Abstract:
On the 6th of January 2021, The United States Congress convened a joint session to officially count electoral votes and declare the certified winner of the Presidential election. These proceedings were abruptly interrupted as supporters of then President Donald Trump stormed the US Capitol. The brutal assault upon the nation’s pinnacle of democracy was in the unsubstantiated belief of electoral fraud and of a stolen election.
The breaching of Capitol Hill suggested it was the direct result of the long-term implications of Donald Trump’s Twitter feed and rhetoric speech. Supporters, justified by the long-term effects of misinformation spouted by Trump’s tweets, sought to rectify what they thought was clear evidence of voter fraud. Coupled with the networked social medias, and his influence over his supporters, an attempt was made to circumnavigate the certified results from being accepted and overturn the election results to their favour. The events of the day were live-streamed, selfies and videos were uploaded, as both misguided common folk and extremists flooded the building forecourts and penetrated the heart of the American democratic processes. The public outrage and dismay at the rioting led to Donald Trump’s permanent ban on certain social media platforms for his incitement of violence.
Introduction
The combined networking of social media and its associated platforms culminated in the events that occurred on Capitol Hill on the 6th of January. The ongoing propaganda of ‘fake news’ culminated in Trump’s continued incitement via social networks, particularly of Twitter and Parler. His tweets pandered to his already loyal followers, who blindly and whole heartedly followed what they perceived to be Donald Trump’s directives. While networks can bring positive social change, what happened on Capitol Hill is testimony that social networks have the ability to enforce social change that may be morally and ethically wrong. The combination of networked medias and the President’s instigated presence upon them, brought about a more dangerous form or activism, where the activists believed themselves morally right, irrespective of the factual information at hand. Social networks, perpetuated by their persistent and persuasive interactions, allowed the remediation of Donald Trump’s Twitter feed and the resulting assault on Capitol Hill.
Online Networking (reaching the masses)
Online networking has been instrumental in bringing people together. There has been a convergence of technology, overlapping multiple social platforms (Papacharissi, 2011). Individuals from across the globe have utilised social media as a means to unite over a variety of subjects and themes. In doing so, they realized the use of such social platforms as a way to present a united front on many personal issues that not only pertain to themselves but those that pervade society today. Such affordances of multiple social media platforms provide a networked- mediated soapbox in which their voice is able to reach a far greater base (Delanty, 2018). Donald Trump expertly used the Twitter (https://twitter.com) platform as one such stage. His networked identity was an online self-presentation of his distinct personality (Papacharissi, 2011, p. 304). His personally and politically motivated social interaction, as well as charismatic persona, allowed similar minded Americans to see it as intimate connection. In this way, Donald Trump presented an amplified version of his personal diatribe which in turn permeated through social channels. Boyd (2010) discussed this as a ‘networked public’, an “imagined collective that emerges as a result of the intersection of people, technology, and practice”, and in doing so, participants could be viewed much more like that of a consumer (p. 39). Utilising Twitter allowed Trump to not only to circumvent expected and conventional means of presidential communicating, but in doing so, also blurred the lines between celebrity and social interaction. Networked speech allowed for his followers to both consume and distribute such politically based misinformation and propaganda (Boczkowski & Papacharissi, 2018). They became an online “imagined political community” where most members did not meet, talk to or know their fellow members; they felt a part simply by their connection to the following of Trump’s twitter feed (Anderson, 2016, p. 15).
Of all social network platforms, Trump was most prominent on Twitter. Probably best described as a micro blog, the Twitter network deals in ‘tweets’ of under 280 characters. Its feed reads in a reverse chronological order, subject to the reader’s personal selections of whom they will follow. The lack of personal names and more of non-descript monikers brings anonymity and less about a person’s identity. It is Twitter’s hashtags which has transcended the original platform. Its simplicity has allowed a networked framed on the searchability of a small collection of words. These hashtags have far reaching implications. Movements like #BlackLivesMatter have hinged on such networking in their call to arms (Pew Research Center, 2016). In the case of Trump’s tweets, we see the resharing of simple hashtags like #Maga and #StopTheSteal. Political pundits, republican followers, and to the extreme, right-wing activists, these hashtags allowed for curating of such posts and the on-sharing to their own social circles and social media platforms. Tweets are a nonreciprocal type of format which gives a mere temporary interaction. Within the realm of networked publics, it could be a assumed this interaction is more network than community (Ito, 2008). The implication of ‘community’ can be felt more in the sharing of these tweets within the relational value of the word hashtagged, than that of a group who are contributing on a more intimate level. This invariably can produce an echo chamber of dedicated followers who hear only those opinions that relate to their personal points of view. Papacharissi (2011) also put forth that Twitter allowed for much more fluidity, both online and offline, for political candidates as a controlling management and networking mechanism in reaching their supporters. Trump’s use of Twitter was a source of information, remediated from its initial tweets and networked out to other social platforms. It extended beyond the simple tweet, permeating journalistic posts, discussed on and offline at large (McGranahan, 2019). Within the anonymity between strangers, their interaction more networking, parts of Twitter showed an influx of hate speech, a cacophony of unrelated voices indexed by hashtags. (Stolee & Caton, 2018).
