This paper questions if democratic elections are still even possible at all. The goal of this paper is to explain which methods Cambridge Analytica used to try to influence the 2016 presidential election. In that course, it aims to answer the question if these practices are a threat to democratic elections. The company in question was called Cambridge Analytica, a data analysis and political consulting company which used user data from Facebook and other social media services to manipulate voters' behaviour.
It is the 8th November 2016, day of the 58th presidential election in the United States of America. The republican Donald Trump and his vice president candidate Mike Pence are competing against the democrat Hillary Clinton and her vice president candidate Tim Kaine. According to surveys and polls prior to the election, Clinton has higher chance of winning and is expected to become the 45th president of the United States. A big surprise was revealed to the world that day when, for the fourth time in American history, a presidential candidate was elected without actually having the majority of citizens' votes. Donald Trump won the election and took office as the 45th president of the United States on January 20, 2017.
But what if this election was possibly manipulated? What if a single company had the power and the possibilities to completely analyse, predict and influence voters' behaviour? This might sound like an idea from a science fiction movie, but it is reality and it happened without the world even realising it.
After dealing with the case of Cambridge Analytica, one might think that electoral manipulation using data seems to be alarmingly easy in the digital age.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 What Cambridge Analytica Was and What They Did
2.1 The Company´s History
2.2 Key Actors in the Trump Campaign
2.2.1 Alexander Nix
2.2.2 Aleksandr Kogan
2.2.3 Christopher Wylie
3 Cambridge Analytica´s Methodology
3.1 Microtargeting
3.2 Psychographics and Demographics
3.3 The OCEAN-Model (Big Five Personality Traits)
3.4 How Cambridge Analytica Practically Applied their Methodology in the Trump Campaign
4 A Threat to Democracy?
4.1 Definition Democracy
4.2 Discussing the Initial Question
5 Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This paper examines the influence of Cambridge Analytica on the 2016 US presidential election, specifically investigating whether their data-driven consulting practices and manipulation methods potentially threaten the integrity of democratic elections.
- The history and operational role of Cambridge Analytica
- Key figures involved in the firm's strategic efforts
- Technical methodologies, including microtargeting and psychographic profiling
- The intersection of personality traits (OCEAN-Model) and political advertising
- Evaluation of whether these practices constitute a genuine threat to modern democracy
Excerpt from the Book
3.1 Microtargeting
The term microtargeting describes the targeted addressing of individuals with the goal of influencing the individuals´ view of something in the initiator´s favour20. In the context of election campaigns, it describes the data based targeting of individual voters or bigger groups of voters with the goal of convincing them to vote for the initi - ator´s party. Potential voters can be targeted through multiple different ways, for ex- ample through direct mail, television ads or billboards. But in the age of digitalisation, the most common method is to reach the target audience through personalised ad- vertisements on social platforms such as Facebook or Instagram. Since there are many different factors that can influence the outcome of an election, the actual effect- iveness of microtargeting is not empirically provable21.
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: Provides an overview of the 2016 US presidential election and introduces the research objective to analyze Cambridge Analytica's influence on voter behavior.
2 What Cambridge Analytica Was and What They Did: Traces the company's origins and identifies key figures whose actions were foundational to the firm's data collection and strategy.
3 Cambridge Analytica´s Methodology: Explains the technical processes of microtargeting, psychographic profiling, and the use of the OCEAN-Model to tailor political advertisements.
4 A Threat to Democracy?: Discusses the implications of these manipulative techniques on democratic processes and addresses the legal and ethical challenges they pose.
5 Conclusion: Summarizes findings, noting the difficulty in quantifying the firm's impact while warning about the broader risks of data misuse in modern digitalization.
Keywords
Cambridge Analytica, US Presidential Election, Microtargeting, Psychographics, OCEAN-Model, Data Analysis, Democracy, Political Manipulation, Facebook, Donald Trump, Big Five Personality Traits, Voter Behavior, Data Privacy, Digital Ethics, Social Media
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper examines the data-driven strategies used by Cambridge Analytica during the 2016 US presidential election and assesses their impact on voter manipulation.
What are the primary thematic areas covered?
The core themes include the company's history, the technical application of psychographic data, the use of personality models, and the theoretical threat these practices pose to democratic institutions.
What is the central research question?
The study aims to determine whether the behavior-changing methods employed by Cambridge Analytica constitute a direct threat to democratic elections.
Which scientific method is utilized?
The work employs a qualitative analysis of historical developments, media reports, and psychological profiling techniques to evaluate political consulting practices.
What is discussed in the main body of the work?
The main body focuses on the company’s organizational structure, key actors, specific technical tools like the OCEAN-Model, and the critical discussion regarding the intersection of data analysis and democracy.
Which keywords best describe this research?
Key terms include Cambridge Analytica, Microtargeting, Psychographics, OCEAN-Model, and Data Misuse.
How did Alexander Nix and Aleksandr Kogan contribute to the events described?
Alexander Nix served as the CEO and strategist connecting the firm to the Trump campaign, while Aleksandr Kogan provided the critical dataset extracted from Facebook users through his app.
What makes the methods analyzed difficult to regulate?
The author argues that because many of these practices are technically legal and rely on standard advertising techniques enhanced by data, distinguishing them from traditional campaigning remains a major regulatory challenge.
- Quote paper
- Anonym (Author), 2022, Election Manipulation in the USA. Using the Example of Cambridge Analytica, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1322832
