DOCSLIB.ORG

Brno University of Technology Vysoké Učení Technické V Brně

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Brno University of Technology Vysoké Učení Technické V Brně BRNO UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY VYSOKÉ UČENÍ TECHNICKÉ V BRNĚ FACULTY OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING AND COMMUNICATION FAKULTA ELEKTROTECHNIKY A KOMUNIKAČNÍCH TECHNOLOGIÍ DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES ÚSTAV JAZYKŮ SOCIAL MEDIA AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON DEMOCRATIC ELECTIONS SOCIÁLNÍ MÉDIA A JEJICH VLIV NA DEMOKRATICKÉ VOLBY BACHELOR'S THESIS BAKALÁŘSKÁ PRÁCE AUTHOR Veronika Khyzhniak AUTOR PRÁCE SUPERVISOR M. A. Kenneth Froehling VEDOUCÍ PRÁCE BRNO 2018 Bakalářská práce bakalářský studijní obor Angličtina v elektrotechnice a informatice Ústav jazyků Studentka: Veronika Khyzhniak ID: 189629 Ročník: 3 Akademický rok: 2017/18 NÁZEV TÉMATU: Sociální média a jejich vliv na demokratické volby POKYNY PRO VYPRACOVÁNÍ: Americká prezidentská volba v roce 2016 zdůraznila důležitost komunikace sociálních médií v demokratických volbách po celém světě. Cílem semestrálního projektu je prozkoumat různé formy sociálních médií a ukázat jejich vliv na demokratické volby. DOPORUČENÁ LITERATURA: http://www.e-ir.info/2017/07/28/social-media-in-the-2016-u-s-presidential-election/ http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/bibliotheque/briefing/2014/140709/LDM_BRI(2014)140709_REV1_EN.pd f https://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/theatre_s/applying/postgraduate/ma-theatre-performan- e-research/option_modules/th988/schedule/shirky.pdf Termín zadání: 9.2.2018 Termín odevzdání: 25.5.2018 Vedoucí práce: M. A. Kenneth Froehling Konzultant: doc. PhDr. Milena Krhutová, Ph.D. předseda oborové rady UPOZORNĚNÍ: Autor bakalářské práce nesmí při vytváření bakalářské práce porušit autorská práva třetích osob, zejména nesmí zasahovat nedovoleným způsobem do cizích autorských práv osobnostních a musí si být plně vědom následků porušení ustanovení § 11 a následujících autorského zákona č. 121/2000 Sb., včetně možných trestněprávních důsledků vyplývajících z ustanovení části druhé, hlavy VI. díl 4 Trestního zákoníku č.40/2009 Sb. Fakulta elektrotechniky a komunikačních technologií, Vysoké učení technické v Brně / Technická 3058/10 / 616 00 / Brno Abstract: Progress in online technology has greatly improved the way how people all over the world can communicate with each other. Social networks greatly facilitate live communication not only for ordinary people but also for representatives of the legislative power. With the help of social media, politicians can promote their political campaign, advertise their party and, thanks to this, quickly and economically gain supporters. The 2016 US presidential elections highlighted the importance of social media communication on democratic elections worldwide. The aim of the thesis is to study different forms of social media. The project deals with the impact of Twitter and Facebook in the 2016 USA election and describes the way candidates were using it during the race. Key words: social media, presidential elections, political campaign, communication, Twitter, Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, Facebook Abstract: Technologický pokrok výrazně zlepšil způsob, jakým mohou lidé na celém světě komunikovat. Sociální sítě velmi usnadňují živou komunikaci nejen pro obyčejné lidi, ale také pro zástupce legislativní moci. Prostřednictvím sociálních médií mohou politici propagovat svou politickou kampaň a svou stranu a díky tomu rychle a ekonomicky získat podporu. Americká prezidentská volba v roce 2016 zdůraznila důležitost komunikace sociálních médií v demokratických volbách po celém světě. Cílem bakalářské práce je prozkoumat různé formy sociálních médií a vyzdvihnout jejich vliv na demokratické volby. Projekt se zabývá vlivem Twitteru a Facebooku na volby v USA v roce 2016 a popisuje způsob, jakým je kandidáti používali během prezidentského klání. Klíčová slova: sociální média, prezidentské volby, politická kampaň, komunikace, Twitter, Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, Facebook KHYZHNIAK, V. Sociální média a jejich vliv na demokratické volby . Brno: Vysoké učení technické v Brně, Fakulta elektrotechniky a komunikačních technologií, 2018. 37 s. Vedoucí bakalářské práce M. A. Kenneth Froehling. Declaration I hereby declare that I have worked on this project independently, using the resources listed in the bibliography. Prohlášení Prohlašuji, že bakalářskou práci na téma Sociální média a jejich vliv na demokratické volby jsem vypracovala samostatně pod vedením vedoucího semestrální práce a s použitím odborné literatury a dalších informačních zdrojů, které jsou všechny citovány v práci a uvedeny v seznamu literatury na konci práce. Jako autorka uvedené bakalářské práce dále prohlašuji, že v souvislosti s vytvořením této práce jsem neporušila autorská práva třetích osob, zejména jsem nezasáhla nedovoleným způsobem do cizích autorských práv osobnostních a/nebo majetkových a jsem si plně vědoma následků porušení ustanovení § 11 a následujících zákona č. 121/2000 Sb., o právu autorském, o právech souvisejících s právem autorským a o změně některých zákonů (autorský zákon), ve znění pozdějších předpisů, včetně možných trestněprávních důsledků vyplývajících z ustanovení části druhé, hlavy VI. díl 4 Trestního zákoníku č. 40/2009 Sb. V Brně dne ………………. ………………. (podpis autora) Acknowledgement I would like to sincerely thank my supervisor M.A. Kenneth Froehling who believed in me and was continuously supporting me in every difficulty that occurred during the work on the thesis. I especially thank him for his support and his constructive comments. Our cooperation was an inspiring experience. Poděkování Chtěla bych poděkovat Kennetha Froehlinga za vedení mé bakalářské práce, cenné rady, připomínky a čas, který mi věnoval. Table of contents List of abbreviations ........................................................................................... 