Social media has immense power—to inform and to connect. But when used irresponsibly, it also has the power to deceive and divide. The polarization fueled by algorithm-driven content, the rampant spread of misinformation, and the violent real-world consequences of online extremism all point to the urgent need for reform, especially in the United States. According to a 2023 study by the Pew Research Center, 64% of Americans believe social media has been detrimental to democracy, almost twice the worldwide median of 35%.
Algorithms on platforms like Meta, X, and YouTube are designed to maximize user engagement by showing content that aligns with a person’s interests and beliefs. While this keeps people on the platform longer, it also creates ideological echo chambers, where users are exposed primarily to viewpoints that reinforce their existing beliefs. Over time, this division deepens, making productive discussions across political lines increasingly difficult.
Even on a local scope, the social media activity of politicians has sparked conflict and controversy. On Jan. 27, Asian school board member Rowena Chiu reposted and commented on an X post from Asians Against Wokeness that criticized statements made by Executive Director of Curriculum and Instruction Danae Reynolds, a Black woman, during the Jan. 23 school board meeting where ethnic studies was approved as a requirement for the class of 2028-29. Chiu’s post received thousands of likes and hundreds of comments, with many containing racially derogatory statements and violent threats toward Reynolds.
Regardless of Chiu’s intent, her case is a clear example of the negative traction political social media posts can gain. Tension between Chiu supporters and those calling for her removal has exploded in group chats, among comments on news sites, and in the boardroom. The properties of social media incentivize the spread of hate speech while worsening conflicts and their fallout.
A 2020 study by the Pew Research Center found that Americans who get their news primarily from social media tend to have more extreme political views than those who rely on traditional media sources. The reason is simple: outrage-driven content gets more engagement. Political leaders, influencers, and partisan outlets take advantage of this by posting inflammatory content designed to provoke strong emotional reactions. The more divisive the message, the more likely it is to be shared, liked, and spread to wider audiences. Family members and friends are finding themselves unable to discuss politics without conflict. Bipartisanship in government is becoming increasingly rare as politicians cater to the most extreme voices within their base. This hostility has been evident in events like the 2020 and 2024 presidential elections, where partisan divides turned into real-world threats.
Just as much as social media accelerates the spread of worldwide news, it has also made it easier than ever for misinformation to spread, often reaching millions before fact-checkers can intervene. Unlike traditional media, which is bound by journalistic standards, social media platforms allow anyone to publish content without oversight. Now, politicians capitalize on this fact, relying less on outside mainstream media sources and instead controlling the message directly. In the months leading up to the 2016 election, billions of election-related posts circulated the internet, with President Donald Trump’s campaign extensively using social media. Due to a lack of regulations, professional and personal accounts co-exist, exacerbating public belief in false statements. According to a 2018 Massachusetts Institute of Technology study, false news spreads on Twitter six times faster than true news. Because misinformation is often sensational, emotionally charged, and designed to grab attention, it often pulls in a wider audience, particularly those less interested in politics.
Social media company policies have also worsened the spread of weaponized information. For instance, Meta recently announced that its social media apps Facebook, Instagram, and Threads would no longer use third-party fact-checkers. In another case, X’s fact-checking program, Community Notes, is ineffective in stopping misinformation, according to a report from the Associated Press. The enabling of false information in political spaces spells doom for the public as they are further exposed to polarized and extremist viewpoints.
Misinformation has also had life-threatening consequences in the realm of public health. During the COVID-19 pandemic, conspiracy theories about the virus, masks, and vaccines spread rapidly on social media. Anti-vaccine content flourished, with influencers and even some politicians casting doubt on the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. This led to increased vaccine hesitancy, particularly in conservative-leaning communities. A 2021 Kaiser Family Foundation study found that those who relied on social media for COVID-19 information were significantly more likely to believe falsehoods about the virus.
The spread of misinformation and the deepening of polarization don’t just stay online—they manifest in real-world consequences, sometimes in the form of violence.
Despite evidence that the 2020 election was fair, misinformation campaigns continued, with little intervention from social media companies. This resulted in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, which led to damaged property, five deaths, and multiple injuries. A 2021 NPR/Ipsos poll with a sample of 1,005 American adults found that nearly two-thirds of Republican voters still believed the election was illegitimate. This widespread belief in a false narrative had profound consequences, eroding trust in the democratic process and laying the groundwork for future election-related unrest.
Even beyond acts of violence, the influence that political leaders wield on social media has impacted democratic stability. In 2022, Paul Pelosi, the husband of then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, was attacked in his home by a man wielding a hammer, who cited conspiracy theories he had encountered online as motivation for his crime.
To curb the weaponization of social media in politics, political leaders must be held accountable for spreading falsehoods; social media companies should enforce policies that apply equally to all users, regardless of influence. In order to ensure this, platforms must implement stronger content moderation by actively detecting and limiting the spread of misinformation. Regulatory oversight is necessary to hold companies accountable for the amplification of harmful content, ensuring transparency in how information is promoted. Fact-checking partnerships should be expanded, with clear labels for misleading posts to help users distinguish truth from falsehood. Additionally, digital literacy education should be prioritized in schools and communities, equipping people with critical thinking skills to evaluate online information.
