet this is not always the case.

Such optimistic views of technological use and development are founded on idealistic pillars and ideas. The problem is that the key assumption is that Internet and social media users utilize such resources and outlets by operating in good faith. However, this is hardly ever the case because online outlets are now avenues and accessible channels and environments for hate groups and political disinformation to emerge and spread. Hate speech, political rumors, and fake news events are each associated with coordinated political disinformation efforts aimed to deceive and influence. However, because of the sensitivities associated with the protection of free speech, leadership in free democratic countries like the U.S. are often reluctant to address the issue through public policy (Tiara, 2017). Governments in open democracies generally avoid trying to restrict different forms of speech on social media outlets. Essentially, it is up to private social media firms like Facebook and Twitter to monitor and restrict their own content. Private social media firms do not currently operate with the level of transparency and openness required to facilitate plans to combat the creation and spread of harmful fake news stories on social media (Bradshaw and Howard, 2018). In democratic countries, the government does not necessarily carry the power to limit or censor information within private businesses and organizations, unless a constitutional question arises, which is brought to the Supreme Court by users associated with the business, or business actors. If requested, the government can play a role in sharing information and potential strategies for ensuring that information and stories shared on social media are accurate and real.

One of the pitfalls of addressing the spread of political disinformation campaigns on social media networks is that political parties and government institutions now realize their power. As a result, many government actors in both democratic and authoritarian political institutions build and use fake news and political disinformation campaigns to pursue political interests, agendas, and goals. Many political actors in the global system are increasing their spending and accessing key resources to create misleading, inaccurate content, to guide public attention and shape perspective on domestic and foreign communities and issues on social media (Bradshaw & Howard, 2018). Political disinformation comes in many different types, but a common approach appears to be the cyber troop method. This refers to state-sponsored entities and organizations, which execute intentional disinformation campaigns in the Internet, particularly through popular social media networking platforms. These troops emphasize the development and dissemination of misleading, false, or fabricated content via using analytics, automation, and algorithms to impact and trick social media users (Bradshaw & Howard, 2018). These troops are actually funded by certain state actors, and coordinate activities closely with higher powers. These sophisticated methods are extremely common in authoritarian regimes in which citizen rights and access to information is limited.

In recent years the consumption and sharing of political disinformation among state actors is also common within free democracies like the U.S. American society is frequently subjected to the sharing and support of common fake news stories and political disinformation campaigns by the most powerful actors including, President Trump. This is especially common during the 2020 election in which the President, and many prominent members of the Republican Party frequently shared and repeated common political disinformation messages and stories regarding election fraud, interference, and rigging of voting machines. Democracies do not typically create, use, and spread political disinformation with the use of cyber troops, but rather political parties.

One recent study referred to as the Computational Propaganda Project 2017 explores the use of state sponsored social manipulation, and ties between organizational behavior and the political economy of cyber troops in 28 different countries. These countries are diverse in terms of regime type and political leadership. The findings show that authoritarian regimes are much more likely to rely on cyber troops to develop, coordinate, and utilize complex political disinformation campaigns. However, the 12 democratic countries also rely on political disinformation campaigns, but in different ways. In countries like the U.S., actors rely on the work and power of political parties to spread fake news and misleading content to shape and guide opinion and voting behavior (Bradshaw & Howard, 2018). There is a misconception in the global system that political disinformation campaigns are only used in certain kinds of political regimes and civil societies, which is simply not the case. The primary difference between the campaigns in each of these types of states and government structures is in the tools and organization. The level of formal organization of disinformation is extremely high in authoritarian regimes, and appears to carry a medium level of coordination in strong democracies.