Parler – the next best ‘Twitter’
Introduced as an alternative to Twitter, Parler (https://parler.com/) was introduced as a social media platform in 2018. It was promptly considered a haven for Trump affiliated supporters dissatisfied with Twitter’s staunch crack down on apparent breaches in community standards (Munn, 2021). Parler saw an influx of ‘ex’-Twitter users with a high concentration of those with Republican leanings and right-wing affiliations, including politicians and conspiracy theorists (Munn, 2021). Much like Twitter, Parler allowed for the grouping of similar posts with the use of hashtags along with a greater character space in which to form an opinion to be shared. Unlike some other popular platforms, the feed is not moderated by Parler but the users themselves (Hitkul et al., 2020). Thus, the convergence of these hashtags once again created an echo chamber of networked ideals, borrowing on Twitter feeds and networking on those hashtags which the user deemed important. Hitkul et al., (2020) noted Parler had an “abnormally high repost combined with single sided narratives” (111:8). An analysis of the most prolific hashtags between Twitter and Parler observed a more neutral trend on Twitter, while Parler representing a more constant distorted notion of voter fraud, echoing hash tags with the likes of #StopTheSteal and #VoterFraud (Hitkul et al., 2021). Thus, these networked ‘communities’ show potency in prejudicial situations, reshaping peoples normally inhibited social behaviour, insulated within echo chambers filtered by their own hands (Hampton & Wellman, 2018). Hitkul (2021) determined Parler traffic to often be violent, with a consistent slew of hate speech due to its relaxed guidelines on posts and numerous presidential election hashtags like #election2020, and #NovemberIsComing. Its widespread and relentless reiteration of Trump’s tirades, and its influenced subsequent postings, once again networked across multiple social platforms.
Inciting the People
History will long recount the prevarication of Donald Trump’s Twitter feed. His infamous cries of “fake news” became a stalwart ploy of his election and re-election campaign. His habitual lies were in excess of that of any modern-day U.S. politician, he was known to present deceptions as truths; his extreme discourse seen as an overture on his view on not just Republican but government protocol (McGranahan, 2019). His administration was responsible for the creation of the term “alternative facts”, where comments made by the President “directly or indirectly contradict real facts” (Barrera et al., 2020, p. 1). boyd (2010) saw the internet as a distribution point of micro-blogged journalism. Trump’s micro-blog was a performance on a networked public which prompted and promoted an engagement (Ito, 2008). His appraisal of current situations was not just consumed but remediated online and distributed, validating his followers’ beliefs (McGranahan, 2019, 3165). Their trust in these social connections now outweighed that of traditional news sources and flagged them as “false” (Neff, 2018). The echo chamber of Trump rich content saturated their news feeds, their distrust of legitimate news sources wavered, polarizing susceptible minds into interpreting Trump’s slurry of racist, misogynistic, and vitriolic tweets as an acceptable means of behaviour. Trump’s tweets, shared through networks, challenged social norms (Müller & Schwarz, 2019). Donald Trump’s reliance on the networked public sphere to influence his followers could be deemed a success. His high visibility and his celebrity status helped filter his presence into other mediated sectors (Fuchs, 2015). As Müller and Schwarz (2019) point out, this, disseminated across social platforms, resulted in real-world events. Trump had emboldened his followers to act out perceived appropriate behaviour in an unacceptable way.
