Preview

Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 18. Sociology and Political Science

Advanced search

Modern technologies of social management in the US political process (using the example of the 2020 presidential election campaign)

https://doi.org/10.24290/1029-3736-2021-27-2-200-217

Abstract

This article provides an applied analysis of the social network technologies used by Western IT-companies to exert a direct or indirect influence on political processes. The study focuses on a set of tools that were employed to shape the media landscape during the 2020 presidential election campaign in the United States. Overall, the empirical observations suggest that the largest networking services (such as Facebook, Twitter, Google, YouTube, etc.) more or less contributed to the success of the Democratic candidate.

Having studied the relevant U.S. experience, the authors identify a set of manipulative techniques used by social network administrators to form specific electoral attitudes among users. These include blocking accounts; setting up search algorithms to produce pre-programmed results; labeling ideologically objectionable materials as “fake”, “untrustworthy”, “manipulative” and “potentially dangerous”; automatically recommending certain materials for viewing; and removing or pessimizing unwanted content.

Seeking to expand their own audience, social networks flood the media space with so-called “partisan” content, which is vigorously welcomed by one part of society and just as vigorously rejected by another. This leads to polarization and radicalization of the masses. The most destructive consequences of this process can be witnessed in the United States, where Democrat and Republican supporters become not just political opponents but real antagonists.

Social media, search engines and news aggregators, developing their capacity as political actors, pave the way to a qualitative change in the established electoral practices. The greatest concern is the ability of IT-companies to manipulate the political consciousness and behavior of citizens during crucial election campaigns. Considering this circumstance, the authors raise a question about the need to regulate the political and communication processes unfolding on the Internet platforms.

About the Authors

P. Y. Feldman
Academy of labor and social relations
Russian Federation

Feldman Pavel Y., Candidate of Political Science, Aassociate professor, Department of philosophy and sociology

Lobachevskogo str., 90, Moscow, Russian Federation, 119454 



N. S. Danyuk
Institute for Strategic Studies and Predictions at RUDN University
Russian Federation

Danyuk Nikita S., Candidate of Historical Science, Deputy Director; Member of the Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation

Mikluho-Maklaya str., 10, Moscow, Russian Federation, 117198 



Y. S. Senokop
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation

Senokop Yan S., Posgraduate Student, Department of International Relations and Integration Processes, Faculty of Political Science

Leninsky Gory, 1, Moscow, Russian Federation, 119991 



References

1. Akkaunty prezidenta SSHA v Twitter perejdut Bajdenu v den’ inauguracii [US President’s Twitter accounts to be transferred to Biden on inauguration day] // RBK. 2020.21.10. URL: https://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/5e881119a79470551c07cfd (accessed: 23.11.2020) (in Russian).

2. Americans’ main sources for political news vary by party and age // Pew Research Center. URL: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/04/01/americans-mainsources-for-political-news-vary-by-party-and-age (accessed: 20.11.2020).

3. Ballots counted ader Election day are legitimate as long as they were cast on or before November 3, as per state-by-state rules // Twitter. 2020.04.11. URL: https://twitter.com/i/events/1323361679699181569 (accessed: 20.11.2020).

4. Castells M. Vlast’ kommunikacii [Communication Power]. M., 2020 (in Russian).

5. Fukuyama F., Richman B., Goel A. How to save democracy from technology // Foreign Abairs. 2020. URL: https://www.foreignabairs.com/articles/unitedstates/2020-11-24/fukuyama-how-save-democracy-technology (accessed: 20.11.2020).

6. Hasell A., Weeks В. Partisan provocation: the role of partisan news use and emotional responses in political information sharing in social media // Human Communication Research. 2016. Vol. 42. Iss. 4.

7. Helmer О., Brown В., Gordon T. Social technology. N.Y., 1966.

8. Koronavirus i deti: 12 voprosov o tom, chto grozit vashemu rebenku [Coronavirus and children: 12 questions about what threatens your child] // BBC. 2020.14.04. URL: https://www.bbc.com/russian/vert-fut-52231282 (accessed: 20.11.2020) (in Russian).