1 List of figures ....................................................................................................... 2 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................... 3 2. Social media ..................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Definition of social media ................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Most popular services........................................................................................................ 4 2.2.1 Facebook .................................................................................................................... 4 2.2.2 Twitter ........................................................................................................................ 5 2.2.3 YouTube ..................................................................................................................... 6 2.3 The expansion of social media .......................................................................................... 7 3. Election ............................................................................................................. 8 3.1 Definition of election ........................................................................................................ 8 3.2 History of election campaigns in the USA ...................................................................... 11 4. Influence of Twitter on 2016 election in the USA ...................................... 13 4.1 Hillary Clinton................................................................................................................. 13 4.2 Hillary Clinton’s campaign on Twitter ........................................................................... 13 4.3 Donald Trump ................................................................................................................. 15 4.4 Donald Trump’s campaign on Twitter ............................................................................ 16 4.5 Support of USA celebrities ............................................................................................. 17 5. Influence of Facebook on 2016 election in the USA ................................... 19 5.1 Hillary Clinton’s campaign on Facebook........................................................................ 19 5.1.1 Pantsuit Nation ............................................................................................................. 20 5.2 Donald Trump’s campaign on Facebook ........................................................................ 21 6. Internet interference of Russia in US election ............................................ 24 6.1 Intrusions into state registration systems of voters ......................................................... 24 6.2 Cyberattack and email leaks ............................................................................................ 25 6.3 Fake news on the Internet................................................................................................ 26 6.4 Results of the interference ............................................................................................... 28 7. Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 30 List of references ............................................................................................... 32 List of abbreviations: DC – the District of Columbia DNC – Democratic National Committee FBI – Federal Bureau of Investigation IA – State of Iowa LGBT – Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender LLC – Limited Liability Company NBA – National Basketball Association RBC – Royal Bank of Canada SMS – Short Message Service SNS
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Social Media and Democracy : the State of the Field, Prospects for Reform
    Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.33.19, on 26 Sep 2021 at 08:20:02, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/E79E2BBF03C18C3A56A5CC393698F117 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.33.19, on 26 Sep 2021 at 08:20:02, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/E79E2BBF03C18C3A56A5CC393698F117 Social Media and Democracy Over the last five years, widespread concern about the effects of social media on democracy has led to an explosion in research from different disciplines and corners of academia. This book is the first of its kind to take stock of this emerging multi-disciplinary field by synthesizing what we know, identifying what we do not know and obstacles to future research, and charting a course for the future inquiry. Chapters by leading scholars cover major topics – from disinformation to hate speech to political advertising – and situate recent developments in the context of key policy questions. In addition, the book canvasses existing reform proposals in order to address widely perceived threats that social media poses to democracy. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core. Nathaniel Persily is the James B. McClatchy Professor of Law at Stanford Law School and the Co-Director of the Stanford Cyber Policy Center and Stanford Project on Democracy and the Internet. His scholarship focuses on the law and technology of democracy.