Storming the Capitol
The debate in the uprising should not be viewed in whether Donald Trump spoke actual words that spurred the riots, moreover, it should be considered that it was the ongoing networked publics and the use of Twitter, as well as Parler, as a channel for distribution of the same repetitious misinformation that led to the events on January 6th. Müller & Schwarz (2018) in their study found FBI recorded hate crime, and the level of Twitter usage in the US, were linked. While they cited sufficient evidence to include other social medias in the inciting of riots and hate crimes, they were able to see a direct correlation between the publication of Donald Trump’s tweets, including those found via news media, in broadening his reach through networked publics. Trumps tweets, and subsequent social media sharing, strongly predicted violence (Müller & Schwarz, 2018; McGranahan, 2019; Twitter, Inc., 2021). As McGranahan (2019) pointed out prior to these events, “extreme speech online can have serious, including violent, repercussions” (p.3167). McGranahan (2019) also indicated there was an evidentiary link between fatalities incited by violence and social media interaction around the world, particularly “in an era of digital nationalism and imagined enemies” (p. 3165). The crowd were stirred up by Trump’s speech and continual disinformation. The persistent networked performance over the alleged, rigged election was enough to psychologically manipulated their outrage. Their susceptibility to these lies inevitably led to their transformation into a riotous mob (Waddington, 2008). The events of the day led to 5 deaths, 1 federal officer and four civilians (Healy, 2021). His constant reiteration of a stolen election ‘weaponising’ social media for his own political gain (McGranahan, 2019). The resulting streams of media was a call to arms and a perceived connection to the president, perpetuated by the persuasive diatribe of Donald Trump.
Conclusion
Online networks are a formidable mechanism in activism, be it for good or bad. In the case of Donald Trump, his use of his social media platform was one of propaganda and disinformation. Availing himself of available converging technology, he sought to persuade those who listened to his mindset. His micro-blogs on Twitter and Parler remediated across online and offline. The simple act of retweeting Donald Trump implied a perception of intimacy to one of a celebrity status. This only furthered the misconception by his followers were following Donald Trump’s expressed orders. Hashtags brought an online mechanism to reach out to fellow believers, a call to arms, bringing them together in a devastating assault on the United States Capitol building.
In the end, Donald Trump was a demagogue, utilising community in networking his political ideals and misinform; his actions resulted in the coup upon Capitol Hill.
REFERENCES:
Anderson, B. (2016). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/curtin/detail.action?docID=5176951
Barrera, O., Guriev, S., Henry, E., & Zhuravskaya, E. (2020). Facts, alternative facts, and fact checking in times of post-truth politics. Journal of Public Economics, 182, 104123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2019.104123
Boczkowski, P. J., & Papacharissi, Z. (Eds.) (2018). Trump and the Media. MIT Press. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/curtin/detail.action?docID=5326880
boyd, d. (2010). Social network sites as networked publics affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), A Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Network Sites (pp. 39-58). Routledge. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203876527
Delanty, G. (2018). Virtual community: belonging as communication. In Community (pp. 200-224). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315158259
Fuchs, C. (2015). Power in the age of social media. Heathwood Journal of Critical Theory, 1(1), 1–29. https://westminsterresearch.westminster.ac.uk/item/99573/power-in-the-age-of-social-media
Hampton, K. N., & Wellman, B. (2018). Lost and saved . . . again: The moral panic about the loss of community takes hold of social media. Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews, 47(6), 643-651. https://doi.org/10.1177/0094306118805415
Healy, J. (2021, January 11). These Are the 5 people who died in the capitol riot. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/11/us/who-died-in-capitol-building-attack.html
Hitkul, Prabhu, A., Guhathakurta, D., Jain, J., Subramanian, M., Reddy, M., Sehgal, S., Karandikar, T., Gulati, A., Arora, U., Shah, R. R., & Kumaraguru, P. (2021). Capitol (Pat)riots: A comparative study of Twitter and Parler. ArXiv:2101.06914 [Cs]. http://arxiv.org/abs/2101.06914
Ito, M. (2008). Introduction. In K. Varnelis (Ed.), Networked Publics (pp. 1-13). The MIT Press. DOI:10.7551/mitpress/9780262220859.003.0001
McGranahan, C. (2019). A presidential archive of lies: Racism, Twitter, and a history of the present. International journal of communication (Online), 3164.
