“It would be an understatement to say that politics have transformed in the past two decades. ”
Sophie Spiegelberger, Chair of Democrats Abroad Austria’s Communications Committee
Modern democracy is built on the idea that citizens have the power to select and vote for those who represent their interest the best. Digital technology has transformed the workings of democracy in profound ways and plays a central role in how people engage politically. It affects the power balance between individual citizens and the main socio-political institutions, political parties in particular.
For our second last #ResponsibleTechInsights we had a chat with Sophie Spiegelberger, the Chair of Democrats Abroad Austria’s Communications Committee. We spoke about the challenges digitalisation has brought to political organisations and discussed the opportunities and risks of technological platforms across the political spectrum.
You’re leading the Communications Committee at Democrats Abroad, can you tell us more about what that means?
Democrats Abroad is the official arm of the Democratic Party representing Americans who live outside the US. Our mission is to provide American citizens living in Austria a voice in the U.S. government and to elect Democrats by mobilizing the overseas vote.
As an organisation, our one and only goal is to encourage people to vote. The Communications Committee is a centerpiece of Democrats Abroad Austria’s internal mechanics. We liaise with different members and representatives to create campaigns, assist in marketing and contribute to membership growth.
And in what areas are your main activities happening?
Our job revolves around two pillars: press & media relations, and social media. When it comes to the press, organisations such as Democrats Abroad are called upon by local media to represent the Democratic Party in various debates, panels and interviews, especially during an election year.
The challenge lies in walking the line of explaining often complex domestic U.S. policy issues to a foreign audience while also staying on message. Social media on the other hand, and I can’t stress this enough, is the flagship of every organisation in 2020. Your standing is often judged by your social media presence – the quality of your content and the tone you strike.
Fast forward to 2020, where politicians are their own one-man media outlet.
How has political communication changed throughout modern technology?
It would be an understatement to say that politics have transformed in the past two decades. The 2008 election cycle was the first in which the internet began to muscle its way into the electoral process and I don’t have to tell you that it doesn’t look like it’s going anywhere anytime soon. Social media has become increasingly important. It was first hailed as a novel opportunity for candidates to connect and communicate with supporters directly, without the “hassle” of having to go through traditional media channels.
Now fast forward to 2020, where politicians are their own one-man media outlet. Donald Trump has 88,7 million followers on Twitter while The New York Times has about half of that. Bypassing and discrediting journalists has become the name of the game, punching below the belt has become standard.
Digital communication has become a battle post for political organisations. You deal with disinformation and internet trolls while you’re also trying to create content that goes viral. All of this is doing nothing to nurture a healthier democracy.
Well, that definitely sounds like a lot. Any opportunities you see in using technology then?
Statistics show that if only people under 35 voted, merely 35% would have cast their ballot for Trump. This means the direction is shifting towards a more progressive agenda. And there is incredible potential for technology to engage the younger generation a lot more.
The Democratic National Committee for example has built a polished online and social media presence. They transitioned well into digital grassroots organising, utilising platforms like Slack to create online volunteer communities. The digitalisation of fundraising has also proven to be an immensely powerful tool, especially during the pandemic-stricken 2020 election.
In my opinion, the most valuable tech solutions for campaigns aren’t social media platforms, but rather project management and fundraising software that make campaigning more efficient and accessible to a new set of people.
As a smaller organisation, how do you approach the current digital landscape?
Globally, Democrats Abroad has almost 200.000 members, our branch in Austria has only a fraction of that. With a small budget, using both organic and paid social media activities to spread the word is a must. Extremely targeted placements on social media for example are a good way to go.
Of course this advantage for us can also be a disadvantage as a whole as it increases polarisation. On that note, I have a strict content policy at Democrats Abroad in place to avoid polarisation as best as we can. We pursue a strict no-Trump content strategy. I want our content to be constructive rather than in opposition to the incumbent, which is why we avoid references to his antics.
The efforts that these companies made so far to combat this are not enough, they’ve gotten off scot-free.
And what are the threats technology products and services pose?
Bots, fake news and polarisation. Misinformation campaigns are intentionally designed to influence people’s views and beliefs in ways that benefit only one side, not the democratic process. There were first signs of social media platforms being misused in this sense in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. But the efforts that these companies made so far to combat this are not enough, they’ve gotten off scot-free.
Labelling Trump’s tweets with cautionary messages that indicate they contain, to put it mildly, questionable claims are largely symbolic. They haven’t proven to stop the virality of his tweets. When people’s opinions are influenced and inevitably distorted by information that is incorrect, inaccurate and not trustworthy, their political decisions and actions are effectively harmful to themselves.
Fake News is the buzzword of 2016, 2020 and beyond; what’s your stance on this?
Social media often gets blamed for the explosion of fake news. Few talk about traditional media’s role in polarising the electorate. Driven by a ratings-craze, America’s TV networks, on both sides, have shifted further and further apart. MSNBC is as much to blame as FOX News and many liberals don’t want to acknowledge that. Filter bubbles a product of network TV too.
So as long as we demonise social media for creating alternate versions of reality, we are addressing only half of the problem. There’s a need for publicly-funded media that doesn’t rely on advertising in the U.S.. Especially local journalism has been experiencing a painful death. Until money and media are detached from one another I don’t see how we will be able to tackle this deep polarisation.
This isn’t journalism, this is his personal opinion.
Then how are you dealing with the spread of misinformation?
The key to combating misinformation is not framing your content in opposition to something else. What I mean by that is the following: present the facts without referring to the fake news you are trying to debunk.
Trump uses fake news very deftly. He tweets whatever’s on his mind, whether it’s true or not. These posts will be seen, liked and shared by millions of people. This isn’t journalism, this is his personal opinion. What’s interesting, however, is that his claims then get picked up and validated by traditional news networks that should (at least in theory) have some sort of journalistic integrity.
Which is exactly what happened when Trump refused to concede despite no evidence of voter fraud in this year’s election.
Exactly. This was to be expected though. He announced that he might not accept the results if he lost four years ago too. In 2020 his message remained surprisingly consistent. Perhaps this was a good thing. Democrats were absolutely prepared for the possibility of him contesting the results and refusing to cooperate.
This means that the Biden campaign was able to meticulously plan out their post-election messaging and lawyer up to fight him in court. This is probably the first time I’m saying this but #ThanksTrump.
Do you have any closing thoughts you would like to share with our readers?
All in all I’m very optimistic when it comes to democracy and technology. We’re far from using all of the digital opportunities that are out there. Humans are infinitely innovative and I can’t wait to see what developments are just around the corner.
If you want to find out more about your startup’s status quo when it comes to business ethics opportunities and other topics such as health risks or technology design, take the Responsible Technology Assessment here – it only takes 15 minutes!