9. Osipova N.G., Chelishchev V.I. Social’nye mekhanizmy i tekhnologii manipulyativnogo upravleniya lichnost’yu [Social mechanisms and technologies of manipulative personality control] // Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 18. Sociologiya i politologiya. 2016. 22 (4) (in Russian).

10. Panarin I.N. SMI, propaganda i informacionnye vojny [Media, propaganda and information wars] M., 2012 (in Russian).

11. Personal Twitter account of D. Trump. URL: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump (accessed: 20.11.2020).

12. Shatin Y.V. Postpravda kak ritoricheskij fenomen v sovremennom mediaprostranstve [Post-truth as a rhetorical phenomenon in the modern media space] // Vestnik Novosibirskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Istoriya, Rlologiya. 2020. N 19 (6) (in Russian).

13. Smoking-gun email reveals how Hunter Biden introduced Ukrainian businessman to VP dad // New York Post. 2020.14.10. URL: https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/ email-reveals-how-hunter-biden-introduced-ukrainian-biz-man-to-dad (accessed: 20.11.2020).

14. Social media users pass the 4 billion mark as global adoption soars // Creative agency “We are social”. 2020.20.10. URL: https://wearesocial.com/blog/2020/10/socialmedia-users-pass-the-4-billion-mark-as-global-adoption-soars (accessed: 20.11.2020).

15. State Senator D. Mastriano’s personal Twitter account. URL: https://twitter.com/SenMastriano (accessed: 20.11.2020).

16. “Svoboda slova dlya svoih”: kak Facebook zablokiroval populyarnye novostnye stranicy iz-za “svyazej” s RT [“Freedom of speech for your own”: how Facebook blocked the popular news page because of the “ties” with RT] // Russia Today. 2019.19.02. URL: https://russian.rt.com/world/article/603562-facebook-blokirovka-rt (accessed: 20.11.2020) (in Russian).

17. Twitter na vremya zablokiroval akkaunt izbiratel’noj kampanii Trampa [Twitter temporarily blocked Trump’s campaign account] // Deutsche Welle. 2020.06.08. URL: https://www.dw.com/ru/twitter-zablokirovala-akkaunt-izbiratelnoj-kampaniitrampa/a-54456473 (accessed: 20.11.2020) (in Russian).

18. Twitter obratil vnimanie pol’zovatelej na fejki v postah Trampa [Twitter drew users’ attention to fakes in Trump’s posts] // RBK. 2020.27.05. URL: https://www.rbc.ru/society/27/05/2020/5ecdba8c9a794773d1b8808f (accessed: 20.11.2020) (in Russian).

19. Trump “blagoslovil” sdelku s TikTok. V SSHA ego poka ne budut zapreshchat’ [Trump “blessed” the TikTok deal. In the US it will not be banned yet] // BBC. 2020.20.09. URL: https://www.bbc.com/russian/news-54228338 (accessed: 20.11.2020) (in Russian).

20. Trump makes unsubstantiated claim that mail-in ballots will lead to voter fraud // Twitter. 2020.26.05. URL: https://twitter.com/i/events/1265330601034256384 (accessed: 20.11.2020).

21. Trump claims Google “rigged” searches against him but company denies it // ABC News. 2020.29.08. URL: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-attacks-google-claimsprioritizes-fake-newssearches/story?id=57444232 (accessed: 20.11.2020).

22. V Gosdumu vnesli proekt zakona o sankciyah protiv zarubezhnyh IT-platform za cenzuru rossijskih SMI [A drad law on sanctions against foreign IT platforms for censoring Russian media was submitted to the State Duma] // Взгляд. 2020.19.11. URL: https://vz.ru/news/2020/11/19/1071356.html (accessed: 20.11.2020) (in Russian).

23. YouTube refuses to remove video that appears to violate its policie // CNBC. 2020.04.11. URL: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/04/youtube-refuses-to-removevideo-that-appears-to-violate-its-policies.html (accessed: 20.11.2020).


Review

For citations:


Feldman P.Y., Danyuk N.S., Senokop Y.S. Modern technologies of social management in the US political process (using the example of the 2020 presidential election campaign). Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 18. Sociology and Political Science. 2021;27(2):184-201. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24290/1029-3736-2021-27-2-200-217

Views: 1453


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 1029-3736 (Print)
ISSN 2541-8769 (Online)