How social media is shaping democracy and what to do about it.
Be honest, how many times have you checked social media since you woke up? If you’re a typical young adult, the answer is probably “too many to count”. And if I had to guess again, I would bet the first thing on your screen wasn’t a news article.
Well, you’re not alone. The National Centre for Social Research’s 2025 British Social Attitudes Report found 58% of under-35s say social media is their main way of keeping up with politics. However, this is less likely to be done through traditional forums such as news apps but instead other social media user’s opinions. Plenty of people get their politics from social media, but most don’t actively participate or engage with the media they are consuming. So, the big question is how much of scrolling is shaping what we think, if we vote, and who we vote for?
Turnout at the 2024 general election was just 59.7%, which is an unhealthy representation of the UK population and reduces the government’s legitimacy. This turnout is the lowest recorded since 2001. So, can we draw a correlation between social media’s impact on politics and voting turnout? Younger people are less likely to vote than older generations, despite having the greatest access to social media and immediate news. In theory, social media should be brilliant for democracy. It gives people a voice compared to traditional outlets that can often ignore them. It also provides immediate information about what is going on in politics, which ensures we can always be up to date on current affairs. If it were used well, it could kill off apathy altogether. So, what’s going wrong? Part of it is the algorithm. It learns what you engage with and serves you more of it. Follow a few political accounts and your feed is brimming with people who agree with you, alongside posts that are there to wind you up and evoke emotional responses, because angry people are more likely to interact.
The wider media landscape doesn’t help either. Healthy media gives a democracy somewhere to share information, hold power to account, and be a forum for debate. But cuts to local and investigative journalism have left gaps, and these gaps are filling up with polarising rhetoric and misinformation. Truthout found that 81% of US citizens see social media as divisive rather than unifying. A 2021 study by Twitter’s own researchers found that in six of seven countries, its algorithm boosted mainstream right-wing politicians more than left-wing ones. In theory this is because algorithms feed on media that is provocative and emotive, so benefits the extremes on both political sides. With the rise of extremist groups, especially in Europe, perhaps there is a correlation that can be drawn between extremism and social media algorithms. We can’t pretend our politics isn’t shaped by controversial and extreme views but how does this relate to voting? Well, as more far-leaning political views are favoured by algorithms this can explain why Reform UK have a much stronger online presence than the more centre-leaning Conservative party. Reform UK receive higher engagement in their content they produce and to correlate they poll far higher than the conservatives.
With algorithms rewarding emotion, this leaves an opening for lies and misinformation. A believable lie can take minutes to become seen as legitimate, especially considering the ease of AI. The level of outrage on social media moves far faster than corrections to deceit. With the line between reality and fiction being so blurred, it makes it nearly impossible for us to detect what is true. The false claims about the Southport attacker in summer 2024 being an example of this, in which false claims raced across platforms before the facts could catch up, and they had real-world, violent consequences.
The longer-term damage is far worse. If any video can be faked, then the value of a real and honest video is lost. Researchers call this the “liar’s dividend”, meaning politicians caught on camera can now blame AI. Female politicians have reportedly been targeted with fabricated, degrading images, which can put off candidates for running for MP at all. We rely on a face and a voice to judge character, and this is now no longer reliable evidence. Politics is an innately human affair with actions directly shaping our lives. AI lacks any moral responsibility or genuine empathy, making it unequipped to make decisions that have real-world consequences.
When voters can’t tell what’s real, they engage less. If a video, an image or a voice can now be faked it becomes far easier to decide that no information can be fully trusted so following and engaging in politics is no longer worth the effort. People who mainly get their political news from social media are less interested in politics and trust parliament and the courts less. This article is not an argument for abandoning social media as you cannot ignore its positive impacts, but there is still a huge risk in making social media your main source of news. Disengaging in trusted sources will only worsen the current problem. The answer to all of this is to engage in local and investigative journalism, fact check information before sharing, and use reliable news outlets.
Ultimately, it is vital to remember that the most important political act doesn’t happen online. No algorithm can vote for you.