Social Media’s influence on the U.S presidential elections of 2020

Figure 1. Cartoon of Fake news amongst elections of 2020 

The 2020 U.S presidential election was one of the most significant events as well as controversial elections in modern American history. The process was held during the COVID-19 pandemic,saw record voter turnout and ended with Democratic candidate Joe Biden defeating former President Donald Trump. The election took place in the atmosphere of political polarization and social chaos. In the modern world, social media platforms have become central arenas for political discourse, raising constant questions about their influence on electoral outcomes, as well as concerns over misinformation. This article will examine how social media played a key role in shaping public view, using evidence from an experimental study conducted by Hunt Allcott and Matthew Gentzkow, published in PNAS in 2024.

Figure 2. Psychological analysis of how media influences voters / Retrieved from  Lee, Hang. “Voters’ Involvement, Attitude, and Confidence in the Era of New Media.” Palgrave Communications, vol. 6, no. 1, 7 Jan. 2020, (Photo Credit: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0368-9.)

Social Media platforms are designed around the principles of social identity formation, peer validation and reward-based engagements. Algorithms prioritize emotionally stimulating and socially reinforced content, evoking psychological theories such as conformity or social group belonging. For the younger generations, political content that is shared within peer networks can significantly shape attitudes and opinions. When political engagement is framed as socially desirable or urgent within an individual’s community, people are more likely to participate to maintain social approval. 

In 2020 these various platforms increased levels of political participation. Due in part to persistent internet messaging promoting civic involvement, voter registration and early voting peaked, with over 99 million early votes cast in the United States, surpassing early voting totals from prior cycles. Election-related content became practically unavoidable for active platform users as a result of the "Get out the vote" campaigns and digital reminders that appeared throughout their feeds. About 72% of American people utilized social media in 2020, and more than half of these users frequently came across political information, according to Pew Research Center statistics. This suggests that political messaging reached a large portion of the voters beyond traditional news consumers. Social media served as the main source of political information for younger voters, those between the ages of 18 and 29, raising their level of political consciousness.

During the COVID-19 epidemic, when in-person campaigning was especially scarce, campaigns used social media to spread information about voter registration, early voting, and mail-in ballots. Voter turnout in the 2020 election was the highest in more than a century, at about 66.8%.

New types of political engagement, such as online conversations via social media platforms, were made possible by social media in addition to election participation.

Figure 3. Socio-affective and Cognitive approaches in misleading information (Photo Credit: Retrieved from ‘Nature Articles’)

Misinformation in Elections

Unlike traditional media, which relies on editorial gatekeeping, social media platforms curate content algorithmically, prioritizing engagement metrics such as likes, shares, and comments. As a result, users were frequently exposed to political information passively, often without actively seeking it. According to the Pew Research Center, approximately 55% of U.S. adults reported receiving political news from social media platforms, highlighting their importance as information intermediaries during the election cycle. Furthermore, around 36% Americans reported that social media was their most used source of political and educational information about election news.

Increased exposure made political information more widely available, but it also made false information more likely to spread quickly. Misinformation is defined as intentionally misleading content, while disinformation is defined as incorrect or misleading information disseminated without malevolent intent. According to research, social media networks served as the main means by which false narratives were disseminated to large audiences, accounting for almost 67% of recorded disinformation occurrences pertaining to the 2020 election (MDPI, 2022). These included conspiracy theories casting doubt on the validity of the political process, inaccurate assertions regarding voting fraud, and deceptive analyses of polling data.

Algorithmic amplification made misleading information more visible. Platform algorithms were more likely to promote information that evoked strong emotional responses, such as fear or rage, regardless of its factual accuracy, thereby broadening its audience. This dynamic resulted in distorted perceptions of political reality, including exaggerated ideas about electoral fraud and candidate support.

Empirical Evidence

Between June and early September of 2020, researchers collected about 240 million tweets about the election. This illustrates how much digital political communication can emerge in such a short period of time (Ferrara et al., 2020). This figure only includes one platform, suggesting that the most popular social media platforms generate an even higher volume of political content overall.

The abundance of political content on social media had several consequences. First, it accelerated the creation and spread of political narratives, with viral posts, hashtags, and popular topics influencing mainstream media coverage and shaping public opinion in a matter of hours. Second, because of the increased incidental exposure brought about by the density of political communications, people often encountered political content even when they weren't actively searching for it. This constant exposure not only raised political consciousness but also amplified emotionally charged and sensational content, which can worsen political polarization (Allcott & Gentzkow, 2017).

The activity of automated accounts, sometimes known as "bots," was a major contributor to raising the influence of social media in elections. Despite making up a small percentage of all accounts, bots were able to create disproportionate awareness due to the frequency of their posts. According to empirical research, bots caused significant increases in online discourse, especially on contentious subjects such as mail-in voting, claims of voter fraud, and candidate issues (Shao et al., 2018). Bots created the appearance of massive support or indignation by quickly posting and resharing content, inflating engagement metrics.

Social media appears to have positively impacted civic engagement, according to empirical data. Digital platforms reduced barriers to participation and enhanced access to political content, as seen by record voter turnout, extensive distribution of voting information, and greater political engagement among younger demographics (Pew Research Center, 2020). Peer-to-peer sharing, algorithmically curated information streams, and targeted outreach tactics allowed campaigns to effectively organize voters, especially in the face of the restrictions of the COVID-19 pandemic(Guess, Nyhan & Reifler, 2023).

