Running Head Web Based Medias Commitment To Politicalmisperceptions ✓ Solved

This paper focuses on social media’s role coverage of the 2012, 2016, and 2021 presidential election United States. The documentation centers main stream of media reporting that was adverse for all the candidates, however largely trailed Donald Trump’s program: when informing over Hillary Clinton, reporting mainly dedicated on the several scandals connected to the Clinton emails and Foundation as observed by researchers such as Williams et al. (2019).

When focused on Trump, major substantive issues, primarily immigration, were prominent. Certainly, immigration transpired as a dominant subject in the campaign serving as an important subject for the Trump campaigns. From the article, there is a revelation that media composition and structure on both the left and right are quite diverse. The top media on the left and right are rooted in diverse journalistic and traditional practices.

Based on the conservative part, more consideration was given to the pro-Trump, extremely biased media outlets. On the side of the liberal party, by contrast, the focus of magnitude was made mainly of longer-position media administrations submerged in the practices and traditions of impartial journalism. This analysis supports texts of an article on a division in USA politics that center on the unequal arrangements between the right and left, instead of reviews that see division as an overall historical occurrence, focused on technology and other systems that apply over the partisan polarization.

For instance, the Clinton drive to express her campaigns on policy, competence, and experience positions was overpowered by reporting purported improprieties connected through the Clinton emails and Foundation. Reporting of Trump-related trade, immigration, and jobs were better than on his scandals. Immigration appeared as the prominent substantive matter of the campaigns.

Primarily, the Trump campaigns applied a hard-stand anti-immigration standpoint to differentiate Trump’s field from GOP competitors. Later on, migration was a segment subject between the right and left. Pro-Trump media foundations reinforced this with race-centric, sensationalist reporting of immigration dedicated to terrorism, crime, disease, and Muslims' fear.

From the article observations, it infers that solving the American sphere might be much difficult. Consequently, the more extensively circulated descriptions of the post-truth instant false news sites looking for Facebook promotion, Russia appealing in the propaganda battle, or data overload leading tangled voters making them unable to differentiate truths from an untrue or deceptive passage which these are unpredictable using democratic principles, and the necessity for interferences to reply to them remains less or more indisputable as noted by scholars such as Westney (2020).

If profit-determined false news remains the problem, resolutions like commending Facebook and Google to apply a technical system to ascertain false news sites to stop them by repudiating them publicizing revenue and reducing their places' perceptibility appear on their look, not to clash with democratic principles.

Equally, if a distant authority is looking to affect the democratic procedure by propagandistic ways, then taking the intelligence society limit how this will be done and silence it normatively smooth, as emphasized by scholars such as Garrett (2019). If the public is tangled, then creating instruments will give them fact-proving metrics, whereas they select and peruse stories might aid.

These methods might add to resolving the bewilderment in the public space; however, the observations infer that they must be checking on the limits of the main challenge.

Paper For Above Instructions

In the context of U.S. politics, the role of web-based media, particularly social media platforms, has become increasingly significant in shaping political narratives and public perceptions. This paper delves into the challenges and misperceptions that arise from how these platforms report on political events, particularly during presidential elections. By analyzing the coverage of the 2012, 2016, and 2020 elections, we can identify patterns of misrepresentation and bias that contribute to widespread political misperceptions among the electorate.

The media landscape in the United States encompasses a wide array of sources, from traditional print and broadcast media to the more contemporary web-based outlets. As highlighted by Williams et al. (2019), mainstream media reporting has often favored sensational stories, particularly those that align with a specific political agenda. In the case of the 2016 election, the media's handling of Hillary Clinton's emails served as a pivotal point in the election narrative, overshadowing substantive discussions about policies and candidate qualifications.

Donald Trump’s campaign strategies capitalized on this reporting bias, emphasizing immigration and economic issues while downplaying scandals associated with his candidacy. Instead of focusing on the substantive issues, the media portrayal often devolved into a spectacle, fueling misperceptions about the candidates’ capabilities and intentions. Donald Trump’s hardline stance on immigration, often framed through a lens of fear, further polarized public opinion and distorted factual narratives around immigration policies and their societal implications (Garrett, 2019).

Moreover, the rise of partisanship in media reporting reveals a significant divide in how news is consumed across the political spectrum. Right-leaning media outlets have been observed to influence their audiences by promoting narratives that align with conservative ideologies, thus reinforcing political misperceptions about left-leaning candidates and their agendas. Conversely, left-leaning outlets primarily focus on critiquing the known scandals and contentious policies of right-leaning candidates, often neglecting a fair analysis of their policies (Westney, 2020). This polarization contributes to a media ecosystem where misinformation thrives, and voters are unable to make informed decisions based on balanced reporting.

The 2020 election cycle further exacerbated this issue, as the proliferation of ‘fake news’ and disinformation campaigns became more pronounced, notably through platforms like Facebook and Twitter. These platforms have faced mounting criticism for their inability to effectively regulate false information, leading to an environment where misleading narratives can quickly gain traction (Garrett, 2019). Studies have shown that misinformation not only influences individual voter decisions but also undermines trust in democratic processes (Williams et al., 2019).

Given these challenges, it becomes essential to explore potential solutions that address misinformation while upholding democratic principles. One proposed resolution is enhancing the accountability of tech giants like Facebook and Google by requiring them to implement more stringent criteria for identifying and managing false news. Such measures could reduce the visibility of misleading content while promoting the spread of factual information (Westney, 2020).

Additionally, empowering the public with tools to verify information can be an instrumental part of the solution. Providing users with easy access to fact-checking resources and promoting media literacy can help equip audiences to discern credible sources from unreliable ones. This educational approach emphasizes the need for a well-informed electorate that can critically engage with information rather than passively consume it.

In conclusion, the commitment of web-based media to political misperceptions poses significant challenges to the U.S. electoral process. As social media continues to play a central role in shaping political discourse, it is imperative to address the issues of bias, misinformation, and the resultant public confusion. Strategies aimed at increasing media accountability and fostering media literacy among the electorate will be crucial in restoring trust in democratic institutions and ensuring informed participation in the political process.

References

• Garrett, R. K. (2019). Social media's contribution to political misperceptions in U.S. Presidential elections. PloS one, 14(3), e0213857.
• Williams, H. E., Bowman, S. W., & Jung, J. T. (2019). The limitations of government databases for analyzing fatal officer-involved shootings in the United States. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 30(2), 141-160.
• Westney, Z. V. (2020). The Social Media Machines: An Investigation of the Effect of Trust Moderated by Disinformation on Users’ Decision-Making Process. 01-222.