    [Show full text]
  • Saturday November 18, 2017 7:00
    Saturday November 18, 2017 7:00 AM 301016 7:00 AM to 7:45 AM Sheraton State Room 4 - Third Floor (Conference Center) Community College Section Business Meeting - Part II Sponsor: Community College Section Presenters: Jeannie Hunt, Northwest College Terry L. Rogers, Casper College Jessica R. Hurless, Skyline College 301044 7:00 AM to 7:45 AM Sheraton Majestic 3 - 37th Floor (Center Tower) Freedom of Expression Division Business Meeting Sponsor: Freedom of Expression Division Presenters: Kevin A. Johnson, California State University, Long Beach Adria Battaglia, University of Texas, Austin Paula T. McKenzie, Bethune-Cookman University Billie Murray, Villanova University Paul Siegel, University of Hartford Alvin Primack, University of Pittsburgh 301066 7:00 AM to 7:45 AM Marriott Nice - Third Floor National States Advisory Council Business Meeting Sponsor: National States Advisory Council Presenters: Douglas Marshall, Southern University at New Orleans Janie Harden Fritz, Duquesne University Eric Grabowsky, Dickinson State University John H. Saunders, University of Alabama, Huntsville Kimberly Weismann, Williston State College Randy K. Dillon, Missouri State University Susan Tomasovic, George Mason University 8:00 AM Dallas Ballroom A1 - First Floor (Conference 303001 8:00 AM to 9:15 AM Sheraton Center) Examining the Role of Visuals in Communicating Health Information to Audiences Sponsor: Health Communication Division Chair: Julie E. Volkman, Bryant University "Adding Multichannel Cues to Medical Providers’ Online Biographies: Do pictures,
    [Show full text]
  • Hillary Clinton's Media Coverage and Choices in the 2016 Presidential
    Volume 4, Issue No. 1. Nasty Woman: Hillary Clinton’s Media Coverage and Choices in the 2016 Presidential Election Abby Bean Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA ÒÏ Abstract: 2016 came to be one of the most influential elections in recent American history; following eight years of the first black president, Hillary Clinton was the first woman to become the first presidential nominee of any major party in the history of the United States. On November 8th, 2016, she received 65 million votes, willing the popular vote but losing the presidency. Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and her opponent, Republican nominee Donald Trump, faced off in a town hall-style debate on October 9th, 2016. Just a few days prior, an Access Hollywood tape had been released to the public, wherein Trump bragged about committing sexual assault. Quickly in the debate, Trump’s behavior devolved and within only a few minutes, he began pacing, huffing, pointing, and looming behind Clinton. Situated within a context and climate unfriendly to female politicians, Clinton was faced with a choice. Either she could ignore Trump’s behavior and hold onto her composure or she could stand up to him and tell him to back off. The country and the world watched this profound moment that encapsulated one of the most significant themes of the campaign in which Clinton’s role as the first female presidential nominee by a major party placed hundreds of years of gender norms front and center. Stuck in a classic double bind, Clinton made the decision to keep quiet and ignore Trump.
    [Show full text]
  • The Scholar As Human
    THE SCHOLAR AS HUMAN THE SCHOLAR AS HUMAN RESEARCH AND TEACHING FOR PUBLIC IMPACT Edited by Anna Sims Bartel and Debra A. Castillo CORNELL UNIVERSITY PRESS Ithaca and London Copyright © 2021 by Cornell University The publication of this book has been made possible in part by a grant from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Funding to make this book available open access was provided by Cornell University's Office of Engagement Initiatives. Chapter 9: Copyright © 2018, originally published as “Making Law” by Gerald Torres, chapter 15 in ResponsAbility: Law and Governance for Living Well with the Earth, ed. Betsan Martin, Linda Te Aho, and Maria Humphries-Kil. Reproduced with permission of Taylor and Francis, a division of Informa plc. The text of this book is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License: https://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. To use this book, or parts of this book, in any way not covered by the license, please contact Cornell University Press, Sage House, 512 East State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850. Visit our website at cornellpress.cornell.edu. First published 2021 by Cornell University Press Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Castillo, Debra A., editor. | Bartel, Anna Sims, 1973– editor. Title: The scholar as human : research and teaching for public impact / edited by Anna Sims Bartel and Debra A. Castillo. Description: Ithaca [New York] : Cornell University Press, 2020. | Includes bibliographical references. | Identifiers: LCCN 2020011148 (print) | LCCN 2020011149 (ebook) | ISBN 9781501750618 (paperback) | ISBN 9781501750625 (epub) | ISBN 9781501750632 (pdf) Subjects: LCSH: Community and college—United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Made the Women's March?
