Neither presidential candidate won the presidential debate in September. While both parties’ blunders and snapbacks circulated the internet — from Trump’s false claims about immigrants in Springfield, Illinois eating household pets to Harris’s facial expressions — not a single piece of policy made national headlines. Both social media and news outlets picked up on insults and comebacks, yet left the general population uninformed about the candidate’s plans for the country.
Unfortunately, this isn’t new — it reflects the larger trend of modern political propaganda that’s overtaking our world. A trend that is terrible news for democracy. Because political propaganda isn’t just provocative rhetoric aimed at weakening a political foe; it’s a force that is increasing divisions and inciting chaos within society.
While the ways it manifests itself have changed, political propaganda today is not much different from how it was before. Rosie the Riveter used to be a poster plastered on every block, but in today’s digital age, you find political propaganda on every website on the Internet. Name-calling, bandwagoning, and slander still very much exist and are amplified in modern society.
For undecided voters who want to hear more about candidates’ policies, it’s not easy to access unbiased political information. It’s an unfortunate fact that most voters today hardly consider policy because media outlets don’t pick it up.
Just look at Hillary Clinton’s campaign in 2016: she had a 600-page policy book that she publicized extremely well, but all that stuck in the minds of Americans was “Crooked Hillary” and that she had an email problem. A study published in the Columbia Journalism Review found that in just six days, the New York Times ran as many cover stories about Hillary Clinton’s emails as they did over the 69 days leading up to the election about policy issues.
So why does modern political propaganda have such a chokehold on American youth? The problem lies within disinformation on social media and the lack of policy accountability from the candidates themselves.
As social media platforms have become a tenet in American lives, they’ve also become a podium for political ideology. After President Biden dropped out of the 2024 presidential race, Kamala Harris made a strong showing as the new Democratic nominee by utilizing the power of social media.
I’m sure everyone remembers the endless “coconut tree” meme videos that popped up when we were doom-scrolling over the summer—for a while, it seemed I’d never escape them. Users on social media had taken a quote from her mother that Harris had stated during a swearing-in ceremony (“You think you just fell out of a coconut tree? You exist in the context of all in which you live and what came before you?”), and turned it into a viral dance phenomenon. Harris then played into her newfound social media fame by using the “Brat” font in her X (formerly Twitter) banner to spell out “kamala hq,” a reference to Charli XCX’s popular summer “Brat” album. By connecting herself culturally to younger generations, Harris was able to create a new movement dubbed online as the “Kamalanomenon” (modeled after a “feminomenon”), that showcased her feminist campaign focus. This was desperately needed after Biden’s various PR fiascos and flubs that had everyone calling him too old to be in office.
Harris isn’t the only one; Trump has also utilized the power of social media throughout his political career. In fact, his accounts have been a spectacle ever since he joined X in 2009. As the Associated Press found in 2021, Trump tweeted around 57,000 times over nearly 12 years. Until, of course, he was banned from the platform entirely after his incendiary tweets that sparked the Jan. 6 United States Capitol attack.
These social media appeals to younger generations should be viewed not as a facade of reliability, but for what they truly represent: a threat to democracy. It’s obvious that misinformation and sensationalist posts thrive on social media, but when people in trusted governmental positions spread it, it’s harder for readers to distinguish between lies and the truth. Just recently, Trump has spread false information about the disaster response to Hurricane Helene and Harris has exaggerated how much the Biden administration has cut the flow of fentanyl.
And with new advancements in artificial intelligence, the technology used to manufacture propaganda seems to only be improving. Generative AI has made easy-to-use media manipulation tools readily available to the public. Deepfakes of both Trump and Harris have made themselves prominent across social media, stating information that doesn’t reflect their policies but is still widely circulated.
So in the wake of such harmful disinformation, shouldn’t social media companies themselves be held accountable? Unfortunately, the ones catered to younger generations have pretty much proven themselves incapable of doing so. A new Global Witness investigation found that Tiktok, with a user base of 1 in 4 under 20, approved 50% of ads containing false information about the election. This is despite its policy explicitly banning all political ads. It’s clear they can’t be trusted to censor content.
While it’s entertaining to watch the candidates’ soundbites, clips, and social media, none of them reflect their policies. As future voters, we must take it upon ourselves to ensure that the claims are true and not blindly believe every fact we see on social media. Visit independent media outlets and fact-checkers like Politifact, a Pulitzer Prize-winning site. Try to understand the policies of opposing candidates, don’t get your information solely from outlets that reflect your political views.
That “new Kamala reel” you saw on Instagram yesterday? Fact-check it. The donation ad on TikTok you scrolled to? Think twice before you pay.
This modern propaganda problem is also exacerbated by candidates themselves, who pour money into marketing themselves at the expense of the truth. This year’s political ad spend is expected to land between $10.2 billion and $12 billion—numbers that would demonstrate a 13%-to-30% increase from the 2019-2020 election cycle. The sad reality is that in today’s day and age, both the Kamalanomenon and MAGA (Make America Great Again) are marketing campaigns, not political movements.
Now, we must call on candidates to be honest and open about their intentions instead of pushing their agendas. The recent announcement that Trump will not be having a second debate against Harris is extremely disappointing, and shouldn’t be celebrated. Just because their policies sound appealing, do not assume that they are true and well-intentioned. Stray away from the bandwagon and demand policy in debates, substance in discussions, and accountability from our nation’s leaders.
