{"id":8550,"date":"2016-12-01T05:51:08","date_gmt":"2016-12-01T05:51:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/?p=8550"},"modified":"2016-12-29T05:55:42","modified_gmt":"2016-12-29T05:55:42","slug":"10-ways-the-tech-industry-and-the-media-helped-create-president-trump","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/10-ways-the-tech-industry-and-the-media-helped-create-president-trump\/","title":{"rendered":"10 ways the tech industry and the media helped create President Trump"},"content":{"rendered":"

Damian Radcliffe<\/a>, University of Oregon<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

Three weeks after Donald Trump won a historic victory to become the 45th president of the United States, the media postmortems continue.<\/p>\n

In particular, the role played by the media and technology industries is coming under heavy scrutiny in the press, with Facebook\u2019s role in the rise of fake news<\/a> currently<\/a> enjoying considerable<\/a> coverage. This represents a shift from earlier in the campaign, when the volume of media airtime given to Trump was often<\/a> held culpable<\/a> for \u201cThe Apprentice\u201d star\u2019s political ascendancy.<\/p>\n

In truth, a Trump presidency is \u2013 in part \u2013 a reflection of the status and evolution of the media and tech industries in 2016. Here are 10 ways that they combined to help Trump capture the White House in a manner not previously possible. Without them, Trump might not have stood a chance.<\/p>\n

Inside the tech industry\u2019s role<\/h2>\n

1) Fake news looks a lot like real news. This is not a new issue<\/a>, but it\u2019s a hot topic, given the social media-led explosion<\/a> of the genre. As BuzzFeed found, fake news can spread more quickly than real reporting<\/a>.<\/p>\n

President Obama has weighed in<\/a> on the problem, as have investigative reporters<\/a>. And The New York Times found that fake news can \u201cgo viral\u201d very quickly<\/a>, even if it\u2019s started by an unassuming source with a small online following \u2013 who subsequently debunks their own false story. <\/p>\n

2) Algorithms show us more of what we like, not what we need to know. Amazon, Netflix and Spotify demonstrate how powerful personalization and recommendation engines<\/a> can be. But these tools also remove serendipity, reducing exposure to anything outside of our comfort zone.<\/p>\n

Websites like AllSides<\/a>, and the Wall Street Journal\u2019s Red vs Blue feed<\/a> experiment \u2013 which let users \u201cSee Liberal Facebook and Conservative Facebook, Side by Side\u201d \u2013 show how narrow our reading can become, how different the \u201cother side\u201d looks, and how hard it can be to expose ourselves to differing viewpoints, even if we want to.<\/p>\n

3) Tech doesn\u2019t automatically discern fact from fiction. Facebook doesn\u2019t have an editor<\/a>, and Mark Zuckerberg frequently says<\/a> that Facebook is not a media company<\/a>. It\u2019s true that Facebook content comes from users and partners, but Facebook is nonetheless a major media distributor. <\/p>\n

More than half of Americans get news from social media<\/a>; Facebook is the 800-pound gorilla. \u201cThe two-thirds of Facebook users who get news there,\u201d Pew notes<\/a>, \u201camount to 44 percent of the general population.\u201d But its automatic algorithms can amplify falsehoods<\/a>, as happened when a false story about Megyn Kelly trended on Facebook<\/a> this summer.<\/p>\n

4) The rise of robots. It\u2019s not just publications and stories that can be fake. Twitter bots<\/a> can look the same as real Twitter users, spreading<\/a> falsehoods<\/a> and rumors and amplifying<\/a> messages (just as humans do). Repeat a lie often enough and \u2013 evidence suggests<\/a> \u2013 it becomes accepted as fact. This is just as true online as it is on the campaign trail. <\/p>\n

My mother always warned me not to believe everything I read in the papers. We need to instill the same message<\/a> in our children (and adults) about social media.<\/p>\n

5) Tech has helped pull money away from sources of real reporting. Google, Facebook, Craigslist and others have created new advertising markets<\/a>, diverting traditional ad revenues from newspapers in the process. <\/p>\n

Meanwhile, programmatic advertising<\/a>, which uses computer algorithms to buy \u2013 and place \u2013 online ads, is changing the advertising dynamic yet again. This can<\/a> mean<\/a> companies unintentionally<\/a> buy ads on sites \u2013 such as those from the alt-right \u2013 which don\u2019t sit with their brand or values; and that they would not typically choose to support.<\/p>\n

The media played its part, too<\/h2>\n

1) Fewer ad dollars means fewer journalistic boots on the ground. Data from the American Society of News Editors show that in 2015 the total workforce for U.S. daily newspapers was 32,900<\/a>, down from a peak of 56,400 in 2001. That\u2019s 23,500 jobs lost in 14 years.<\/p>\n

Though some of these roles have migrated to online outlets<\/a> that didn\u2019t exist years ago, this sector is also starting to feel the cold<\/a>. A reduced workforce has inevitably led to less original journalism, with fewer \u201con the beat\u201d local reporters, shuttered titles and the rise of media deserts<\/a>. Cable news, talk radio, social networks and conservative websites \u2013 channels that predominantly focus on commentary rather than original reporting \u2013 have, in many cases, stepped in to fill these gaps.<\/p>\n

