![]() ![]() We’ve known since at least 2012 that Facebook was a powerful, non-neutral force in electoral politics. The informational underpinnings of democracy have eroded, and no one has explained precisely how. The real problem-for all political stripes-is understanding the set of conditions that led to Trump’s victory. It’s not that this hypothetical perfect story would have changed the outcome of the election. Every component of the chaotic digital campaign has been reported on, here at The Atlantic, and elsewhere: Facebook’s enormous distribution power for political information, rapacious partisanship reinforced by distinct media information spheres, the increasing scourge of “viral” hoaxes and other kinds of misinformation that could propagate through those networks, and the Russian information ops agency.īut no one delivered the synthesis that could have tied together all these disparate threads. Reporters tried to see past their often liberal political orientations and the unprecedented actions of Donald Trump to see how 2016 was playing out on the internet. ![]() Tech journalists covering Facebook had a duty to cover what was happening before, during, and after the election. To hear more feature stories, see our full list or get the Audm iPhone app.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |