User:Narmstrong1010/Internet activism

When discussing the 2004 U.S. presidential election candidates, Carol Darr, director of the Institute for Politics, Democracy & the Internet at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., said of the candidates who benefited from online grassroots supporters: "They are all charismatic, outspoken mavericks and insurgents. Given that the Internet is interactive and requires an affirmative action on the part of the users, as opposed to a passive response from TV users, it is not surprising that the candidate has to be someone people want to touch and interact with."

A more decentralized approach to campaigning arose, in contrast to a top-down, message-focused approach usually conducted in the mainstream. "The mantra has always been, 'Keep your message consistent. Keep your message consistent,'" said John Hlinko, who has participated in Internet campaigns for MoveOn.org and the electoral primary campaign of Wesley Clark. "That was all well and good in the past. Now it's a recipe for disaster. You can choose to have a Stalinist structure that's really doctrinaire and that's really opposed to grassroots. Or you can say, 'Go forth. Do what you're going to do.' As long as we're running in the same direction, it's much better to give some freedom."

Two-thirds of Internet users under the age of 30 have a SNS, and during the 2008 election, half of them used a SNS site for candidate information (Hirzalla, 2010). MoveOn.org endorsed then-Senator Barack Obama in 2008, and used this endorsement as an opportunity to encourage grassroots advertising. MoveOn hosted a competition that requested submissions from ordinary citizens with the criteria the digital ads were positive towards Obama. The contest drew 1,000 entries of 30-second ads for Obama that streamed on YouTube. This endorsement by a grassroots organization, and the ensuing contest, is an example of agenda setting that scholars have been studying ever since social media and digital content began influencing presidential politics.

Studies delving into the 2008 presidential campaign examined inequality online of various ideologies deriving from various socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds. Scholars concluded the 2008 race, and the influence of online politicking, did not see an empowerment of new voices. The idea that digital literacy become a concept taught in school, with educators incorporating blogging, commenting, and creating content as part of their curriculum, has been bandied about among social and political scientists in an effort to turn online enthusiasm from young people into demonstrable results at the ballot box.

The 2016 presidential election changed the digital landscape again. Digital media scholars note that the hopes of developing digital literacy post 2008 turned into a fomenting distrust of traditional news media. People of all ages and political inclinations gravitated towards social media sources that acted as echo chambers, and online personalities and organizations were held in higher esteem than traditional news sources.