2) Unparalleled airtime helped Trump build momentum. A study by The New York Times concluded<\/a> that in his first nine months of campaigning, Trump earned nearly US$2 billion<\/a> in free media. This dwarfed the $313 million earned by Ted Cruz and the $746 million secured by Hillary Clinton. The Times noted<\/a> this was already \u201cabout twice the all-in price of the most expensive presidential campaigns in history.\u201d<\/p>\n

Wall-to-wall coverage wasn\u2019t just beneficial to Trump. \u201cThe money\u2019s rolling in,\u201d CBS Chairman Les Moonves told<\/a> an industry conference this year, noting that a Trump candidacy \u201cmay not be good for America, but it\u2019s damn good for CBS<\/a>.\u201d <\/p>\n

3) Did all the investigative journalism and fact-checking make a difference? Great work by NPR, The New York Times, the Atlantic, the Washington Post and others didn\u2019t slow Trump\u2019s momentum. Just two<\/a> of the country\u2019s 100 largest newspapers endorsed Trump, but more than 62 million people voted<\/a> for him anyway. <\/p>\n

We need to understand whether these journalistic efforts changed any opinions, or simply reinforced existing voter biases. As Fortune journalist Mathew Ingram observed<\/a>: \u201cTrump supporters and the mainstream media both believed what they wanted to believe.\u201d<\/p>\n

4) Many journalists were out of step<\/a> with the mood of much of the country. We need a greater plurality<\/a> of voices, opinions and backgrounds to inform our news coverage. <\/p>\n

A 2013 study from Indiana University\u2019s School of Journalism<\/a> revealed that journalists as a whole<\/a> are older, whiter, more male and better-educated than the American population overall. This means journalists can be disconnected from communities they cover, giving rise to mutual misunderstandings and wrong assumptions. <\/p>\n

5) The jury\u2019s out<\/a> on whether Trump is a master of deflection<\/a>. But despite his fabled short attention span<\/a>, too often it\u2019s the media that is distracted and dragged off-course. <\/p>\n

In March, the Washington Post\u2019s editorial board<\/a> astonishingly allowed Trump to play out the clock when he ducked a question on tactical nuclear strikes against ISIS by simply asking \u2013 with just five minutes of the meeting remaining \u2013 if people could go around the room and say who they were.<\/p>\n

More recently he led the press corps and Twitterati<\/a> on a merry dance, after his \u201cHamilton\u201d tweet<\/a> got more coverage than the $25 million settlement against Trump University<\/a>. He repeated the trick when tweets alleging illegal voters<\/a> turned the spotlight away from discussions about potential conflicts of interest<\/a> between his presidency and his property empire.<\/p>\n

The next four years<\/h2>\n

There were other factors, of course, that helped Republicans win the Electoral College. These include a desire for change in Washington<\/a>, Clinton\u2019s ultra-safe campaign<\/a> and Trump\u2019s ability to project the image of \u201cblue-collar billionaire<\/a>\u201d who understood economically and politically disenfranchised communities.<\/p>\n

Trump capitalized on these opportunities, prospering despite myriad pronouncements and behaviors (accusations of assault<\/a>, unpublished tax returns<\/a>, criticism of John McCain\u2019s war record<\/a>, feuding with a Gold Star family<\/a>, mocking a disabled reporter<\/a> and routinely offending Muslims<\/a>, Mexicans<\/a> and women<\/a>) that would have buried any other candidate.<\/p>\n

Trump\u2019s use of media and technology means his presidency promises to be like no other<\/a>. <\/p>\n

In the past few days we\u2019ve finally started to see discussions emerge<\/a> about how the media should respond to this. Suggestions include focusing on policy, not personality<\/a>; ignoring deflecting tweets<\/a>; and a raft of other ideas<\/a>. To these, I would add the need to promote greater media literacy<\/a>, a more diverse media and tech workforce and improving the audience engagement<\/a> skills of reporters. <\/p>\n

Journalists and technologists will need to redouble their efforts if we are to hold the White House accountable and rebuild trust across these two industries. This promises to be a bumpy ride, but one that we all need to saddle up for.<\/p>\n

\"The<\/p>\n

Damian Radcliffe<\/a>, Caroline S. Chambers Professor in Journalism, University of Oregon<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

This article was originally published on The Conversation<\/a>. Read the original article<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Damian Radcliffe, University of Oregon Three weeks after Donald Trump won a historic victory to become the 45th president of the United States, the media postmortems continue. In particular, the role played by the media and technology industries is coming under heavy scrutiny in the press, with Facebook\u2019s role in the rise of fake news […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":43,"featured_media":8551,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[8],"tags":[479,483,785,308,1764,1763,934,789,533],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8550"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/43"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8550"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8550\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8552,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8550\/revisions\/8552"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/8551"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8550"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8550"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8550"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}