Social media has changed how we perceive and distribute news.

Social media profit motive is tied to engagement, regardless of its factual integrity.

This means that news and information must become more shocking or rely on emotions in order to keep people engaged.

People can be grouped into echo chambers and then fed items that increase engagement. The effect is that communities grow further apart and are told what to believe in. Instead of getting news from traditional sources, the news is delivered by family and friends, lending a personal credibility to information and making it harder to discern from misinformation.

On video and forum platforms, suggestion algorithms are designed send you more and more controversial content to keep you engaged. This leads to viewers clicking on a catchy video, and then being recommend 5 or 10 more similar videos of varying levels of extremism. Each video can lead to more videos of varying topics and extremism, but matching ideologies. Spend too much time at this without actively searching for alternative views and these platforms will give you the impression that these opinions and views have a larger representation in the real world than they actually do.

In addition, there is little to no perspectives on many of the people that are presenting their views. The same expert can present their findings in video after video as they make the rounds on YouTube, and this can lead to people thinking that this expert is at the top of their field. But in keeping with the how social media operates, there is just as much of a chance that the expert is on the fringe and that the views being presented are not accepted in their field. The popularity of their work may simply be a function of unfamiliarity and being adept at social media. How often is the alternative or competing opinion given? If there is one, is the person presenting just as charismatic as the expert that is being promoted?

These trappings make social media an force multiplier that, if used incorrectly, can drastically mislead the people and cause damage to our Democracy.

The only way to get noticed is to make more extremist statements.

Talking about good policy decisions that can save social security in 8 years is boring. Talking about the latest scandal or problem and who to blame is good TV

There are FCC regulations that prevent any one company from owning all of the television and newspaper outlets. The rules are designed to prevent any single entity from taking over all of the airwaves and newspapers and dictating what people could see, hear and read.

However, the rules surrounding these FCC regulations have been continually relaxed. In 1985, a single company could own only 25% of a given market. That percentage is now 45% after changes were made in 2003. [1] This has led to independent stations and newspapers being eaten through mergers with the large corporations. This had led to fewer viewpoints available for everyone, and has concentrated control and power of media moguls. In one example, in 2018, the Sinclair Broadcast group had several local news outlets reading the same promotional script that sounded like pro-Trump propaganda. [2]