Social Media Stereotypes

Public opinion and social attitudes are defined as the expression of beliefs, ideology, and sentiments within a citizenry concerning conduct of human affairs (Freeland, 2015 pg. 562)25. Public opinion and social attitudes can shift the perception of others to start a social revolution, just like what’s taking place with Bernie Sanders’ supporters. Most young voters who share their views on social media reflect on what they learn in their home. A (Jennings et al. 2009)26 study found that children are most likely to adopt parents’ political orientations and opinion when parents have a greater interest in politics. This allows candidates to be aware of what the public thinks of them, especially in households, which becomes visible on social
media. The public opinion and social attitudes are not the only factors to change the perception of voters, and also the candidate’s reputation.
Now, let’s examine the reputation of a few past and current presidential candidates from a public opinion and social media perspective.

Candidate’s Reputation What is reputation? Merriam-Webster defines Reputation as the following:
1. The common opinion that people have about someone or something: the way in which people think of someone or something. One of the greatest benefits of social media or online social websites, in general, provides the ability for individuals to share their thoughts and opinions. So, to maintain a positive image, candidates must monitor their reputation online and respond as quickly as possible. For candidates, reputation online is their most valuable asset to win support and influence voters. However, there are candidates like Donald Trump, who is maintaining public support regardless of his negative reputation and comments on social media. Therefore, reputation on social media is manageable with the right communication practitioners who are capable of smoothing over a candidate image and changing perception. In this section, the researcher outlined three former and current presidential candidate’s reputation for further observation.
Mitt Romney Social media can help and ruin a candidate’s reputation, so they must monitor how voters perceive their statements.
If a candidate makes a bad joke or a false statement, it can cause them to lose support in a presidential election. In Robert E. Denton, Jr.’s “The 2012 Presidential Campaign,” he discusses candidates’ memes and videos on social media. Denton elaborated on how a candidate’s actions can “go viral,” in minutes and “leave the campaign little control over the message.” For example, Big Bird memes were the highlight of the second 2012 presidential debate when Romney stated: "he would consider cutting federal funding to PBS though he liked Big Bird." After his statement, The Washington Post reported that Twitter users posted 17,000 tweets per minute mentioning Romney’s Big Bird remarks. After the debate, the public viewed Romney as ignorant for not understanding the value of education on public broadcasting
channels. Hillary Clinton The lack of public trust can generate onto social media and spread throughout multiple platforms, which becomes uncontrollable content for most candidates.
Hillary Clinton’s email scandal did just that and was detrimental to her campaign. Most debated whether Clinton was a corrupt politician or just someone who wanted to separate her professional and private life. Trackur, a social media monitoring platform, reported that Clinton’s email apology increased her negative ratings from 21 to 30 percent based on social media conversations. At the same time, social media flipped the negative news once the State Department released 3,000 pages of Clinton’s hilarious chit-chat emails. Though Clinton did not face charges for using her private email account, most voters viewed the scandal as a waste of
time.
Additionally, her role in Benghazi damaged her reputation further, and Republicans saw it as an opportunity to strategize against Clinton. With Clinton’s reputation on the line, she started to force on grassroots strategies to reestablish trust with the public. Clinton took action in rebuilding relationships by going out in the field to meet with small business owners, community activists, students, home makers and the everyday working citizen (Kounalakis, 2015)27. In a 2014 YouGov survey, 44 percent of the people surveyed had an unfavorable opinion of Clinton (Frankovic, 2014)46. Those who found Clinton unfavorable describe her as incompetent, untrustworthy, and a liar in the public eye. While 49 percent with a favorable opinion of Clinton thought of her as a smart, intelligent, and a strong politician. The words used to describe Clinton in YouGov 2014 survey are the same words used today to describe her reputation throughout social media channels.