Separate the wheat from the chaff

In recent times we have been witnessing the progressive evolution of political communication associated with the uninterrupted development of new information and communication technologies.

Contemporary reality is now inseparable from the digital plane and the political-party panorama is an unequivocal example of this.

The way of doing politics has undergone significant changes, currently benefiting from the many technological advances and new ways of transmitting information, but also becoming more exposed to the possible dissemination of false or inaccurate information, which easily creates erroneous narratives and even endangers democracy and institutions.

Traditional electoral campaigns, based on direct contact with the population, have been losing some of their shine, with the digital space, especially the world inherent to social networks, becoming essential for the dissemination of propaganda themes of a political nature, ideas and related proposals.

Social networks, broad-spectrum communication tools, now make it possible to reach the population more easily and in a short space of time. Social networks promote contacts and enhance the range of action of the messages that are intended to be transmitted. Social networks generate a cascade of interactions, promote the uninterrupted sharing of content, thus giving energy and dynamism to the political discourse of parties and, in particular, to the electoral campaigns that precede a given election. Social networks clearly influence voters' voting intentions, which is why the positioning of politicians in the digital world is extremely important and cannot be neglected.

However, the virtual world associated with politics can also be pernicious.

In the wake of the unbridled dissemination of political discourse and in pursuit of voters' votes, political parties and their candidates may use inappropriate means when it comes to the use of social networks.

The use of “bots”, programs that, through artificial intelligence, simulate or imitate human behavior, creating virtual users with the aim of increasing interactions, generating discussions and manipulating opinions, are an example of the misuse of the virtual world.

The spread of fake or anonymous accounts used to create certain narratives to the benefit of those who create them or to denigrate opponents is another example of the misuse of the virtual world in politics. This type of strategy, in addition to being despicable and cowardly, does not promote the discussions that should really be promoted, nor does it tend to inform voters with due seriousness and transparency. Fake or anonymous accounts only contribute to a rudimentary attempt to manipulate public opinion.

The dissemination of false information, often propagated by hordes of candidates’ followers, is also a danger in associating the virtual world with the political world, since this information tends to be based solely on the sole obsession of protecting the supposed leader, the candidate, often an incumbent, with the aim of obtaining advantages or maintaining privileges in the future. The hordes of followers thus serve as spokespeople for the dissemination of certain narratives, orchestrated by the party or the candidate. They are made up of a group of people who blindly submit to the fierce defense of certain ideas and political discourse, of which they often do not even realize the true scope, but which nevertheless provides them with a purpose, a feeling of belonging and also a certain hope of having “a place in the sun”. This empty discourse of the hordes, however silly it may seem, can still deceive some unwary people and influence opinions.

In fact, the work that political parties do virtually must be in line with the work that must be done outside the virtual sphere. The political projects that are intended to be put into practice must be rooted in a concise plan and vision of what is really intended for the territories and for the benefit of the population. It is not enough to simply capitalize on words and use less serious strategies to stir up emotions, during election campaigns, on certain issues. It is necessary to have a purpose and a sense of mission for the public cause.

To separate the wheat from the chaff, taking advantage of the full potential inherent in the digital world, we must promote digital literacy and, above all, the development of critical thinking among the population. May such prerogatives protect voters in the upcoming elections, and may these same voters extract the benefits of social networks while at the same time keeping away from themselves the most harmful aspects of these networks.

(Written according to the old spelling)