Müller, K., & Schwarz, C. (2020). From hashtag to hate crime: Twitter and anti-minority sentiment (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 3149103). Social Science Research Network. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3149103
Munn, L. (2021). More than a mob: Parler as preparatory media for the U.S. Capitol storming. First Monday, 26(3). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v26i3.11574
Neff, Gina. (2018). The potential of networked solidarity: Communication at the end of the long twentieth century. In P. J. Boczkowski & Z. Papacharissi, Trump and the Media (pp. 129–132). MIT Press. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/curtin/detail.action?docID=5326880
Pew Research Center. (2016, August 15). History of the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter: Social activism on Twitter. Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2016/08/15/the-hashtag-blacklivesmatter-emerges-social-activism-on-twitter/
Stolee, G., & Caton, S. (2018). Twitter, Trump, and the base: A shift to a new form of presidential talk? Signs and Society, 6(1), 147–165. https://doi.org/10.1086/694755
Twitter, Inc. (2021, January 8). Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump. Permanent Suspension of @realDonaldTrump. https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.html
Waddington, D. (2008). The madness of the mob? Explaining the ‘irrationality’ and destructiveness of crowd violence. Sociology Compass, 2(2), 675–687. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9020.2007.00079.x
Hey Emma,
This is an interesting paper and I’ve enjoyed reading it. I agree with your conclusion where you stated how Donald Trump use social media as a platform for his propaganda and disinformation. I have to say I am glad that his Twitter account is suspended!
If you have time, feel free to read my paper regarding how social media can help individuals who are suffering from mental illness: https://networkconference.netstudies.org/2021/2021/04/28/how-social-media-such-as-twitter-and-discord-can-help-individuals-with-mental-illness-and-build-communities-online/
Hi Emma,
This was an interesting read and I am disappointed I have only just found it in the closing hours of the conference. I was slightly obsessed (not in a good way) with Trump and the way he used social media. That being said my Twitter feed is so much better these days! I am sure now that he is not there, many of his followers have left also.
I have an older relative here in Australia that in a sense supported Trump and is quite right-leaning. He is often sending us (and his mailing list) emails with conspiracy theories etc. It seems like he is in his own echo chamber of misinformation here in Australia.
Sometimes I will take the time to fact-check and send back some links (reply all of course) but I don’t actually think this works when as you say ‘their distrust of legitimate news sources wavered’ and he seems to distrust the mainstream media. Another theme of discourse that Trump perpetuated. I know this is a very late question, but in your reading was there any thoughts on how to debunk some of this information? To show people that it is false? Or do you have any thoughts on this? I am still in shock at how inciteful his social media speech was and how many people just blindly followed him.
Best regards
Michelle
Hi Emma,
Very well thought topic, your paper was very engaging. However, some points in your paper against Trump can be highly debatable in terms of the point of view of a Trump supporter and a non-supporter. The right or wrong can easily get mixed up on social media platforms causing confusion among the mass audience. Twitter as many other social media platforms revolve around the concept of attention economy. Thus, this might be the reason for Trump to produce and share such tweets within the online community. Do you think social media platforms should implement a certain type of barriers/restriction to prevent the occurrence of such events?
Please do check out my paper: https://networkconference.netstudies.org/2021/2021/04/26/amateurism-vs-professionalism-who-will-prevail-in-the-digital-era/
Thanks Ignesh!! Yes, it’s a very controversial point of view, I actually wondered if I would counter any backlash to this possible bone of contention. It is a hard call, but I think, in any given situation, we are allowed freedom of speech but with that speech also comes the consequences. Social media have every right to restrict certain behaviours and speech. Considering the events on January 6th, there were quite a few people surprised that these platforms hadn’t done something sooner. Müller and Schwarz’s 2018 study found a strong connection between these online attitudes and speech and the consequent violent action that ensued the following day. Considering this was at least 2 years prior to the Capitol Hill events, I question why such restrictions didn’t happen sooner to Trump. You might find Luc Samuel Quevauvilliers‘ paper on “ Social Media Free Speech Policies are a Myth” an interesting read!! (Link: https://networkconference.netstudies.org/2021/2021/04/26/facebook-and-twitter-have-become-a-third-space-for-citizens-to-have-freedom-of-expression-on-political-views/)
Emma
Hi Emma,
I enjoyed your paper, and this is a very hot topic at the minute. In another unit, I am analysing Trump’s speech and the keywords that had hidden meaning and causing violence without actually saying it. Add this to the social media platform Twitter, and we have two influential mediums that can drive this type of behavior. However, we need to analyse this because this is what other people in power will do. Trump decided to do this because his speeches were not making enough impact, crowds are dispersing, and his very little interaction amongst his followers. He started Twitter, and it was more used for his campaigns than voice opinions until this had happened., so we are in a situation where he has combined both crowds and social media to get a more significant reaction. The irony is. Social media needs presence to gain attention and interaction amongst communities, and this is how they further their power, and politicians need Twitter and other platforms to voice their opinions. In this sense, these are both powerful identities; what will happen if politicians and social media platforms join forces for a reason, whether it is for good or bad? To gain audiences, do you think that the power of these platforms will join forces, and what do you think it might be for this to happen?