One recent study on the development, coordination, and spread of political disinformation to sway public opinion and voting patterns looks at the strategies employed by government in South Korea. The authors identify the use of the country’s information system in developing and presenting misleading information, and fake news during a recent election cycle. They specifically refer to the term political astroturfing to explain the process of using false or fake human profiles and social networks to create and share ideas and fake news stories regarding political competition and public policies to impact perspective, voter engagement, and votes. The goal is to be able to use these fake profiles to create and spread fake news and misleading stories during election cycles as a means of influencing elections. The most popular social media networking platform for these activities in South Korea is Twitter (Keller et al., 2020). The study indicates that members if the NIS (state information system) use fake profiles as a means of representing average citizens nationwide to share inaccurate stories and fake news stories in an effort to shift public opinion on policy issues. Although these efforts are tightly coordinated and monitored by state actors, the effects on voter activity and perspective is not significant in this specific study. The researchers conclude that the fake social media profiles wielded little influence in igniting and keeping discussions moving surrounding important, public policy challenges and issues in South Korea (Keller et al., 2020). An explanation for this outcome is that other characteristics of social media consumers shape the type of information accessed, and the manner in which certain stories and claims are analyzed. For example, education, background, political knowledge, and open access to factchecking information often serve as barriers to political disinformation on social media networking sites. As a result, certain consumers are not as susceptible to believing political disinformation campaigns.

Another study indicates that political rumors remain a key driver or cog in political disinformation campaigns. State actors, opposing political candidates, and key entities rely on the existence and consumption of political rumors to drive political interests, campaigns, and agendas. The process of developing and sharing political rumors remains a dynamic, complex process. It is not a stable process or pattern because political rumors are constantly evolving (Shin et al., 2018). Political rumors are often associated with fake news. Fake news refers to stories, events, and perspective, which consists of intentional inaccurate claims and disinformation. The researchers in this specific study explore and describe the most pervasive, popular, and widely shared political rumors during the 2012 United States presidential election. They identify twenty key political rumors during the election cycle, which cover slightly over a year.

The authors present some interesting trends and outcomes for political rumors and inaccuracies being shared and consumed through popular social media networking sites. The methodology used to convey these findings is a content analysis of stories shared over social media outlets like Twitter and Facebook. The study finds that stories rooted in political rumors and misinformation are read, shared, and discussed more than factually supported news stories (Shin et al., 2018). Rumors are also consumed with a higher rate of intensity compared to accurate political claims and stories. This obviously carries the potential for voters to feel strongly about certain political candidates and policy issues during election cycles. It also shows why it is so difficult for private social media companies and state actors to work together in targeting and removing certain political rumors from respective social media platforms. Some social media companies like Twitter are taking certain measures to ensure that users can decipher political rumors and fake news from accurate stories and claims. For example, Twitter now employs fact checking seals to ensure that platform users are made aware of when a story cannot be factually verified and may be untrue or misleading. Due to the increasing rate of political rumors and fake news, it is nearly impossible for social media platforms to catch, fact-check, or verify misleading, inaccurate claims and stories.

One of the primary reasons that tackling political disinformation campaigns on social media networking sites is such a daunting task is because the emotions of social media consumers and voters are strongly associated with the manner in which political rumors and disinformation is sought and consumed on social media networks. To truly grasp that manner in which political disinformation shapes voter preferences and choices, officials, policymakers, and social media firms must acknowledge the function and role of emotions and feelings. Presidential election cycles are known to be highly competitive, emotional, stressful, and intense. As a result, information, perspective, and stories shared on large social media networks like Twitter and Facebook during election cycles tend to heighten emotions.

Conditions and characteristics including, political party identification, ideology, religion, and individual beliefs and values shape the ways that political disinformation is accessed and consumed on social media networks. There are some research gaps in existing research regarding the power of emotions and feelings when consuming and processing fake news and inaccurate or misleading claims during election cycles. However, one study argues that political and social environment, partisan cues, and overall mental state each wield a monumental influence on the choice to consume political rumors and disinformation during presidential elections (Weeks, 2015). The author relies on a content analysis of news stories on social media platforms on emotional, divisive issues like immigration and criminal justice reform (death penalty) during election cycles.

