Social Media Bias

Last week I discussed the future of social media from a neutral perspective. In this article I will give more of an opinionated stance which looks at the recent trends in elections and media to see which direction the industry is going in. Social media firms should not take an opinionated, editorial stance on what is on their websites. If they were to, having an elitist bias is the exact same failed approach traditional media firms have taken. Gab’s recent growth shows why having an opinion could spur the downfall of these big social media players.

There is a growing skepticism from the non-political elite about the direction of the country and the world. Any establishment figure, whether it is the media, Congress, or the wealthy on Wall Street, are losing their credibility. Has the media really changed much in the past 10 years or has the attitude of people towards it changed? I would argue for the latter because of economic reasons. The proof is in the chart below. Since the 1980s the share of the wealth owned by the bottom 90% has fallen from 36% to 23%. This trend is bound to cause havoc politically. Trump was able use this trend to his advantage by making the argument “what do you have to lose by picking me?”

inequality

The mainstream media claims the biggest loser of this election is itself. This is another misunderstanding of reality. The media already lost, seeing the election results was just an updated score of a game that ended years ago. According to Business Insider only 6% of Americans have a lot of trust in the media. This shows how out of touch, the media is with its viewers. They thought a failed prediction of an election mattered when there was never any trust in it before the election happened. I consider the main factor for this loss in trust to be the growing inequality gap as the media reports how great the economy is while millions of Americans can’t find a job. The inequality gap works in tandem with where the media personalities live. Most of the richest areas in America surround Washington DC and New York, while the middle of the country hasn’t experienced the recovery. This why 84% of the counties in America supported Trump.

You would think the distrust in media would be great for Facebook and Twitter because they represent the new way to consume the news. This loss in mainstream credibility hasn’t translated to trust in the sources on these social networking sites. According to the same poll I cited earlier, only 12% of Facebook users have a lot of trust in the news they see on it and only 18% of Twitter users have a lot of trust in the news they see on it.

I described in my last article about how these firms are becoming editors of news. They are a new type of media firm which wasn’t what they set out to be. The main goal of these firms, in my opinion, should be to be places where content is shared, not to be determinants of what should and shouldn’t get news coverage. Twitter misunderstands what it is. Just because Twitter is the first place news is reported, doesn’t mean it should control the coverage.

Not only is this the wrong direction for these firms, but they also are using the same failed strategies of traditional media firms. It’s not a political battle of left versus right. If this was the case then media firms, would have much higher than a 6% approval rating. It is a battle of the elite versus the ‘average Joe.’ Silicon Valley has the same elitist mentality as New York City and Washington D.C.

Traditional media is pushing hard against Facebook for reporting ‘fake news.’ This type of alternative news is probably the most popular news because it is an alternative to what is reported by the big media firms. Because of this elitism in Silicon Valley, I expect it to acquiesce to these complaints. Twitter has already been banning many accounts which are part of the new political trend called the ‘alt right.’ It’s not a matter of whether these accounts are agreeable or not. Twitter makes money from traffic. Banning accounts hurts it. The verification check mark being taken away and banning accounts are part of the elitist mentality that drove people away from traditional media.

If I thought Facebook and Twitter should go in the direction of being opinionated media firms, I think they should be going in the direction of where the eyeballs are. With the election of Trump and the Brexit, you would think they might notice a trend. The chart below represents this trend. It is the traffic garnered by ZeroHedge.com. The website’s traffic is up about 41% since May. I’m not saying media should be reported in the way this website does, but I do think all viewpoints should be heard

zerohedge

Another example of the trend towards this new perspective is Paul Joseph Watson’s Twitter stats. As you can see, this alternative right new-media personality has improved his impressions and profile visits by over 50% in the past 28 days. This reinforces the idea that the social media firms are moving in the wrong direction. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if Watson was banned from Twitter in the next few weeks.

gab

As I said, taking an opinionated approach to news stories is too risky because it will always offend a group. The new social media website Gab is trying the non-biased approach. So far it has worked out well for it as its stats have jumped since my last post mentioning the service. There have been 55,000 new accounts added to the list of people trying to get on in the past week. There are 72,000 total accounts. It’s amazing how well a relatively small user base has done in boosting Gab’s ranking in the Alexa graph. I expect this trend to accelerate in the future as it takes share from Facebook and Twitter.

gab

Conclusion

Social media firms have such political bias, that they don’t see the strategic mistakes they are making by not catering to those with an alternative viewpoint. Because of this elitist attitude traditional media still hasn’t been able to change its direction. Given those who run Facebook and Twitter have the same mentality, I see no chance that they will change and respond to market forces. Therefore, I would avoid their stocks.

Spread the love

1 Comment

  • Ray

    November 21, 2016

    Who wrote this load of bull? Fake news is not news it's propaganda. Real media with real reporters reporting on real news is an essential part of democracy. It's a sad fact that the public would rather be entertained than informed. Twitter and Facebook and other sites have a responsibility to crack down on abuse.