For my paper, I wrote about freedom of speece and analysed Trumps and media relationship, how he can divert medias attention and the publics attention of subjects citizen feel they want to comment on. I also write on the relationship between politicians and social media platforms and the power that this voices have.
https://networkconference.netstudies.org/2021/2021/04/26/facebook-and-twitter-have-become-a-third-space-for-citizens-to-have-freedom-of-expression-on-political-views/
Kind Regards
Nakia Stevens
Hey Nakia! This other unit sounds fascinating! Can I ask which one it is? Over the course of this degree, I have come to realise the far reaching implications of social media and Trump are phenomenal. I whole heartedly agree with the assessment of causing violence without saying the words. I had read the way in which Obama had utilised these platforms for his presidential campaign, and in retrospect, I plan to revisit it and compare the two. They are such opposites in their discourse. The whole idea of echo chambers are an interesting topic as well. You mention his keywords and hidden meanings, and these resonating within these echo chambers only served to amplify his rhetoric. I had pondered whether this topic was based more on the communities thread, but I felt it really was more the networked activism, then the building of a community, though this is also a worthy conversation.
I have been trying to read through all the related papers, both from an academic as well as from a personal perspective. I have you on my ‘to read’ list 🙂 I look forward to it!
Hi Emma
I am studying Anthropology and Sociology and one of the units is Language. We look at media representation and we look at analysing the language used. Trump is very clever and some of the language he used and what he conveyed to his supporters. We look at the spoken discourse and how language, ideology, power and politics and the connections made. Trump used the power of social media in text communication with Twitter and he also applied this to verbal communication with his speech on Capitol hill.
This is a great read if you ever want to know more about speech and how to analyse the context.
– Cameron, Deborah. 2001. Working with Spoken Discourse. London: SAGE Publications. Retrieved from
http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/curtin/reader.action?
docID=254679&ppg=121
By examining spoken discourse, we can analyse what he did not say, but what has been implied or hinted to cause violent outage on Capitol Hill.
We then start to adapt Ideological analysis and the meanings expressed with how language has been interpretated and understood (Van Dijk 1998, 189-190)
Ideologies such as patriotic, nationalism, power, and dominance and further
examination of how Trump exerted power through language had influenced social change. Trump used power and language to shift change and language attitudes and used language as a strategyto influence his followers
Trump uses the word ‘WE’ throughout his speech and implying “WE’ are in this together and ‘WE’ will fight
Trump continually uses these words
5x Dead, 6x Destroy, 20x Fight/Fighting 13x Hell
I think this will lead to more political debates and possible hate speech. Other leaders and politicians will follow because there is no consequences to this behaviour and it made an impact on the world. communities were formed online and then taken to another level by meeting and fighting for something based upon a politician thinking the election was stolen from him.
Van Dijk, Teun A. 1998. Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. London: SAGE Publications. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/curtin/reader.action?docID=1024022&ppg=177
Hi Emma,
This was an interesting read, and I’m glad you brought up Parler as the alternative platform for Trump supporters. I wonder if you’ve read about his alleged bid for Gab reported in Forbes magazine recently: https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2021/03/23/trump-gab-parler-social-media-app-network/?sh=448b9e251101
What are the chances that Trump will turn into a media baron like Rupert Murdoch? I shudder to think…
I know Trump’s presence on Twitter has drawn the most attention from academics, media professionals, and his own followers. However, I wondered if his presence on other platforms was similarly devastating and far reaching. Have you any information on his wider online presence?
