The US election has concluded, and Trump has made a strong comeback, sweeping the nation with overwhelming momentum. In my previous articles, I have thoroughly discussed both sides' political and economic proposals and their implications for the future cryptocurrency market, and many articles have addressed related viewpoints, so I will not elaborate further. During this time, in addition to focusing on the election dynamics, I also noticed a relatively micro phenomenon that I found quite interesting and will summarize to share with everyone. Overall, this US election and the 'media war' between both sides will greatly weaken the credibility of mainstream media and X social media, while Web3 social media platforms may seize new development opportunities. On one hand, this arises from the need for followers of the Democratic Party to cultivate new, controllable propaganda channels, which brings convenience for related competitors in terms of financing channels. On the other hand, under Musk's rule, X will increasingly be inclined towards dictatorship. This 'Dark MAGA' will inevitably lean towards conservatism on various cultural issues, such as abortion, immigration, and LGBTQ diversity. The dictator's preferences will greatly influence the logic of the recommendation algorithm in X, making the trend of user loss standing on the opposite side inevitable. X's self-destructive actions will benefit related competitors in reshaping more competitive product differentiation, thus reducing promotion difficulties.
The polling results are highly distorted, and the American mainstream media's credibility has been severely damaged due to their indecisiveness towards Harris's statements. The Democratic Party needs to find new propaganda strongholds.
In the period leading up to the election, I believe everyone has experienced some uncertainty about the election results, especially in the days leading up to the election, where it seemed that Harris's election prospects surpassed Trump's. I am no exception; in the previous article, I anticipated that this election would be an exceptionally close process, and thus the results might only be confirmed after the last batch of votes was counted, making the entire cycle last for some time. However, in fact, Trump's election prospects can be described as overwhelming, almost sweeping all swing states while maintaining a lead throughout the voting process.
So how did this instability arise? The main reason comes from the last push of the so-called 'mainstream media' in the United States. We know that for a long time, mainstream media has been a traditional propaganda stronghold of the American establishment represented by the Democratic Party. These so-called 'mainstream media' cover 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 are not neutral in terms of political preferences; 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 'anti-Trump.' The mainstream media that truly stands on Trump's side is limited to a few, with Fox News and The Wall Street Journal being the more representative ones.
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 impression that Harris had an advantage in early voting. This information naturally influences the judgments of these mainstream media subscribers and makes them believe that there is a possibility of a reversal in the election. However, the outcome was vastly different. In addition, the mainstream media underwent a re-adjustment in their support for Harris's campaign. We know that in this election, the Democratic Party underwent a leadership change. After the Trump shooting incident, Biden's election prospects plummeted. At that time, before major figures like Obama and Pelosi made clear statements, mainstream media had many reservations about Harris's candidacy, including doubts about her past achievements. However, after successfully consolidating the party, all voices of doubt completely disappeared, and they fully supported Harris. From an election perspective, this is certainly beneficial for the Democratic Party, but it also reflects that so-called mainstream media has completely abandoned neutrality and fairness, serving more the interests behind them. Therefore, the final election results clearly indicate that the American public has developed a dislike for this and is unmoved by it. 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 has the initiative, as they can influence potential voters' ideologies by weaving information cocoons and can also smear political opponents or interfere with policy implementation through Fake News. Against the backdrop of declining credibility in American mainstream media, the Democratic Party, representing the American establishment, urgently needs to find a 'Plan B' to compensate for its shortcomings in internal propaganda. Among the interest groups backing the Democratic Party are many capital related to technology and globalization. Therefore, supporting a social media platform that they can control and that is beneficial to them is relatively convenient, which also brings convenience in financing and resource acquisition for related products.
With the privatization of Twitter, Musk has effectively become the 'dictator' of X, and his ideology will inevitably raise users' doubts about X's neutrality.
This election has proven that social media platforms driven by self-media represented by X are efficient in information dissemination and public opinion guidance. However, in fact, X is also a loser in this media war because throughout the election process, the information cocoon woven by X through its recommendation algorithm greatly influenced users' political preferences, and its fairness is bound to be questioned even more after this election.