Thus, social media was both a catalyst for political participation and a mechanism for shaping public narrative, demonstrating its dual role in contemporary electoral processes.

Experimental Evidence: The Allcott and Gentzkow Deactivation Study 

One of the most known studies made to measure social media’s effect on voters comes from an experiment by Hunt Allcott and Matthew Gentzkow which was published in PNAS in 2024. Their aim was to understand what would happen if people simply stopped using social media before an election. In order to investigate this, they asked nearly 20,000 Facebook users and over 15,000 Instagram users to deactivate their accounts for six weeks leading up to the 2020 presidential election (Allcott et al., 2024).

By comparing those who stayed off social media with those who continued using it, the researchers could analyze what impact these platforms did in fact have on their political engagement. The results showed that the individuals who deactivated their accounts engaged less with political content online. The individuals shared less posts than usual, clicked on fewer political links, and generally participated less in digital political discussions.

However, the experiment also showed that social media didn’t drastically change deeper political beliefs. Participants’ overall political knowledge wasn’t significantly affected, though they were slightly less exposed to some political news. Interestingly, people who took a break from social media were somewhat less likely to believe false information, suggesting that being offline may reduce exposure to misleading narratives.

When it came to voting preferences, the effects were less significant as expected. Facebook deactivation seemed to slightly reduce support for Donald Trump among participants, but the change wasn’t strong enough to be statistically significant. Likewise, taking a break from social media didn’t meaningfully change participants’ feelings toward candidates or trust in the election.What this study shows is that social media does shape how people interact with politics, but its effect isn’t as dramatic as some might assume.

 Figure 4. Comparison and Data of Facebook Deactivation and Instagram Deactivation by the participants

Overall, it can be confidently said that the 2020 U.S elections demonstrated  social media’s huge role in society. During the COVID-19 pandemic, digital platforms helped mobilize voters, broaden access to information, and boost political engagement. They also contributed to political divisiveness by facilitating the quick dissemination of false information and emotionally charged content.

Empirical and experimental data suggest that social media does not significantly alter fundamental political beliefs or voting behavior, even though it has a significant impact on political engagement and information exposure. Social media affects how politics is experienced, debated, and perceived rather than directly influencing election results. Thus, the 2020 election illustrates the potential, as well as the drawbacks of social media for modern democracy.

Bibliography

Allcott, H. & Gentzkow, M., 2017. Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), pp.211–236.

Ferrara, E., Varol, O., Davis, C., Menczer, F. & Flammini, A., 2020. The Rise of Social Bots. Communications of the ACM, 59(7), pp.96–104.

Guess, A., Nyhan, B. & Reifler, J., 2023. Exposure to misinformation in the 2020 U.S. election: Evidence from a large-scale survey. Stanford University. [Online] Available at: https://news.stanford.edu/2023/04/13/2020-election-saw-fewer-people-clicking-misinformation-websites-stanford-study-finds/ [Accessed 18 February 2026].

MDPI, 2022. Disinformation and Social Networks in the 2020 U.S. Election. Social Sciences, 11(3), pp.36–52. [Online] Available at: https://www.mdpi.com/2673-5172/2/4/36 [Accessed 18 February 2026].

Pew Research Center, 2020. Social Media and Political News Consumption in the 2020 U.S. Election. [Online] Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2020/10/22/social-media-and-politics-2020/ [Accessed 18 February 2026].

Shao, C., Ciampaglia, G.L., Varol, O., Yang, K.C., Flammini, A. & Menczer, F., 2018. The spread of low-credibility content by social bots. Nature Communications, 9, Article 4787.

Vosoughi, S., Roy, D. & Aral, S., 2018. The Spread of True and False News Online. Science, 359(6380), pp.1146–1151.

Allcott, H., Gentzkow, M., Mason, W., Wilkins, A., Barberá, P., Brown, T., Juan Carlos Cisneros, Crespo-Tenorio, A., Dimmery, D., Freelon, D., González-Bailón, S., Guess, A.M., Young Mie Kim, Lazer, D., Malhotra, N., Devra Moehler, Sameer Nair-Desai, Nyhan, B., Carolina, A. and Pan, J. (2024). The Effects of Facebook and Instagram on the 2020 election: a Deactivation Experiment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 121(21). doi:https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2321584121.

Marazziti, D. (2022). Brainwashing by Social Media: a Threat to Freedom, a Risk for Dictatorship. Clinical Neuropsychiatry, [online] 19(5), pp.277–279. doi:https://doi.org/10.36131/cnfioritieditore20220502.

Sanz, C. and Thorbecke, C. (2020). What social media giants are doing to counter misinformation this election. [online] ABC News. Available at: https://abcnews.com/Technology/social-media-giants-counter-misinformation-election[Accessed 18 Feb. 2026]

Ecker, Ullrich K. H., et al. “The Psychological Drivers of Misinformation Belief and Its Resistance to Correction.” Nature Reviews Psychology, vol. 1, no. 1, 12 Jan. 2022, pp. 13–29, www.nature.com/articles/s44159-021-00006-y, https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-021-00006-y.

Lee, Hang. “Voters’ Involvement, Attitude, and Confidence in the Era of New Media.” Palgrave Communications, vol. 6, no. 1, 7 Jan. 2020, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0368-9.