Thanks Deepti! I wish I had devoted some more time to Parler, but to be honest, I felt a little trepidation considering it is often seen as a more right wing biased platform. I also wanted to try to not stray to far from what is considered mainstream, however, it felt right to include it in consideration of its use as a platform to network the events. I must admit, I’m a little nervous how Rupert Murdoch may try to sway media in Australia like he did in the US. Between Trump and him, it is a little concerning. I have been following the with interest the Royal Commission into our media landscape. The effects of Murdoch Media in the propagandising of Trump would be an interesting thing to look into, as well. I had seen the alleged bid for Gab. I wonder too, if he decides to actually run for president again, if he’ll actually take on some other platforms. For the most part (bearing in mind I did not do extensive research on the other platforms), the majority of the platforms seemed to be a copy of his Twitter feed. My impression was he used Twitter to voice his opinion and his social media executives then carried those posts over to the other platforms. Happy to be corrected if anyone knows differently!
Hi Emma,
This was an interesting topic to read about, and i’m fascinated (and slightly terrified) of the impacts of online echo chambers. The influence of Trumpism will be felt for some time I think, with politicians and staffers influenced and inspired by his use of social media to garner support and media attention – both good and bad.
Have you listened to the Axios podcast ‘How It Happened’? Australian journalist Jonathan Swan breaks down the events that led to the Capital insurrection. It’s really well done and gives insight to what seemed an extreme and baffling (how did that actually happen????) event.
Best,
Kristen
Thanks for reading Kristen! You are so right in the influence of Trumpism (how can that already be a word?!) will continue to be felt. I must admit I have not heard the Axios podcast yet, thank you so much for bringing it to my attention! I like Jonathan Swan as a reporter, I still recall the Trump interview and resulting memes that came from it. They swirled the internet for some time afterwards. I will endeavour to find it and listen! The whole Trump presidency has influenced a few of my assignments, with decent marks coming from them, so I guess it can’t have all been that all bad? 🙂
Hi Emma,
As much as I hated listening to Trump, that Jonathan Swan interview was absolute gold (along with the memes). I’m already anticipating my politics subject later this year – it really is a fascinating/terrifying subject and lots of content to learn and discuss about. Glad you have a pragmatic view and it’s worked out for you 😂!
Best,
Kristen
Hi Emma, great write up. I personally have been very interested in the effects of echo chambers and diffusion of misinformation on social media and enjoyed the in-depth look at the capitol hill riots. What both amuses and horrifies me is that even after so much information has been revealed, supporters of Donald Trump continue to blindly worhsip him and perform incredible feats of mental gymnastics to justify everything that has happened so far. I’m quite worried what the future will bring.
Thanks Hao! It is quite mind-boggling. I recall watching a rioter read Trump’s tweet ad verbatim, and it made me realise just how much of an echo chamber his followers had placed themselves in, coupled with their idolisation of him. I am grateful that so many turned out to vote against what Trump stood for, here’s hoping people don’t forget how close it was that time around, and hopefully more come to realise how divisive he is.
Very well written paper Emma! Congratulations
The debate about free speech, hate speech, view point based censorship online is so important at the moment in my opinion.
I found your paragraph entitled Storming the Capitol very insightful and I´m sure a comparative analysis of the Black Lives Matter protests would be an interesting read also.
Thanks so much David!
I had spied some similar papers and have already planned to read them, being it so closely aligns with my paper. I look forward to seeing different takes on the BLM movement, it was a topic I had considered myself, so I’m glad to see others were up to the challenge!
Hi Emma, GREAT paper – I thought it was put together so well. I agree with your point, “The echo chamber of Trump rich content saturated their news feeds, their distrust of legitimate news sources wavered, polarizing susceptible minds into interpreting Trump’s slurry of racist, misogynistic, and vitriolic tweets as an acceptable means of behaviour.” Living here in the US I saw how this was being played out in everyday life. I could see how people were living in a pressure cooker environment being fueled by nothing but DT’s vitriol and rhetoric (whether this was by choice in following certain accounts or hashtags or unconsciously being served up messaging via social media’s algorithms) and being totally brainwashed that his rhetoric was 100% true. It was then as if the echo chambers created an internal tornado that whipped people into a frenzy that would not allow any other point of view to be heard let alone considered and to blindly follow this demagogue over the hill and into battle.