We know that the reason Trump was able to run successfully during his first term, aside from the self-exposure of the Democratic candidate Hillary's 'email scandal,' was due to his influence on Twitter, where he posted over 36,000 tweets in four years and had 88 million followers. However, after the Capitol Hill incident in 2021, Twitter announced a 'permanent ban' on Trump, effectively shutting off his microphone. Following Twitter, Facebook and YouTube also took measures to prohibit Trump from speaking on their social platforms. Major tech companies like Google, Apple, and Amazon removed the application Parler, widely used by Trump supporters, and ceased to provide 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 dilemma. The reason many social media companies did this is still for profit. We know that a large part of the emerging 'tech aristocracy' was born in Silicon Valley, located in California, which is a stronghold for the Democratic Party, naturally leading to many related interests. Additionally, due to the technology industry, including the internet, often requiring support from international markets, while supporting globalization, they fund legislators who favor strong regulatory policies to suppress potential competitors. This naturally aligns with the Democratic Party's policies of 'big government' and multilateral cooperation, so it is only logical to choose to cooperate in suppressing the populist Trump.
However, these were 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. This means Musk 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, in light of the current results, his initial intentions have become very clear. Under the guise of 'protecting free speech,' he circumvented many obstacles posed by Democratic forces, completed the acquisition with the might of the world's richest man, and achieved internal integration through massive layoffs. He openly declared his support for Trump. I believe 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 processed in the recommendation algorithm.
In this political gamble, Musk is undoubtedly a winner. However, from the surface, X did not become more neutral and fair because of 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 various cultural issues, such as abortion, immigration, and LGBTQ diversity. This preference will greatly influence the logic of X's recommendation algorithm. Therefore, I believe that in the coming period, the trend of user loss standing on the opposite side will be inevitable, and X's self-destructive actions will benefit related competitors in reshaping more competitive product differentiation, thus reducing promotion difficulties.
Facing resource dividends 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 platforms like 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 ensures a scale advantage in the competition for 'mass information,' which is the most important competitive strength of social media platforms. In simple terms, Twitter has a lot of information, comprehensive information, and interesting information, which naturally attracts 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 high engagement, which further stimulates users' desire to create and keeps the entire UGC ecosystem vibrant.
This monopoly position naturally forces many competitors to choose extremely niche areas to build their differentiation, which will inevitably reduce them to toys of subcultural circles. The information that accumulates on these platforms will also become focused, which greatly diminishes the core network effect value of social media platforms. Once the hot topics in the track are exhausted, it naturally enters 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 how can we better capture this opportunity in the face of the inevitable trend of user loss from X? I believe Web3 social media platforms can focus on the following key points:
(1) Compete boldly with X in the 'mass information' field through more transparent recommendation algorithms and data storage technology features: In the past promotion of related products, there seems to have been an overindulgence in using the wealth effect of cryptocurrencies to attract users, whether it is the so-called 'content monetization' or various reward airdrop logic. 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 of recommendation algorithms and information storage brought by technological solutions. This aligns perfectly with the core value of freedom of speech in social media platforms. Therefore, in the product promotion process, it is necessary to focus on this feature and directly compete with X, rather than initially attracting cryptocurrency users and then seeking to break out of that circle. The dictatorship of X has created an opportunity for this product operation path. Imagine if the 'Prism' incident had not been exposed, would the Bitcoin system have developed to its current state? Such a large-scale centralization credit crisis is a rare opportunity for Web3 products. Additionally, I think that in terms of product innovation, combining AI modular recommendation algorithms is a good direction to consider. By introducing AI features, allowing users to customize recommendation algorithms, and opening algorithm markets or platforms, it could stimulate user UGC. This design that helps users break out of information cocoons may win users' favor.
(2) More aggressive marketing, capturing hot social events, and actively attracting the 'X vulnerable group' from top to bottom: In event marketing, I believe Web3 social media platforms should take a more proactive stance and support 'non-MAGA' values in a more pronounced way, such as relaxing illegal immigration policies, maintaining LGBTQ rights, women's rights, human rights, anti-authoritarian politics, supporting abortion, minority rights, and the rights of people of color, etc. By seizing relevant social hot topics, they can make their platforms a channel for expression to break out of their circles. At the same time, during this process, actively adopt a top-down promotion strategy. We know that in this election, many celebrities from the entertainment, arts, and sports circles clearly supported Harris. Therefore, by integrating resources, striving to attract a number of celebrities to migrate from X platform to this platform will have a multiplier effect on promotion.