Glimpsing New Opportunities for Web3 Social Media Platforms from the "Media War" in the U.S. Election

Author: ++@Web3Mario++

Abstract: The U.S. election has concluded, with Trump making a powerful comeback, sweeping across America. In my previous article, I thoroughly discussed the political and economic plans of both sides and their impact on the future cryptocurrency market, and many articles have elaborated on related viewpoints, so I won't repeat them here. During this time, aside from focusing on the election dynamics, I have also felt and observed a more micro phenomenon that I find quite interesting, and I would like to summarize it and share it with you all. Overall, this U.S. election's "media war" will greatly weaken the credibility of mainstream media and X social media, while Web3 social media platforms may usher in 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. On the other hand, under Musk's rule, X will increasingly become 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. Moreover, X's self-destructive actions will benefit related competitors in reshaping more competitive product differentiation, thereby reducing promotion difficulties.

Poll Results Are Highly Distorted, and the Mainstream Media's Credibility in the U.S. Has Been Greatly Damaged by Harris's Ambivalence; The Democratic Party Needs to Find New Propaganda Positions

In the period leading up to the election, I believe everyone has experienced some uncertainty regarding the election results, especially in the days close to the election when Harris's polling seemed to surpass Trump's. I was no exception; in my previous article, I predicted that this election would be an exceptionally close 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 polling can be described as overwhelming, as he almost swept all the swing states and maintained a lead throughout the ballot counting process.

So how did this wavering occur? The main reason comes from the so-called "mainstream media" making a final push. We know that for a long time, mainstream media has been the traditional propaganda platform of the Democratic establishment in the U.S. These so-called "mainstream media" encompass various forms, including television, newspapers, and online platforms. They often play a key role in guiding public opinion on major domestic and international events. However, these media outlets are not politically neutral; most 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 reach a consensus on being "anti-Trump." The only mainstream media that truly stands with Trump is represented 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 influenced the judgments of these mainstream media subscribers, leading them to believe that a reversal in the election was possible. 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 polling dropped sharply. 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 party consolidation, 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 outlet, serving more the interests of behind-the-scenes stakeholders. Therefore, the final election results clearly indicate that the American public has developed a dislike for this and is not swayed, leading me to believe that the credibility of mainstream media has been greatly damaged in this election.

We know that in elected politics, whoever controls the media holds the initiative, as they can influence potential voters' ideologies by weaving information echo chambers and can smear political opponents or interfere with policy implementation through Fake News. Against the backdrop of declining credibility of mainstream media in the U.S., the Democratic 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 capital related to technology and globalization, so supporting a social media platform that they can control and that is beneficial to them is relatively convenient, which also brings ease in financing and resource acquisition for related products.

With the Privatization of Twitter, Musk Has Essentially Become the "Dictator" of X, and His Ideology Will Inevitably Raise Questions About X's Neutrality

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 created 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 successful campaign during his first term was not only due to the "Email Gate" scandal of Democratic candidate Hillary but also benefited from 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 these social media companies acted this way is still about interests. We know that a large part of the emerging "tech aristocracy" originated from Silicon Valley in California, which is a stronghold for the Democratic Party, naturally leading to many related interests. Moreover, since the internet and tech industries typically require support from international markets, they advocate globalization while funding legislators who favor strong regulatory policies to suppress potential competitors. This aligns with the Democratic Party's "big government" and multilateral cooperation policies, so it is only natural to choose to cooperate in suppressing populist Trump.

However, this was broken by Musk, who successfully completed the privatization of the publicly traded company Twitter for $44 billion in October 2022 after six months of effort, meaning Musk now has 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 are now quite clear. Under the guise of "protecting free speech," he navigated through numerous Democratic obstacles, leveraging his position as the world's richest person to complete the acquisition, and after massive layoffs to achieve internal consolidation, he openly expressed support for Trump. Many users of X must have noticed that during the entire election phase, any post by Musk would easily appear in your recommendation list, which I believe was due to some adjustments made in the recommendation algorithm.

In this political gamble, Musk is undoubtedly a winner. However, X, in terms of appearance during the entire election process, 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, and X's self-destructive actions will benefit related competitors in reshaping more competitive product differentiation, thereby 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 competing for "bulk information," which is the most important competitive advantage 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 in 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 of subcultures. The information accumulated on them will also become focused, greatly reducing the core network effect value of social media platforms. When the hot topics in their respective fields are exhausted, they naturally enter a period of silence, and at this time, the lack of heat will cause the hard-won user attention to dissipate. 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, they seemed too obsessed with using the wealth effect of cryptocurrencies to attract users, whether it was the so-called "content monetization" or various reward and airdrop logics. In my view, this is merely scratching the surface. I believe that the biggest advantage of Web3 social media platforms compared to 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 fitting for 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 out of the circle. Moreover, 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 a widespread centralization credit fragmentation event is a rare breakthrough opportunity for Web3 products. Additionally, I believe that in product innovation, incorporating AI modular recommendation algorithms is a good direction for thought. 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 out of information echo chambers may win users' favor.

More Aggressive Marketing, Seizing Hot Social Events, and Actively Attracting the "X Vulnerable Group" from the Top Down: 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, maintaining LGBTQ rights, women's rights, human rights, anti-authoritarian politics, supporting abortion, minority rights, and rights of people of color. By seizing relevant social hotspots, they can make their platform a channel for expression, thus breaking out of their circles. At the same time, in this process, actively adopting a top-down promotion strategy is essential. We know that in this election, many celebrities from the entertainment, arts, and sports circles clearly supported Harris. Therefore, through resource integration, attracting a host of big names to migrate from the X platform to this platform will have a multiplier effect on promotion results.