Thanks Katherine! It really was like watching a powder keg waiting to erupt! I think it will be interesting to read the other related topics in this stream to see how they viewed events withing the Trump Presidency. I don’t envy you living there during all that turmoil! I have family in the US, and much like us, could not help but wonder how Trump supporters could come to be so manipulated. Over the last few units I’ve studied, I’ve realised just how deep social networks and media can take you within your own bias. Considering I have tried to always view both sides of an opinion, I like think I to try to stay (hopefully) neutral and stick to facts. Until 5 years ago, I couldn’t have told you if I would have aligned with Republicans or Democrats politically. My initial interest was spurred with Trump’s running for office and his apparent lack of morality. It has been an interesting personal study of US politics, and now even more so, on how social networks have played into it. Research into this was fascinating when one considers social media as a platform for politics far outdates Donald Trump’s use of it.
Thanks, Joseph! I have to agree with you on the hashtags and clicktivism point! I was in the finalising of the conference paper when I realised it was a point I should probably have touched on more. Twitter, being that it was Trump’s main social platform in the lead-up to this event was instrumental, considering hashtags are a staple on its feeds. I did ponder that this was more used in building an online community (e.g. #MAGA) over the networking of his account for this incident (e.g. #StopTheSteal). I guess it goes a little both ways in that respect.
Though I agree with you in the sense of the social change is in the point of view, I do feel that in this instance it is important to recognise the United States is seen as having a fair democracy. It has prided itself on it principles of providing a free and fair election for all. And while they may have underlying issues on this matter, the ideals of this riot was more about misinformation than injustice associated with it. Mandela lived under a regime that saw much violence over racial injustice. Their struggle with racial equality is more recent, whereas the US is supposed to be considered peaceful having already addressed this issue. (This in itself is a whole other issue I won’t go into, considering #BlackLivesMatter!). Thus the incident of January 6th was a blight on US history and what they believe as a whole about their country and its institutions. The rioters’ belief they were patriots confounds the matter as they went against the very institution they were patriots for. They rioted again the ‘point of view’ they stood for. I hope that makes sense!
I think this is quite a thought provoking topic to touch upon and opens a discussion to a number of much wider issues such as net regulation, standard of education and mob mentality. The paper itself is also very well presented. Regarding the subject matter, I personally have always find it difficult to discuss political issues without offending anyone – there’s always someone who wholeheartedly believe that if I’m not on board with how much of a non-sequitur they think the Paris climate agreement is then I’m a ‘dirty leftist’. I think the insurrection might have been that but at a much larger scale after the crowd have been psyched up for months. At it’s core DT managed to validate his followers’ frustration and at the same time bring profit to people he associated with through his content. I’m curious as to how some people from their side are still able to justify the damage that the insurrection has caused.
Roosdy, I think politics is always going to offend someone! So, I tried to not be too controversial, and obviously, stay with the facts. I have read quite a few stories of rioters who have looked back and shocked themselves over what happened and what they did. In this sense, I tried to be more neutral and look at the implications of ‘how’ the riots came to be over the ‘why’. Ironically, there is so much more we could add to this discussion but limited on word count! All the wider issues you mentioned are very much a part of the bigger picture and I’m sure we’ll see many more papers on it in the foreseeable future. The current political climate in the United States seems to feel broken but hopefully on the mend. This incident is just another learning experience in the way of how online social media can have a far-reaching effect on its users for change, be it an extreme.
This is a very well thought out and articulated paper which I agree with much of. I like how you touched on Trump blurring the lines between celebrity and social interaction in order to interact with the people to suit his agenda. You mentioned hashtags but I think it would of been wise if you talked about hashtag activism and clicktivism as concepts in this paper and how they relate to the social change caused by Trump on Twitter in relation to the capitol riots. I think you are correct in saying it caused the wrong kind of social change but then again it depends from which POV you look at it from. From a Trump activist POV I think the Capitol riots are the epitome in the quest for social change, although they did not achieve their goal they fought very strongly for it. In a similar sense, Mandela is considered a terrorist by many despite also being crowned one of the greatest revolutionists to ever live. Ultimtely I agree with your comments on this being the wrong kind of social change, from a neutral perspective however social change comes in all forms and sometimes you don’t know if its ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ until it fully unfolds. (No I’m not a Trump supporter haha)