The researchers rely on the random sampling method to select a pool of eligible American voters during the election to assess how they view these issues when presented with intentional political disinformation. The study seeks to identify levels of anxiety and anger associated with stories regarding these issues, and who they impact perception of issues and candidates during elections. Respondents were asked to record their feelings and experiences when presented with fake news stories regarding the death penalty and immigration reform. Each was given both misleading claims and stories and sets of corrective information (Weeks, 2015). The researchers often switched the political party affiliation and news sources attached to different stories to see how party identification and ideology impacts perception regarding the truthfulness of the stories. All of the claims and stories were misleading and false, yet still connected to these complicated public policy issues. The study indicates that both anger and anxiety alter the manner in which political rumors, inaccuracies, and bias are consumed and processed during elections. Ultimately, social media users feel anger when they perceive that party bias and political ideology impacts the manner in which events and challenges are presented, and contradicts their own beliefs and identification (Weeks, 2015). Anxiety is a more common emotion when readers choose to shift their attention to the message of the story and content, and avoid the influence of partisanship. Readers and voters experiencing anger are much more likely to respond and absorb information in a manner, which supporters partisan bias. The findings in this study provide insight regarding some of the common emotional reactions to political disinformation campaigns, political rumors, and fake news stories during presidential election cycles. Anger, anxiety, desperation, and frustration are each emotions experienced by voters and social media users during these times. Because of this, voters may actually seek out political disinformation, which matches their political beliefs, ideologies, and preferred candidates during election cycles.

Those relying on political disinformation campaigns easily recognize the potential power and influence of misleading claims, inaccuracies, and fake news stories. Critics of these campaigns argue that the rapid creation and dissemination of such misleading information via the Internet and social media networks creates significant problems and risks for society (Ciampaglia, 2018). The reason for this is that today’s digital misinformation is dependent on a mix of social, cognitive, and unique algorithmic biases, which is difficult to tackle and overcome. Effective responses are not simply attempting to present corrective information or journalistic corrections. The range of political disinformation continues to expand, which also works against the ability for social medial leadership and government officials to enforce protective measures. Disinformation campaigns on social media networking sites now includes, conspiracy theories, claims of hoaxes, propaganda, fake news, and political rumors (Ciampaglia, 2018). It is not always easy for users and voters to decipher real versus fake news on social media outlets, which carries important repercussions during elections.

A recent study indicates that an increasing number of adults now rely on social media networks to get their news updates and stories. For example, a set of 2017 surveys shows that nearly 67% of American adults get their news from social media networks, which is up from 62% in 2016 (Ciampaglia, 2018). Interestingly enough, a high number of social media users also do not necessarily believe or trust the news stories presented on social media. Similar surveys show that nearly 65% of adult social media consumers do not trust news content on social media networks, yet are still left confused about real life, current events because of such easy access to fake news stories. Another alarming trend is that nearly 25% of adult social media users admit to intentionally or unintentionally passing fake news stories and misleading content to friends and family (Ciampaglia, 2018). This shows the manner in which political disinformation travels fast and carries the potential to reach large audiences in a limited amount of time. The reason that political disinformation campaigns and efforts can be effective is because social media and the Internet reinforce and support human biases and thinking processes.

There might be some confusion as to why political disinformation campaigns and rumoring are such serious threats to elections and voting practice in democracies. One study explains that the primary concern with tools like the Internet and social media networks is that they escalate the level of unprecedented misrepresentations and falsehoods (Garrett, 2011). Recent elections show that political disinformation clouds the minds of information consumers and voters. Political rumors and misrepresentations make it difficult for consumers to form an accurate viewpoint or perspective of the current political reality during elections (Garrett, 2011). The American public continues to use innovative technologies like the Internet, email, and social media to analyze and share political disinformation. Liberal democracies thrive on the ability for voters to be active participants in the political system and culture by being active participants. However, when voters consistently use these technologies to seek, read, and share falsehoods and fake news stories it undermines the effectiveness and legitimacy of democracy (Garrett, 2011). Citizens who fail or refuse to assess and break down news stories and events with a critical eye contribute to throwing the entire political system and voting process in doubt.

This is a problem because masses of citizens integrate political rumors and disinformation into the electoral system, whether they believe the information is true or not. Easy access to the Internet and social media it makes it much simpler to share political misinformation by sharing links on social media and email. The sharing of political misinformation on social media networks is not a new phenomenon strictly associated with the most recent elections. The presence and sharing of political disinformation campaigns dates as far back as the 2008 U.S. Presidential election. However, during that time period email was more of the primary mode of sharing political rumors and fake news. The 2016 and 2020 elections reflected changing patterns of political disinformation campaigns, which thrived on the popularity and growth of social media platforms. The consumption and sharing for political rumors, fake news stories, inaccuracies, and misrepresentations impacts voting patterns and habits by escalating and reinforcing ideological and partisan divisions (Garrett, 2011). Partisan rumors contributes to shifts and beliefs about voting because citizens from competing political parties and ideologies feel skeptical of the entire political system. Political disinformation campaigns also shape voting patterns by increasing tension, hostility, and aggression toward certain issues, events, and stories connected to elections. Voters from opposing sides of issues may also show violence toward one another, which may force citizens to vote a certain way, choose different methods of voting, or stay home during the election cycle and avoid voting altogether.

