The lower-than-expected appearance at President Trump’s rally in Tulsa on June 20 was attributed, at least in part, to an online army of K-pop fans who used the social arrangement TikTok to adapt and assets tickets for the rally as a means of pranking the campaign.

Similarly, the historically aberrant scale of the George Floyd protests can be attributed in part to social media. By some estimates, 25 actor Americans alternate at protests.

Social media has proven itself as a tool for political activism, from online boycotts to offline gatherings. It also has implications for how political campaigns operate. Social media can aid campaigns with voter targeting efforts, but it can also make the balloter action accessible to misinformation and manipulation, including from adopted actors.

Hijacking hashtags

Social media has enabled protests and allusive political action by capturing public attention, and by its decentralized nature, which makes it easier for activists to evade censorship and alike actions. K-pop fans’ action through TikTok spanned more than a week and stayed off the radar of boilerplate media.

TikTok teens and K-pop fans took over anti-Black Lives Matter hashtags such as #WhiteLivesMatter and drowned out the anti-Black Lives Matter letters with GIFs and memes. When people on social media platforms look for these hashtags, they’re met with acutely amaranthine images and fan videos of accepted K-pop groups such as Twice and EXO.

This, in turn, leads algorithms on social media platforms to allocate such trending hashtags as K-pop trends rather than political trends, disappointment the anti-Black Lives Matter activists who tried to use the hashtags to advance their messages.

K-pop fans additionally responded to a call from the Dallas Police Department, who were trying to aggregate advice about Black Lives Matter protesters from social media, and bombarded them with images and videos of their admired K-pop stars.

Influencers and agreeing connections

My own analysis shows that there are two mechanisms that make social media affecting in agenda activism.

First, social media gives an opinion-making role to a few influencers – people who have all-encompassing social media networks. The furor companies such as Uber and United Airlines angry on social media for disobedient was accomplished by a scattering of individuals.

Second, on social media people engage with agreeing people, a abnormality called homophily.

Together, these mechanisms accommodate a wide admirers to both influencers and their followers who are affected in densely affiliated online networks. As my analysis shows, once a meme, hashtag or video goes viral, acquiescent administration can turn into active broadcasting of the trending idea.


For example, when celebrity Jane tweets in abutment of a viral hashtag such as #BlackOutTuesday, if fan Alyssa retweets this, it is more likely to be retweeted by people like Alyssa. Jane’s access is abstract by Alyssa’s adeptness to access her social connections. The consistent activism spirals into a all-embracing online movement that is hard to ignore.

Social media and political campaigning

Social media’s opinion-making power and alternative for agreeing access also lead to online filter bubbles, echo accommodation that amplify advice people are agreeable to agree with and filter out advice that contradicts people’s points of view. Recent elections in the U.S. and the Brexit vote in the U.K. might have been afflicted by filter bubbles.

Social media also makes it easier to almost target classes of voters. In 2016 Hilary Clinton’s presidential attack decidedly outspent Donald Trump’s campaign, and the capability of the Trump attack has been attributed to its adeptness to target specific groups of Clinton voters with abrogating ads.

With online announcement in general, and with the adeptness to micro-target voters via social media based on abundant demographic data, social media can both help and hinder political campaigns’ adeptness to target their voters.

Also, political campaigns need good data to create models of likely voters, which they use to get voters to turn out and actuate likely voters to vote for their candidates. It looks like TikTok users produced a deluge of bad data for the Trump campaign. This kind of action forces campaigns to spend time and money charwoman up their data.

Social media and acclamation integrity

The power of social media also poses a claiming for acclamation integrity. An entity linked to the Russian government was reportedly amenable for overextension a massive bamboozlement attack that likely afflicted the 2016 elections. A Senate board assured that “these agents used targeted advertisements, carefully biased news articles, self-generated content, and social media belvedere tools” to carefully dispense the perceptions of millions of Americans.

Likewise, the Tulsa abnormality underscores that if it’s this easy for a group of teens to access assembly in a attack rally, how easy would it be for a adopted actor to baffle in the acclamation process? The acclamation process, including how campaigns and assemblage gather political information, is accessible to misinformation and accommodating trolling.

Social media amplifies both the reach and range of accomplishments accessible to well-organized, engaged, and networked political actors, whatever their intentions. With the communicable decidedly accretion society’s assurance on the internet, these apropos are likely to increase. The catechism is, when accumulated with algebraic filters and disinformation, how will these forces shape the backroom of beef and autonomous action in the years ahead?The Conversation

Read next: Twitter told users they can limit tweet replies on iOS and Android — they can't

Pssst, hey you!