How harvesting and analyzing of Big Data influenced the 2016 presidential election
Back in 2008, social media was in its infancy stage. As many people flocked to social media sites like Twitter and Facebook to share their opinions and influence on other people, there was no way of measuring the impact that social media had beyond the overall sentiment.During that time, social media was considered to have the same characteristics as guerrilla marketing, and these tools were influential because they gave people a voice to be heard in the policies that were discussed, which swayed the results of the election. People often want change and are not afraid to give out their thoughts in the global conversation. The global discussion often encourages others to exercise their democratic rights by voting. Social data changes the approach of advertisers towards the art of marketing. Cambridge Analytica, which is a voter-profiling company, was effective in the 2016 presidential elections because it had tools that identified the personalities of voters and influenced their behavior.
Cambridge Analytica was effective in the 2016 presidential elections as it used Facebook toharvest private information from the profiles of over 50 million users. The company did not seek the consent of the users, and this made it to be the most significant data leak that has ever happened in the history of social networks (Rosenberg et al. 2018). The breach created an avenue for the company to explore the private social media activities of American electorates, and this developed techniques, which influenced the results of the elections. The results that were collected were mixed with voter records, online activities, and polls to create voters’ personality models(Rosenberg et al. 2018). The company was able to quantify the personality of people based on the discussion that it had with other people. It used the big data that is harvested from people to come up with the profiles of the voters and influence the decisions of the voters.
Mobile data and social influence impact the outcomes of campaigns when they are harnessed effectively and quickly. Data-driven marketing takes, and technologies like hashtags turn earned media like social sharing and tweets into paid media. A good example is the presidential banner apps that people often see on mobile phones and computers(Chahal, 2013). The algorithms of big data like the one that Cambridge Analytica harvested from Facebook help to target the voters online depending on how they socially interact on the site. The algorithms used CRM data, mobile geolocation data, and Facebook to fuel the campaigns that were delivered online that influenced thedecisions of voters(Chahal, 2013). With the many sharing events that take place every month on social media sites, there is always the creation of big data with every share and like. Whenever people travel globally with their mobile devices, there is still the presence of big data. Brand advertisers and campaign managers often find new ways of sorting out new data, just like Cambridge Analytica did to exploit the information that they have(Rosenberg et al. 2018).Data crushers and Math quants have managed to use the campaign data that they have into targeting information that persuades prospective voters all over the country.
After Cambridge Analytica took the information from Facebook, the company put the information in its psychological profiles. The Texas Senator, Tom Cruz, came up with the Cruz campaign that used the big data approach towards campaigning(Rosenberg et al. 2018). The approach divided voters into psychological profiles in the early primaries. The campaign was wise in how it managed its operations. It reached out to the voters that it had grouped timid traditionalists and the other voters that it had grouped as temperamental voters(Rosenberg et al. 2018). These messages were different, and they depended on the groups that people had been put.The psychological profiling that the campaign used attracted media attention after the senator won the Iowa caucuses, and specifically after Nix claimed credit in public, for the win. Even though the company has admitted that it deleted the information that it got from Facebook, the fact is that the information remains with the server of the company. Analyzing the information collected, and categorizing the psychological knowledge of the people whose data was taken significantly contributed to the presidential election outcome.
Much has been said concerning the 2016 presidential elections in America. The election’s outcome was influenced by a company that decided to breach the privacy of social media users on Facebook. The campaign managers used the information to their advantage and ensured that they got what they wanted from the site. The actions of Cambridge Analytica have shown that harvesting and analyzing big data has a significant influence on the outcome of the presidential election. The company took information from a substantial number of Facebook users and exploited the data to influence voter decisions. Besides, the company also claimed that it got the data from the site legally, and it had all the time that it needed to influence the decisions of the voters.
References
Chahal, G.(2013). Election 2016: Marriage ofBig Data, Social Data will Determine the Next President.
Rosenberg, M., Confessore, N. &Cadwalladr, C. (2018). How Trump Consultants Exploited the Facebook Data of Millions.