A goal for political candidates and campaigns seeking to create political disinformation campaigns intended to shape voter behavior and alter outcomes in elections is to remove the presence and function of rationality and logic. Another recent study seeks to assess the scope of rationality during legislative elections identifies the 2015 UAE elections, and political information presented on social media platforms intended to reach voters, shape public opinion, and electoral outcomes. The researchers use a content analysis of messages posted and shared during the election campaign on social media by political candidates and current officeholders. The primary goal is to identify the most important policy issues during election cycles, and determine how rationality connects with messages presented on social media impact voter perception and behavior (Yaghi & Antwi-Boateng, 2017). The study provides insight on how voters react to campaign challenges and promises offered on social media networking sites.

The main type of methodology used to collect data is a content analysis of blogs, tweets, and messages posted on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and Snapchat. However, the researchers also examine television advertisements, brochures, signage, and billboards (Yaghi & Antwi-Boateng, 2017). The different forms of campaign content was integrated into a unique form of thematic analysis. Nearly 350 total campaign messages were analyzed. The findings from the study indicate that voters on social media responded strongly and positively to campaign messages connected to rational statements and promises in regard to improving laws, and new routes for women’s rights, and education. The overall message is that voters respond to policy incentives, which are rooted in logic and rationality. The material in this source is directly related to political disinformation campaigns because it shows that strategies used relying on rationality and logic connected to individual citizen rights may be a valuable strategy for offsetting and countering the effects of political rumors, fake news, and inaccurate claims, which dominate social media networks today.

Providing corrective information against political disinformation by tying messages to policy changes, promises, and outcomes may persuade voters to pay attention to accurate information, and disregard the content in political disinformation campaigns. Digital content on social media is a key driver in generating campaign and election success by advocating for specific policy issues (Yaghi & Antwi-Boateng, 2017). Voters want results that fake news, inaccurate claims, and political rumors simply cannot provide. Although political disinformation campaigns is designed to impede rationality and logic, this study reflects that voters still seek accurate information surrounding the policies and social and economic issues, which impact their lives the most. This study is important because it provides a different viewpoint and key information regarding what strategies work the most in terms of getting voters to absorb accurate political information and assess key public policy issues, instead of being bogged down and distracted by fake news and untrue rumors. Existing literature largely avoids discussing the impact and presence of integrative, connected campaign strategies rooted in public policy facts when studying the influence of political disinformation during important elections. Still, there is much debate on the topic of how reading, consuming and sharing political disinformation and rumors during elections, actually relates or molds voting activity during actual voting periods and voting day.

One recent book called Fake news on social media: Illusory truth and the 2016 Presidential election aims to detail the actual effects of political disinformation on voter activity and results of the U.S. presidential election in 2016 between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. The researcher’s priority is answering a few key questions pertaining to the impact and effects of fake news during a contentious presidential cycle. The questions are listed below.

· How often are voters exposed to fake news stories and inaccurate or misleading headlines on Facebook and Twitter during the election cycle?

· Did voters actually believe the most significant fake news stories pertaining to the election?

· What leads voters to share news stories that may be false or misleading? (Goodwin-Ortiz de Leon, 2018).

The author also develops and advances several key research questions and hypothesis regarding exposure to and impact of fake news headlines and stories during the election cycle.

· Voters were exposed to fake news stories and increased levels of political misinformation numerous times per day leading up to election day.

· Voters also believed false stories, and these beliefs actually altered and impacted candidate choice (Goodwin-Ortiz de Leon, 2018).

· Voters shared stories, which may be inaccurate or false because they felt anxiety about the results of the election.

