Each year, as January fades into February, the student body begins to brace itself for the onslaught of social media campaigns that will crop up in the middle of the month in time for student elections. In recent years, student election season has been defined not by community-wide debate and engagement, but by pictures of candidates on the Lawn with bolded slogans. As college students, it seems that more and more time and energy is spent on our online presences. By that logic, it makes sense for campaigning to be done largely online. However, in order to address issues of community apathy and disengagement with groups such as the Honor Committee and Student Council, the campaigning process must be duly scrutinized.
In an ideal world, student elections might be characterized by engaged students and a 100 percent participation rate, embodying the values of student self-governance. Unfortunately, this has not been the case in the University’s recent past. In the 2014 student elections, which closed on Feb. 27, 2014, only 3,525 students (roughly 16 percent of the student body) voted for Student Council president. Only near 25 percent of students voted for Honor representatives from the College.
If we wish to continue to claim to be a community defined by student self-governance, these numbers should warrant more than a raised eyebrow. Most of the Facebook events I have seen for elections this year have between 400 and 2,000 invitees. So, perhaps these campaigns are effective in getting the number of votes the candidate requires to win. However, can a student body president elected by less than one quarter of the student body really claim authority?
I should note that I am not criticizing individual candidates who choose to use social media as a way to reach out to students in time for elections. I am sure that if I were running for a position, I would do the same. It would almost seem silly to not use the social network as a tool. Not doing so would likely leave me far behind the other candidates. Leah Retta, a third-year College student running for Student Council College representative, said, “I especially wanted to run a social media campaign because I wanted to raise political efficacy among my direct network of friends. This way, their incentive to vote would be to support me because they already know of my experience as well as my capability.”
At some point since Facebook spread across America like wildfire, that first “Vote so and so for Honor” event was made, and the precedent was set. There is nothing inherently wrong with using social media. However, when the number of attendees on a Facebook event becomes the primary indicator of who is to win an election, we should be concerned.
Many clubs and organizations around Grounds (including The Cavalier Daily) use social media to promote their events and recruitment periods. For the most part, such campaigns are harmless. However, at a certain point we should question whom social media campaigns are reaching. If I did not have any friends who wrote for The Cavalier Daily, would I have known when Opinion tryouts were happening? If I did not know any of the candidates running for positions this year, would I even know elections were this month? I am not so sure.
As a college student in the 21st century, it’s impossible to say whether student campaigns were more tangibly personal and substantive before the Internet. My guess is students had to work a lot harder to campaign, reaching out in interpersonal ways which are now, unfortunately, a thing of the past. Reaching almost 15,000 undergraduates is not an easy task. However, a more rigorous and comprehensive campaigning process would benefit both candidates and the community. If I felt my vote would have an actual effect on the results of an election (other than supporting a friend or a friend’s friend), I certainly would be more inclined to learn about the candidate and his platform.
It is easy to feel like a small fish in a huge, overqualified pond. Social media helps individuals reach their friends, and their friends’ friends, but doesn’t seem to go beyond that. While that small group may be enough to ensure the candidate will win the election, it is not enough to ensure a high standard of accountability and communication between the student leaders and the community in the year that follows. It is vital to remember that any democratic system relies on community participation. The responsibility of engagement must fall on the candidates and the community rather than one or the other.
Mary Russo is a Senior Associate Editor for The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at m.russo@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
WILLIAMS: Big donors are dominating the Board of Visitors
By Ryan Williams | 3 days agoSuch appointments being dictated by connections and donations creates a Board composed of big donors instead of members passionate about University goals.
EDITORIAL: Collectives are a misinterpretation of the mission of NIL
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoA large driver of this inequality comes in the form of collectives, the structures many schools use to organize their NIL payments.
CARTER: Data science without sustainability is insufficient
By Nathaniel Carter | November 9, 2024The University appears committed to a future defined by data, but lacks the dedication to meeting this future’s energy needs in a sustainable way.
