.Corp Comm Connects

Voting in the 'wild west': How social media impacts the municipal election

Yorkregion.com
September 10, 2018
Kim Zarzour

“This is Anon. We have been watching you Karen. You need to stop being a bully. We Have everything!! whats your is now ours. Stop the madness or we will send our enforcers”

Welcome to politics in the digital era.

Richmond Hill Councillor Karen Cilevitz was shocked Aug. 4 to discover that her social media accounts had been hacked by a person or people who seemed out to get her.

Within 10 minutes, they’d hacked into her personal and community Facebook pages and her Twitter account, replaced the landscape and profile photos with “Bully," posted threatening messages on her Facebook and Twitter accounts, took down her councillor website, and hacked her Mailchimp e-newsletter account.

The hack and threat are now part of a York Regional Police criminal investigation, but it was a striking example of how social media has become the new frontier in politics -- especially in an election year, especially in what some are calling the “post-truth era”.

It’s not just lawn signs and doorbell-ringing anymore.

Back in the day, we met our local candidates by shaking hands on the doorstep or at all-candidates meetings. Today we meet them online -- or we think we meet them.

Thanks to the proliferation of anonymous websites, social bots, internet trolls and the Trump-led charge of “fake news,” it has become increasingly difficult to know what is the truth, and who the players really are.

Voters got a taste of this new approach to politicking during the 2014 municipal election in Vaughan and Richmond Hill.

In Vaughan, two incumbent politicians, Deb Schulte and Marilyn Iafrate, were targeted in attack ads on anonymous websites, Tumblr pages and YouTube videos.

In Richmond Hill, residents puzzled over Richmond Hill Watchdog, a website that took shots at the mayor and some councillors. It claimed to be a new residents group, but few members ever came forward and the website -- which has since disappeared -- was linked to a company that sold election campaign services.

A similar secretive group, called Time For Change Vaughan, appeared in 2010. An internet expert who examined the site said whoever created that website went to great lengths to conceal their identities. A corporate search by The Citizen later revealed a Maple resident was connected to the site, but members remained anonymous.

The issue of fake news and social media influences have become even more entangled in politics in recent years, experts say, and they warn voters to be wary -- and educated.

The alternative may be confusion and chaos, something Arnold Neufeldt-Fast is observing now in Stouffville.

“It’s becoming like the Wild West,” he says. “It’s getting more complex and difficult to figure out who is driving what.”

Neufeldt-Fast ran for Stouffville mayor in 2014. This election, he says Facebook and Instagram are larger political platforms in Stouffville and as the October vote looms closer, these venues that used to provide space for healthy discussion have become fraught with fakery, anonymity, shrill voices and personal attacks.

“A lot of us want to discuss and debate and we’re frustrated that it is becoming so polarized.”

When it works, social media can be a valuable space for civil debate and information-sharing, says Seneca College professor Bhupesh Shah. Because most messaging is free, it can level the playing field and provide an avenue for two-way conversations, he says.

“Before it was easier to ignore the harder questions.”

But there is a danger, he says, when more vocal voices dominate the space and skew perception of community sentiment.

People are more confident behind the keyboard and have the guts to say things online they wouldn’t in person, making it easier to spread rumours and inaccuracies, he adds.

“Echo chambers” or political silos present another danger, he says. We have a tendency to seek information that supports our beliefs and each time we like or click a post on social media, search engines and algorithms work to provide us more of the same."

This can isolate us from dissenting views, he says.

York University instructor Derek Hrynyshyn says these “filter bubbles” lead to a more polarized and misinformed electorate.

“We’re unable to tell when we’re being misled. We used to all watch the same newscasts -- now we can choose where we want to get our information and not know when there is reason to doubt what we’re hearing.”

This might lead to more populist candidates playing fast and loose with the facts and more vulnerability to trolls or teens in basements, he adds.

“It’s not very expensive to make stuff up and put it online.”

It’s not just made-up facts. Made-up Facebook users, websites and Twitter bots can be created, or purchased, by candidates and those who support them to push their message, says Gavin Adamson, a Ryerson professor who specializes in digital journalism.

“It’s not hard to slap up a website these days and be anonymous.”

Candidates can now buy ads through social media that select the audience they want to reach based on demographics, geographic area and interests, he says.

When candidates do make statements or announcements, they are increasingly bypassing traditional media outlets and news conferences, sending their message directly to potentially sympathetic voters instead - and thereby avoiding difficult questions from journalists, Adamson says.

“This way they can shape the message, choose facts they want highlighted or omitted. They don’t have to worry about a fair and balanced approach that is created by mainstream media scrutiny.”

Adamson doesn’t blame politicians for taking advantage of the technology, but he says voters should beware.

“There is no simple solution. We just need to take politics more seriously.”

Tips for ferreting out fake news: