Glimpsing New Opportunities for Web3 Social Media Platforms from the "Media War" in the U.S. Election
The U.S. election has concluded, and Trump has made a strong comeback, sweeping across America with overwhelming momentum. In my previous article, I have thoroughly discussed the political and economic plans of both sides and their impact on the future cryptocurrency market, and many articles have also elaborated on related viewpoints, so I will not repeat them here. During this time, in addition to focusing on the election dynamics, I have also felt and observed a relatively micro phenomenon that I find interesting, and I would like to summarize it and share it with everyone. Overall, this U.S. election has shown that the "media war" between both sides will greatly weaken the credibility of mainstream media and X social media, while Web3 social media platforms may welcome new development opportunities. On one hand, this stems from the need for Democratic followers to cultivate new and self-controlled propaganda channels, which brings convenience to related competitors in terms of financing channels. On the other hand, under Musk's leadership, X is becoming increasingly dictatorial, and this "Dark MAGA" will inevitably lean towards conservatism on many cultural issues, such as abortion, immigration, and LGBTQ multiculturalism. The preferences of a dictator will greatly influence the logic of X's recommendation algorithms, making the trend of user loss on the opposing side unavoidable. Furthermore, X's self-destructive actions will benefit related competitors in reshaping more competitive product differentiation, thus reducing promotion difficulties.
Poll Results Are Highly Distorted, and the Mainstream Media's Credibility Is Severely Damaged by Harris's Ambiguous Statements; The Democratic Party Needs to Find New Propaganda Grounds
In the period leading up to the election, I believe many of you have experienced some uncertainty regarding the election results, especially in the days close to the election when Harris's campaign seemed to surpass Trump's. I am no exception; in my previous article, I predicted that this election would be an exceptionally intense process, and thus the results might only be confirmed after the last batch of ballots was counted, meaning the entire cycle could last for some time. However, in reality, Trump's campaign can be described as sweeping, almost taking all the swing states and maintaining a lead throughout the ballot counting process.
So how did this wavering occur? The main reason comes from the final push of the so-called "mainstream media" in the U.S. We know that for a long time, mainstream media has been the traditional propaganda ground for the establishment represented by the Democratic Party. These so-called "mainstream media" encompass various forms such as television, newspapers, and online platforms. They often play a key role in guiding public opinion on major domestic and international events. However, these media do not actually possess neutrality in political preferences; most of them are staunch supporters of the Democratic Party, such as CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, CBS, ABC, NBC, Yahoo News, Google News, etc. Some of these media claim to be neutral, but they seem to have reached a consensus on being "anti-Trump." The mainstream media that truly stands with Trump is represented only by Fox News and The Wall Street Journal.
In the days leading up to the election, the content you could see from these media channels was mostly biased towards Harris, including descriptions of minor incidents during the campaign and dynamic polling results, even creating the illusion of Harris having an advantage in early voting. This information naturally influences the judgments of these mainstream media subscribers, leading them to believe that there might be a reversal in the election situation. However, the actual results were quite different. Furthermore, regarding support for Harris's campaign, mainstream media underwent a readjustment. We know that in this election, the Democratic Party experienced a change in leadership; after the Trump shooting incident, Biden's campaign plummeted. At that time, before prominent figures like Obama and Pelosi made clear statements, mainstream media had many reservations about Harris taking over the election, including doubts about her past achievements. However, after successful internal consolidation within the party, all questioning voices completely disappeared, and they fully supported Harris. From an electoral perspective, this is naturally beneficial for the Democratic Party, but it also reflects that the so-called mainstream media has completely abandoned its neutrality and fairness as a media entity, instead serving the interests behind it. Therefore, the final election results clearly indicate that the American public has developed a sense of disgust towards this and remains unmoved. Thus, I believe that the credibility of mainstream media has been severely damaged in this election.
We know that in elected politics, whoever controls the media holds the initiative, not only influencing the ideological consciousness of potential voters through information echo chambers but also using fake news to smear political opponents or interfere with policy implementation. Against the backdrop of declining credibility of mainstream media in the U.S., the Democratic Party, representing the establishment, urgently needs to find a "Plan B" to compensate for its shortcomings in internal propaganda. Among the interest groups behind the Democratic Party are many related to technology and globalization, so supporting a social media platform that it can control and that is beneficial to itself is relatively convenient, which also brings ease in financing and resource acquisition for related products.
With Twitter's Privatization, Musk Has Become the "Dictator" of X, and His Ideology Will Inevitably Raise Questions About X's Neutrality Among Users
This election has proven the efficiency of self-media-driven social media platforms like X in information dissemination and public opinion guidance. However, in this media war, X is also a loser because throughout the election process, X's recommendation algorithms have woven information echo chambers for users, greatly influencing their political preferences, and its fairness will inevitably face greater scrutiny after this election.
We know that Trump's first term was successful not only due to the "Email Gate" scandal involving Democratic candidate Hillary but also thanks to his influence on Twitter, where he posted over 36,000 tweets and had 88 million followers in four years. However, after the Capitol Hill incident in 2021, Twitter announced a "permanent ban" on Trump, effectively silencing him. Following Twitter, Facebook and YouTube also took measures to prohibit Trump from speaking on their platforms; tech giants Google, Apple, and Amazon removed the widely used app Parler by Trump supporters and ceased providing related online services.
