To President Donald Trump’s second term, all is well. Videos of immigration raids are widely shared on X by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the policy is fueled by conspiracy theories, and prominent and powerful right-wing podcasters hold high government roles. Trump’s second administration is, to put it bluntly, very much online.
Trump and his supporters have long peddled—and profited from—disinformation and conspiracy theories, helping them build visibility on social media and set the tone of the national conversation. During his first term, Trump was famous for announcing executive positions and priorities via tweet. Since then, social media has become a friendly environment for conspiracy theories and their promoters, helping them to spread widely. Trump’s playbook adjusted accordingly.
Don Moynihan, a professor of public policy at the University of Michigan, says that social media, especially the social media ecosystem, is no longer just a way for Trump to control the conversation and public perception. Managers, he says, are now making impulsive decisions and shaping policy based largely on how they will be perceived online. Their priority is what right-wing communities care about—regardless of whether it’s true.
WIRED spoke with Moynihan, who says the US has entered a new level of convergence between the Internet and politics, in what he calls “clicktatorship.”
This discussion has been edited for length and clarity.
WIRED: To get us started, what is “clicktatorship”?
Don Moynihan: “Clicktatorship” is a form of government that combines the worldview of social media with a tendency toward authoritarianism. This means that people who work in this type of government not only use Internet platforms as a means of communication, but that their beliefs, judgments, and decision-making reflect, are influenced by, and respond directly to the Internet world to an extreme. “Clicktatorship” views everything as content, including basic policy decisions and implementation processes.
The provision of a platform that promotes right-wing conspiracies and the administrative need for people who can trade in those programs is what gives us the current times of “clicktatorship” we are facing.
The “clicktatorship” produces these images to justify the occupation of American cities by military forces, or to justify cutting off services in states that did not support the president, doing things that would have really shocked us ten years ago.
Trump’s first presidency was characterized by a certain kind of showmanship. How is that different from what we see now?
Trump’s first presidency may be understood as a “TV presidency,” where it is viewed Student or Fox News gave you real insight into the situation in which Trump was operating. Trump’s second presidency is a “Public Truth or X presidency,” which is very difficult to interpret without the reference points of those online platforms. Some of the content and messages used by the president or other top policymakers are full of insider references, messages that don’t make sense unless you’re already in that online community.
Ways of speaking have also changed. We see the most senior policy makers showing patterns and trends that work online. Pam Bondi takes to the floor of the Senate with a list of zingers and X posts printed as a way to respond to the usual accountability process, showing how this way of speaking online shapes how public officials view their real roles.
There has been a lot of research about the polarizing and dangerous nature of social media. What does it mean that our political leaders are people who have not only succeeded in managing social networks, but are also being used by them?
