Politicians want their constituents to feel a sense of personal connection to them. Mass media makes those perceptions of intimacy and authenticity possible on a large scale, like FDR’s radio fireside chats, Ronald Reagan’s TV appearances, and Donald Trump’s tweets. But we are on the cusp of the political adoption of a new media form; it’s the age of livestreaming as an exercise in political branding, whether it’s Elizabeth Warren awkwardly taking a swig of beer, Beto O’Rourke carving a steak, or Alexandria Ocasia-Cortez wandering wide-eyed the corridors of Capitol Hill.

Yet the adoption of livestreaming, as well as the rise of crowdfunded political campaigns, is drawing the attention of campaign finance regulators. Radio and television broadcasting by political candidates has long been regulated, but the internet has traditionally not. John Samples joins Will Duffield and Paul Matzko to discuss the legal and political implications of these new trends in fundraising and advertising.

Are the social media accounts of politicians a more intimate way for voters to view them? Are politicians authentic on social media or do they try to hard to be seen as relatable? Do Americans have a right to view or hear Russian ads? 

Further Reading:

Who Should Moderate Content on Facebook, written by John Samples

Google Is a Tricky Case but Conservatives Please Stay Strong — Reject the Temptation to Regulate the Internet, written by John Samples

Related Content:

New Year, New Congress, New Tech, Building Tomorrow Podcast

Place Your Political Bets, Building Tomorrow Podcast

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.