The methodology used for this particular study combined a unique set of quantitative and qualitative strategies. The researcher relied on multiple surveys, including, a survey from Survey Monkey to determine the level of exposure and belief in fake news and real news stories during the election cycle. They were also provided with eight different news headlines, and ten relevant political stories between August 1st and November 8th 2016 (Goodwin-Ortiz de Leon, 2018). The Survey Monkey survey was quantitative and required respondents to answer closed-ended questions pertaining to the news stories and headlines. However, the qualitative method provided more insight regarding voters feelings, emotions, and perspective on the new headlines, by offering a second survey, which asked participants to ask open ended questions freely and candidly. The researcher used electronic tools including, Microsoft Excel to study the correlation between level or degree of belief and repeated exposure to fake news (Goodwin-Ortiz de Leon, 2018). A total pool of 99 responses were collected, but only 85 of them qualified because 14 respondents refused to answer questions regarding the fake news stories.

Respondents were also shown a series of 10 news stories and asked to rank them in terms of how many times they saw, heard, or read the story. They were required to assign a score to each of these stories by ranking them from 1-4. Stories with the higher ranking indicated that they were seen more times, resulting in a higher frequency (Goodwin Ortiz de Leon, 2018). The results reflect that none of the stories actually received a high average score, although some stories were seen more than others. Essentially, both fake news and real news stories received similar levels of exposure. In order to determine belief in each of the fake news stories versus real news, the researcher looked at results from both surveys. Interestingly enough, each set of real versus fake stories received similar rankings. This reflects that respondents actually accepted and believed many of the fake news stories to be true, despite being inaccurate or misleading. Finally, in regard to determining the correlation between exposure and degree of belief in news stories, the researcher finds that as the frequency of exposure to news rose, so does the level of belief (Goodwin-Ortiz de Leon, 2018). These findings are also consistent with fake news stories consumed by the respondents. This reflects that certain pockets of voters do actually believe inaccurate or misleading claims and stories when repeatedly seeing, hearing, or reading them. It is important to note that this sample is extremely small, and may not necessarily apply to all voters within the American voting populations. Previous literature conveyed in this study actually reflects that political disinformation does not carry a significant effect in changing opinions or level of belief in more educated, informed voters in other countries.

Finally, the author relies on the qualitative findings to determine the reasons that consumers of fake news stories choose to share stories they know may be inaccurate or misleading. The primary finding is that voters choose to share certain fake news stories because they align with their own personal beliefs and confidence in the story (Goodwin-Ortiz de Leon, 2018). Ultimately, the way that stories are framed impacts voter’s interpretation of news stories and headlines. Political disinformation are growing in scope, intensity, and exposure because they seem to carry effects on different segments of voters. In terms of the 2016 election participants conveyed that certain coverage and news stories are biased towards one candidate or another. For participants who chose to mention a specific candidate, nearly 60% of respondents said they felt coverage was biased for Trump and Clinton (Goodwin-Ortiz de Leon, 2018). Like other studies, this specific research shows that the fake news stories and headlines generated a high degree of anger and anxiety. A vast majority of respondents indicate that they carried anger towards the media and either of the candidates. Some were so frustrated with the headlines and information, that they chose not to participate in the election at all because of the way that the candidates were framed in the news. This directly shows that political disinformation campaigns directly shape voting patterns by motivating certain voters to support specific candidates or sit out the election altogether because of fake news. This is a serious concern in liberal democracies like the United States because elections are one of the most important, and legitimate components of the political system. When political candidates and elections are questioned and challenged because of fake news it destroys the key social and political fabric, which allows democracy to thrive and function. Another problem with fake news stories and political disinformation campaigns is that they divide voters along ideological, cultural, and racial lines.

