On Election Day, the winner is – Twitter?

While the social media service has seen its stock value wane this year, Election Day proved it's indispensable. 

Lucas Jackson/Reuters
The Twitter logo is shown with the US flag during the company's IPO on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange in New York in Nov. 2013.

Election Day was Twitter’s once again on Tuesday, as the social media service saw a record number of tweets posted to its platform throughout the day.

“For all of its flaws and the badness of the product itself, the election has proven Twitter is vital,” Ben Thompson, the founder of Stratechery, a technology industry analysis site, told The New York Times. “The immediacy and speed is unmatched by any other network.” 

Twitter’s surging popularity contrasts with its recent dive in stock value, an unsuccessful attempt to sell itself off, and its announcement it would cut 9 percent of its workforce and close the video app Vine. From the first presidential debate in September to the hours after the polls closed, however, more than one billion election-related posts swirled across the network.

While detractors have criticized Twitter for the hateful, misogynistic, and anti-Semitic tweets that have gone unchecked on its network, its popularity on Election Day has once again shown that its real-time flow of information and discussions is indispensable in the new media age.

This was evident in the number of tweets posted on the site starting early Tuesday. By 11 a.m. EST, 27,000 election-related posts circulated across the network every minute, according to The New York Times. By 10 p.m., the total number jumped to about 40 million, exceeding the 31 million sent on Election Day 2012.  

This success started with Twitter’s early effort to prepare for the big day. In addition to ramping up its ad sale operations, it streamed video on its platform, starting with the Democratic and Republican National Conventions. For Election Day, Twitter partnered with BuzzFeed to broadcast the news site's election coverage from its offices in New York City. A number of websites also embedded tweets onto their web pages, from news sites such as The New York Times and The Washington Post to entertainment-focused sites such as TMZ and Perez Hilton.

But the appeal of Twitter on Election Day is likely bolstered by how Americans follow the presidential race, as USA Today’s Jessica Guynn wrote.

“Social media is a popular destination for American voters on election night. They fire up laptops, tablets and smartphones – and sometimes all three – to spend the evening in the company of election-obsessed friends and followers around the country,” she writes. “Facebook is the spot where many people seek support and camaraderie from friends. But Twitter is frequently the spot where people hunt for the latest information and commentary.”

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has also brought newfound attention to Twitter, championing it as a “modern-day form of communication.” Throughout the election, he fired off Twitter posts at odd hours of the morning, and the picture he sent of himself eyeing his wife's ballot as they voted went viral Tuesday. The New York Times even reported this past week that Mr. Trump’s campaign had wrested his Twitter account away from him in an effort to control his temper and his loose hands. But some of Trump’s supporters and members of the alt-right have stirred controversy this election.

Twitter has been criticized for its inability to check posts many consider hateful, misogynistic, and anti-Semitic. According to the Anti-Defamation League, Twitter experienced an uptick between August 2015 and this past July in the number of anti-Semitic tweets directed at journalists, with at least 800 journalists receiving such messages. George Washington University’s Program on Extremism also recently found white nationalists and Nazi sympathizers have run largely unchecked on Twitter, as their followings have grown.

In response to recent criticism about the spread of hateful messages on its platform, Twitter pointed to its get-out-the-vote initiatives.

“Our goal is to increase engagement in the election process and encourage voter turnout,” a Twitter spokesman said in a statement.

With 317 million monthly users (Facebook has 1.79 billion monthly active users), Twitter has shown there’s still a place for it in the social media world.

The core ideals that made the product great are not lost, yet, even if they’ve been obscured,” tech journalist Joshua Topolsky wrote in a New Yorker piece early this year. “The directness and power at the heart of Twitter – short bursts of information that can make you feel that you’re plugged into a hulking hive mind – are still its greatest asset.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to On Election Day, the winner is – Twitter?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today