During that time, Trump's propaganda channels were scarce, forcing him to launch his own social media platform, Truth Social, to cope with this predicament. The reason for such actions by various social media companies is still profit-driven. We know that a significant portion of the emerging "tech elite" originates from Silicon Valley in California, which is a stronghold for the Democratic Party, leading to many related interests. Additionally, as the internet and tech industries often require support from international markets, they advocate globalization while funding lawmakers who favor strong regulatory policies to suppress potential competitors. This naturally aligns with the Democratic Party's "big government" and multilateral cooperation policies, making it logical to cooperate in suppressing populist Trump.
However, this was disrupted by Musk, who successfully completed the privatization of Twitter for $44 billion in October 2022 after six months of effort, meaning Musk now holds unparalleled authority over the company. After the acquisition was completed, for a long time, the market questioned whether this operation was a failed attempt, as there seemed to be no visible return on investment. However, considering the current results, his initial intentions have become quite clear. Under the guise of "protecting free speech," he navigated through numerous Democratic obstacles, leveraging his status as the world's richest person to complete the acquisition, and after large-scale layoffs for internal restructuring, he openly expressed support for Trump. Many users of X would have noticed that during the entire election phase, any post by Musk would easily appear in your recommendation list, which I believe indicates some manipulation in the recommendation algorithm.
In this political gamble, Musk is undoubtedly a winner. However, on the surface, X did not become more neutral and fair due to this acquisition; it merely shifted from one extreme to another. Moreover, with X being privatized by Musk, this "Dark MAGA" will inevitably lean towards conservatism on many cultural issues, such as abortion, immigration, and LGBTQ multiculturalism. His preferences will greatly influence the logic of X's recommendation algorithms, so I believe that in the coming period, the trend of user loss on the opposing side is unavoidable. Furthermore, X's self-destructive actions will benefit related competitors in reshaping more competitive product differentiation, thus reducing promotion difficulties.
Facing Resource and Market Dividends, How Can Web3 Social Media Platforms Better Capture This Opportunity?
We know that in the Web3 industry, there are also some decentralized social media platform products, such as Farcaster and Lens. However, I believe that for a long time, these products have not achieved good results in promotion. The core reason, in my opinion, is that Twitter's enduring monopoly position ensures that it has a scale advantage in the competition for "bulk information," which is the most important competitive strength of social media platforms. Simply put, the information on Twitter is abundant, comprehensive, and interesting, naturally attracting user attention. The diversity of information also allows the platform to better adapt to the fast-paced changes of real-time hot topics, always having trending topics and maintaining heat, which further stimulates users' creative desires and keeps the entire UGC ecosystem vibrant.
This monopoly position naturally forces many competitors to choose extremely niche areas to build their differentiation, which inevitably diminishes their status to mere toys in subcultures. The information accumulated on these platforms will also become focused, greatly reducing the core network effect value of social media platforms. Once the hot topics in their respective tracks are exhausted, they naturally enter a period of silence, and the lack of heat will lead to the loss of the hard-won user attention. We can easily find this phenomenon in Farcaster and Lens.
So, in the face of the inevitable trend of user loss on X, how can Web3 social media platforms better capture this opportunity? I believe they can start from the following key points:
(1) Compete boldly with X in the "bulk information" field using more transparent recommendation algorithms and data storage technology features: In the past promotion processes of related products, it seems they were overly obsessed with attracting users through the wealth effect of cryptocurrencies, whether it was so-called "content monetization" or various reward and airdrop logic. In my view, this is merely scratching the surface. I believe the biggest advantage of Web3 social media platforms over traditional centralized social media platforms is the transparency and fairness brought by technological solutions in recommendation algorithms and information storage. This is undoubtedly the most compatible with social media platforms that take free speech as their core value. Therefore, in the product promotion process, it is essential to always focus on this feature and directly compete with X, rather than first attracting cryptocurrency users and then seeking to break into broader circles. X's dictatorial nature creates an opportunity for this product operation path. Imagine if the "Prism Gate" incident had not been exposed, would the Bitcoin system have developed to its current state? Such large-scale centralization credit-breaking events present a rare opportunity for Web3 products to break through. Additionally, I believe that in product innovation, combining AI with modular recommendation algorithms is a good direction to consider. By introducing AI functions, allowing users to customize recommendation algorithms, and opening up algorithm markets or platforms to stimulate user UGC, this design that helps users break free from information echo chambers may win users' favor.
(2) Be more aggressive in marketing, seize hot social events, and actively attract the "X vulnerable groups" from top to bottom: In event marketing, I believe Web3 social media platforms should be more proactive, supporting "non-MAGA" values in a more flagrant manner, such as relaxing illegal immigration policies, protecting LGBTQ rights, women's rights, human rights, anti-authoritarian politics, supporting abortion, minority rights, and rights of people of color. By seizing relevant social hot topics, they can make their platform a channel for voicing opinions, thus breaking into broader circles. At the same time, during this process, actively adopting a top-down promotion strategy is essential. We know that in this election, many celebrities from the entertainment, literary, and sports circles clearly supported Harris. Therefore, by integrating resources, attracting a host of big names to migrate from X to this platform will have a significantly positive impact on promotional effectiveness.