Politics from Twitter

Twitter was born in 2006 and is perhaps the social platform that has most contributed to the change in behavior and communication in the era of the digital revolution.

Twitter is the natural extension of the old SMS, the way of communicating that has flanked telephone calls up to modern messaging systems and represented the customs clearance of the distortion in writing and unfortunately made it normal to use the “X” instead of the “for ”Or the“ K ”instead of the“ ch ”giving rise to grammatical disgraces that persist. Twitter is the tool that forced the text of the message to be reduced to the bone, now concentrated in 280 characters that previously were only 140. Bloggers, politicians, advertisers and viewers had to respect that space and, as a result, communication has been reduced to bone, especially for those who have to receive it. I write little because you have learned to read little is the summary of the context.

Here then is a communication of simple, dry sentences, which must not raise doubts in the recipient. From Twitter this method was then transferred to the other social networks, but it is on this platform so dear to politicians, see the Trump case, that the most evident consequences occur.

Go ahead and then a “Go Milan” or “Juveladri” (I don’t want the fans; they are just examples) or saying that we will never fly Alitalia again because “Always Late In Takeoff, Always Late in Arrival”. It is also good to say how much spaghetti must cook or that we are single and it is an ideal system for advertising: immediate and understandable slogans to the simplest minds. Today we can all “tweet” to have our say, using this new verb which, like “googolare” will never have an Italian translation because chirping is the prerogative of some birds.

However, the communication problem arises when the message would need, for the content or the recipients, to be developed and detailed. Twitter becomes the perfect excuse to avoid doing it by “justifying yourself” with the limit of characters to use.

This is precisely the case of the political messages that storm us these days and that are commented, clicked, retweeted and obviously distorted by many without often being able to understand their meaning.

Effective slogans such as “Italians first” or “We will not hand over the country to this right”; “God, country and family” or “We are the real alternative” (what is not given to know) or “We never with them”. Candidates who insult each other by reproaching old votes against everything and nothing and cross vetoes of years before, forgetting changes of shirt and alliances and so on or who send subliminal messages such as “who wants to understand”.

Obviously, in this context, it is almost impossible to find a complete, detailed, clear electoral program online in all points, perhaps with an integral bill and an indication of financial coverage. Party programs are also in the form of slides, posters, summaries. Easy to write and simple to make understand to a user who does not want to commit more than the initial three seconds of a video.

Conversely, an electoral campaign should not be based on slogans and proclamations, but on concrete proposals, with bills, feasible and with financial coverage, such as not to create situations such as that of citizenship income which, promised in the election campaign without a concrete feasibility check, it was given to dozens of Italian and foreign citizens who did not have the conditions to request it.

Unfortunately, the days in which politicians confronted each other, without insults, exposing ideas and programs, in the Electoral Tribune, with journalists as moderators and correct provocateurs; today we have barkers of junk programs surrounding themselves with crawling jesters for an audience that agrees to be insulted online with messages of 140 or at most 280 characters.

© Futuro Europa® The images used are taken from the Internet and evaluated in the public domain: to report any improper use, write to the editorial staff

Politics from Twitter