Political disinformation campaigns often target and impact marginalized groups like minorities during voting cycles. This is a problem because social media outlets are now a space for fake news and political rumors started by Alt-Right groups, and white supremacist organizations aimed at intimidating communities and minority voters, which may dissuade minority participants from engaging in the political system and voting process. In the age of President Donald Trump, social media platforms are increasingly become a popular space for Alt-Right groups to share information and spread false, inaccurate, and aggressive information (Jakubowicz, 2017). Many actors within these hate filled groups seek to limit the influence and shifting status and power relationship of minority communities. As a result, some contribute to political disinformation campaigns by sharing political misinformation, which reinforces white dominance and minimizes the importance of issues plaguing communities of color. These Alt-Right groups thrive because social media platforms are very difficult to monitor and regulate within the international system because of a lack of coordinated policy and strategy for eliminating political disinformation (Jakubowicz, 2017). Many social media consumers are actually quite impressionable, which leads to fake news stories and misleading claims being accepted as fact. Unfortunately, this allows hateful, divisive speech, to be integrated into political disinformation campaigns, which divides diverse communities, and disproportionately negatively targets people of color in the voting process. For example, in the 2016 election many minority voters felt dissatisfied with candidates Trump and Clinton, largely because of the tension generated from high levels of political rumoring and fake news. Of course, this impacted the outcome of the election because masses of American citizens felt like outcasts in their own political system. There is no universal solution to tackle the problem of political disinformation campaigns and the presence of fake news and political misinformation during key presidential elections because of the growing access and popularity of social media networks. State actors and diverse citizens must learn to navigate the presence of different forms of political misinformation designed to undermine the legitimacy of elections.

Conclusion

Political disinformation, political rumoring, and fake news stories are considerable, influential components of today’s political campaigns among political parties, state government entities, and candidates. These campaigns generally emerge and spread because of the easy access and reach of powerful technologies like social media platforms. The reason that political disinformation campaigns on social media are growing in popularity among state actors, organizations, and political parties is because many citizens and voters consider political inaccuracies, misleading claims, and gross representations to be true, regardless of a lack of fact-checked information. The research shows that political disinformation campaigns on social media are not limited to authoritarian regimes, but also occur on a large scale in modern democracies like the United States. American citizens and voters experienced the effects of massive amounts of political misinformation and fake news during both the 2016 and 2020 election. Increased exposure to fake news stories, inaccuracies, and rumors raises the likelihood of false narratives and bogus stories being believed. This carries significant weight and influence on voting patterns during elections because consumers incorporate beliefs in fake news in forming their opinions regarding candidates, issues, and elections in general. Ultimately, political disinformation impacts voter choice and selection, and participation in the voting system. However, there is room for optimism in finding ways to reduce the impact of political disinformation campaigns. Getting relevant, factual policy information to social media users, and building greater levels of knowledge and awareness of how political disinformation actually undermines benefits provided by sound policy is one strategy to minimize the impact of political rumors and fake news. Educated, well-informed social media users are much less likely to believe political disinformation, which safeguards the key aspects of free and fair elections within democracies.

References

Bradshaw, S., & Howard, N., P. (2018). The global organization of social media disinformation campaigns. Journal of International Affairs, 71(1.5), 23-32.

Ciampaglia, L., G. (2018). Fighting fake news: A role for computational scocial science in the fight against digital misinformation. Journal of Computational Social Science, 1, 147-153.

Garrett, R.K. (2011). Troubling consequences of online political rumoring. Human Communication Research, 37(2), 255–274.

Goodwin-Ortiz de Leon, C. (2018). Fake news on social media: Illusory Truth and the 2016 presidential election. Amazon.

Jakubowicz, A. (2017). Alt right White lite: Trolling, hate speech and cyber racism on social media. Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 9(3), 41-60. DOI: 10.5130/ccs.v9i3.5655. 

Keller, B., F., & Schoch, D., Stier, S., & Yang, J. (200). Political astroturfing: How to coordinate a political disinformation campaign on Twitter. Political Communication, 37(2), 256-280.

Shin, J., Jian, L., Driscoll, K., & Bar, F. (2018). The diffusion of misinformation on social media: Temporal pattern, message, and source. Computers in Human Behavior, 83, 278-287. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2018.02.008.

Tiara, A. (2017). Are there limits to online free speech? In D. Mittleman & D. Druckenmiller (Eds.), Annual editions: Technologies, social media, and society (pp. 178-182). United States of America: McGraw-Hill Education.

Weeks, E., B. (2015). Emotions, partisanship, and misperceptions: How anger and anxiety moderate the effect of partisan bias on susceptibility to political information. Journal of Communication, 65, 699-715. DOI: doi:10.1111/jcom.12164

Yaghi, A., & Antwi-Boateng, O. (2017). Public policy issues and campaign strategies: Examining rationality and the role of social media in a legislative election within a Middle Eastern context. Digest of Middle East Studies, 26(2), 398-421.