A Nation Divided

Political polarization has grown across America, to a point where now most Americans believe it is a serious issue that impacts them directly. Violent demonstrations in support of both right and left-leaning political movements are more commonplace than ever. Every election cycle the divide seems to get a little worse. There is always talk about how the country must heal after the election, but no significant progress is made. 

What is driving the increased political polarization? I believe it is due to several reasons. The ever-expanding media environment simply offers much more choice than ever before. News media has pivoted from informing to entertaining. There is more focus on generating profits via increasing viewership. In essence, outrage and conflicts sell. Also, there is distrust in the mainstream media by both liberals and conservatives, which is understandable. Why would anyone trust those that demonize them? Another significant factor is social media accounts that can quickly send out divisive messages to millions instantly.

So what can be done to change the current trend? There is no getting around the fact that media significantly impacts the way society thinks about topics. Academically, this has been labeled the Agenda-Setting Theory. The Agenda-Setting Theory is the news media's ability to influence the importance placed on topics being reported. It determines which news stories are shown in the news media. What topics are being discussed and how they are discussed is what must change.

For there to be a significant change, the way the media chooses stories and how it covers them must change. Stories can't just be covered from one viewpoint, but opposing views should be presented. The tone of the debates must change. Instead of glorifying disagreements, interviewers and guests on network shows must be respectful even if they disagree. If journalists in the media can't be civil with their guests, it sets a bad example for everyone watching. There should be a focus on civil debate, with the understanding that it is ok to disagree in the end.

In conclusion, people do emulate the behaviors that they see. Having a diverse civil debate on news shows will benefit the country. Less outrage and more civility are needed.

A Flawed Social Media Study

As a web designer, SEO, and social media consultant, I am responsible for increasing social media user engagement for my clients. The more followers my client’s social media accounts have the better. Increasing the time those followers spend online engaged on my client’s social media accounts, the more likely sales will be generated. Due to this, I always read social media studies as I worry about the impact of my work on society. The latest study I have read is called The Impact of Social Networking Sites on the Youth. It was an interesting read, and below are my thoughts on each of the sections that comprise the study.

Introduction

The influence of social networking sites on the user’s life will be gauged. Both the positive and negative impacts of online networking are investigated. The study will analyze the credibility of information received from social media. After reading the study, I feel the objectives were not clearly defined with specific measurements. For example, how would the researchers gauge the credibility of the information from social media?

Hypothesis

1. Social media sites have more negatives than positives if both the parameters are evaluated. 

2. Users are more inclined towards fields of entertainment other than relevant information. 

3. Participation in social gatherings is declining due to the overutilization of social media sites.

The hypothesis in this study lacks clarity and is too general. What determines a negative vs. a positive parameter and how are they evaluated? I did not see anywhere in the study what constituents a negative or positive parameter.

Research Methodology

The study used the quantitative approach to study the research objectives. Sampling was via questionnaires where the questions were close-ended, and the target group consisted of ages 15 to 24. The respondents were from the Delhi/NCR region. One hundred questionnaires were filled out, each containing a total of 10 questions. 

Looking at the methodology, I felt the size of the target group was very small and not effective. Choosing all participants from one region does not make sense to me. I feel the study would have been more effective if the target group was larger and from multiple areas both urban and rural.

Conclusion 

The primary objective of the study was to measure the positive and negative aspects of social media usage. Social media use from the target group was found to be heavily skewed towards entertainment. It was found users can discriminate between the real and virtual world. Users realize social media does not build stronger contacts with people than in person. The target group spends on average more than 2 hours a day on social media which keeps them from real-world social interactions. After reading this research paper, I don’t think such a small and localized study can prove much. The research methods seemed flawed from the beginning. Including the criteria for what constitutes negative and positive parameters is needed to provide clarity to the reader. A larger target group from multiple areas would also be beneficial and provide more accurate results.