    3 Who Made the Women’s March? Marie Berry and Erica Chenoweth Introduction: The Women’s March in Context In part because of women’s historical marginalization in institutionalized poli- tics, women’s activism and organizing have often happened in the streets, outside of formal political spaces (Ferree 2006; King and Codur 2015; Molyneux 1998; Principe 2017). Women have featured prominently in movements mobilized around broader issues, including civil rights, labor rights, prison reform, land re- form, peace, security, community safety, and food security. For instance, in 1905, Russian women organized marches against the price of bread, which launched the first Russian Revolution. In the decades since, women have marched on Pretoria during Apartheid in South Africa, against the disappearance of loved ones in La Plaza de Mayo during the “Dirty War” in Argentina, and, most re- cently, to insist resolutely that Black Lives Matter and to defend indigenous land and resources in Standing Rock. Beyond their participation in broader movements for social change, women have also mobilized around claims spe- cifically related to women’s rights, such as women’s suffrage, reproductive rights, campaigns against women’s sexual exploitation, and campaigns against female genital mutilation (King and Codur 2015; Principe 2017: 4). From the aboli- tionist movementO to the U labor movement P - that Upreceded S the suffragistA parades in the United States and Britain in the early 20th century, to recent mass protests in Poland against abortion restrictions, such women-led and women-centered movements have been instrumental in advancing human rights and women’s rights in particular.
    [Show full text]
  • RESIST, PERSIST, and TRANSFORM: the EMERGENCE and IMPACT of GRASSROOTS RESISTANCE GROUPS OPPOSING the TRUMP PRESIDENCY* Leah E
    RESIST, PERSIST, AND TRANSFORM: THE EMERGENCE AND IMPACT OF GRASSROOTS RESISTANCE GROUPS OPPOSING THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY* Leah E. Gose and Theda Skocpol† The November 2016 election sparked nationwide resistance to the new Trump administration and Republican Congress. Initial studies have focused on public protests and professionally staffed advocacy organizations, but the resistance also includes thousands of volunteer-led grassroots groups. This article uses data from online surveys, fieldwork observations and interviews, and web searches to analyze the development, demographics, and activities of grassroots resistance groups located in multiple states as well as all parts of Pennsylvania. Starting right after the 2016 election, local resistance groups were founded in places of all sizes and partisan orientations through friendships and social media contacts. Most of their members and leaders are middle-class, college-educated white women. Groups have reached out to surrounding communities, generating and supporting candidates for local, state, and national public offices; and many participants seek to join and reform local Democratic Party organizations. With polls predicting a win for America’s first female president, excitement built with the approach of Election Day, November 8, 2016. On October 20, “Pantsuit Nation” was launched as an invitation-only Facebook group coordinated by Libby Chamberlain, a college counselor based in Maine who wanted a site where members, overwhelmingly women, could share joyful anticipation (Correal 2016; Ohlheiser 2016). Some 2.5 million people quickly signed up, often posting pictures of mothers and daughters dressed in pantsuits. On Election Day itself, people posted emotional accounts of heading to the polls. Hours later the euphoria came crashing down when Hillary Clinton fell short in the Electoral College and Donald Trump won the presidency.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Manoeuvring by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in the Third US Presidential Debate of 2016
    Manifesting Personal Brands in Politics: Strategic Manoeuvring by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in the Third US Presidential Debate of 2016 Annimari Meri MA Thesis English, Language Specialist Path School of Languages and Translation Studies Faculty of Humanities University of Turku April 2020 The originality of this thesis has been checked in accordance with the University of Turku quality assurance system using the Turnitin OriginalityCheck service. UNIVERSITY OF TURKU School of Languages and Translations Studies/Faculty of Humanities ANNIMARI MERI: Manifesting Personal Brands in Politics: Strategic Manoeuvring by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in the Third US Presidential Debate of 2016 MA Thesis, 108 pages, 1 appendix (6 pages) English, Language Specialist Path April 2020 In this thesis I investigate how the political brands of the two presidential candidates of the 2016 US presidential election, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, were manifested in their argumentation during the third and final presidential debate of 2016. The method used for the analysis is the extended theory of pragma-dialectics, which includes the notion of strategic manoeuvring. The theory allows the evaluation of how the candidates balanced the simultaneous objectives of adhering to the rules of argumentation while manoeuvring the discussion to a direction that was in their favour. The analysis focuses on a 15-minute segment of the debate, the topic of which was fitness to be the president of the United States. The analysis indicates that both candidates
    [Show full text]