Navigating Social Media’s Political Quagmire
Does social media lead to depression? Is it a net good for society, promoting progress and activism? These are two of the most prominent questions asked about social media. In the dire conditions of the Covid-19 pandemic, with more people online and on social media than ever, the conversation has become supercharged. For me, and many others, the questions of politics and mental health are closely interlinked. This is my attempt at navigating the chaos.
My musing began in earnest when #CivilWar was repeatedly trending on Twitter last week. Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh added fuel to the rigged-election fire with talk of succession, and boom, the fuse was lit. It was the usual mix of 1) people mocking the idea to assert their superior intelligence, 2) people freaking out, and 3) people writing serious, self-important statements as if they themselves could somehow singlehandedly save the world.
The specific hashtag doesn’t concern me, but rather the predictable reactions. Not least because I engage in all of them myself, particularly the latter two. At first glance, they might be easily dismissed as merely illogical. Yet, given the ways our minds work, I think they all make sense. Our worlds are made up of the inputs we receive. Social media, and media in general, make up a great deal of these inputs.
Crime coverage illustrates this point perfectly. Violent crime is sharply declining and has been for decades. Yet, most Americans believe that it is increasing. Why? To a large extent because the news over-reports violent crime. Everyone wants clicks and views. Covering the opening of bike lanes in a city to encourage exercise, lessen traffic, and combat climate change, might not get many clicks, but covering a murder in said bike lane will generate some solid views. Social media operates in a similar manner. Thus, #CivilWar trending. The runaway topics are geared towards excitement, and often make the world more chaotic and scary than it really is.
And while this is technically true, it risks obscuring as much as it reveals. We feel negative media deeply and it can greatly affect our mental health. A study conducted after the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings found that people who consumed upwards of six hours of bombing related coverage per day experienced more acute stress than people who had witnessed the explosions. In the words of the study, “Mass media may become a conduit that spreads negative consequences of community trauma beyond directly affected communities.” In a similar vein, a study conducted in Wuhan, China at the beginning of the pandemic found that excessive social media usage related to the pandemic led to mental health issues.
All of which has very real-world consequences. Trump, and the media behind him, ran on amplifying violence. While this wasn’t enough to win the election, it was still effective. According to exit polls, choosing between five options, including the ongoing pandemic (with now over 300,000 dead in America), the economy (struggling because of the pandemic), healthcare policy (a tool to help with the pandemic), and racial inequality (in the midst of an incredible movement for racial justice), 11 percent of Americans still thought crime and safety was the most pressing issue. 71 percent of these people voted for Donald Trump. I do not believe crime and safety would have played as significant a role in people’s voting without the disproportionate media focus.
So, in a certain way, it makes sense for people to write with deadly seriousness about the impact of social media. To feel a real sense of accomplishment after winning an argument. What happens on social media matters because we feel it matters. And thereby affects change in the physical world. At the same time, social media, particularly as we experience it, is not the real world, just a small, warped slice. It is important to remember this fact.
Take Twitter, which started this whole journey. Unlike other social media, Twitter engagement comes through trending words and hashtags, and so is not limited by your circle of friends and acquaintances. Believing I am engaging more widely, I find it easier to make the false assumption that what I see on Twitter somehow represents a broader representation of Americans. Or, at least, to feel an unwarranted amount of happiness or soul-crushing despair.
As of 2019, 22 percent of Americans were on Twitter. Overall, they are more likely to be younger and Democrats than the general population. Additionally, 10 percent of Twitter users generate 80 percent of tweets. A majority of these most frequent users are women. In short, while Twitter seems like it engages a broader population, it still represents a small fraction of America that is not representative of the United States overall.
What is popular on Twitter, and on social media in general, often doesn’t translate beyond its digital confines. For example, The Lincoln project, a political PAC of anti-Trump Republicans, was very successful at making anti-Trump ads. From July through September, the group raised 39.4 million dollars. However, a study carried out by Democratic Pac Priorities USA found that Lincoln project ads on Twitter were ineffective in the changing the minds of persuadable voters in swing states. Moreover, the ads most shared on Twitter were the least effective. Rather, the defeat of Trump in many states was attributed to a strong ground game, such as the effort led by Stacey Abrams in Georgia where Joe Biden was the first Democratic presidential candidate to win in almost three decades.
So where exactly does this leave us in terms of dealing with depression, social activism, and their intersection in social media (and the media, in general)? I wouldn’t recommend quitting altogether because we are better citizens when we’re informed about the world. Rather, it is important to maintain perspective on social media. Using it as a barometer for the world can lead to freak-outs and a sense that your posts are doing far more than they really are. At the same time, tracking media trends can help you better understand certain political moments by providing helpful context. Social media is an active and influential force in our world as we feel it deeply. This does not mean that everyone experiences it as we do or that our slice of it is representative of the broader world. Our immersion in it should be temporary, rather than all-consuming.
Perhaps the best way to manage this is the tried and true cliché of moderation. The study done in Wuhan China found that while excessive social media usage was harmful, more limited amounts related to the pandemic were helpful. It provided valuable information and peer support. Don’t let social media become the inexorable quicksand that leads you to a distorted version of the world. Make it into a tool.
