How Political Parties Communicate With Their Electorate

How Political Parties Communicate With Their Electorate 1
HOW POLITICAL PARTIES COMMUNICATE WITH THEIR ELECTORATE
By (Student’s Name)
Professor’s Name
College
Course
Date

How Political Parties Communicate With Their Electorate 2
HOW POLITICAL PARTIES COMMUNICATE WITH THEIR ELECTORATE
Introduction
Social media use in political campaigns is increasingly gaining traction as a tool to
engage the electorates and even drive them away from the mainstream media. Social media has
indeed transformed politics. However, social media must never be blamed for Trump and Brexit.
Following Brexit and Donald Trump’s election, 2016 shall be recalled as a period of catastrophic
democratic happenings on each Atlantic side. Social media remained involved in the upsurge of
populism, which culminated in Brexit and Trump’s election developments (Karlsen and Enjolras
2016).
Consideration has emphasized on echo chambers whereby several people are holding that
users of social media only exist in the philosophical filter bubbled, focused barely on partialities,
prey to fake news as well as political bots, buttressing polarization as well as guiding voters to
turn their backs on the mainstream. The Facebook owner, Mark Zuckerberg has reacted to critics
with a strange assertion that his firm does not impact the choices of voters. This essay looks at
social media’s role in the 2016 political events, specifically, Brexit alongside the election of
Trump.
How Political Parties Communicate With Their Electorate
It is apparent that the political turbulence and the new populism witnessed in 2016
political events had everything to do with social sites. It is doubtless that social sites have
brought alterations or shift in politic in term of how political parties communicate with their
electorates. From the waves of unrest and protests in reaction to 2008 GFC to Arab spring of
2011, a sweeping feeling remains that political enlistment stays on surge and that it is the main
contributor.

How Political Parties Communicate With Their Electorate 3
According to Margetts et al. (2015) and Gold (2016), the association between social
media and collective action has been examined. These books have focused on how social sites
enable novel, “tiny acts” of the party-political partakes including tweeting, viewing, following,
liking, besides signing petitions, to mention a few, have turned social media to theory of social
movement around. Instead of identification with matters, the formation of shared identity
subsequently acting to buttress interest of such identities, or balloting for a given party-political
supporting this identity, in the world of social sites, individuals work quickly and think about it,
or if it all, identify later with others.
The small acts of partaking have the potential to scale up to huge-scale mobilization,
including protests, demonstrations, or even campaigns for a change in policies. Their impacts act
increasingly fast on an enormous scale. For example, petitions contesting Trump and Brexit
votes instantly exploded beyond 4m signatures. It became the most significant petitions ever
witnessed. However, in the absence of standard political or social movement organizational or
institutional trappings, like political parties or leaders, the rationale behind the disappointing
Arab Spring revolutions. An example of the petitions is represented in appendix below,
demonstrating the influence of social media on Brexit vote.
The quick-tempered rise, non-normal dissemination as well as absence of organization
which features modern politics explains the reason several developments politically of the period
appear to mysteriously emerge. It helps comprehend the shockwave of supports which led to
Trump and Brexit campaigned in contradiction of the “establishment” as well as defied old-style
institutions of politics to the breaking point (Gold 2016).