{"id":1520,"date":"2016-11-10T18:58:25","date_gmt":"2016-11-10T18:58:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.rsoftsolution.com\/blog\/analysis-of-social-media-did-a-better-job-at-predicting-trumps-win-than-the-polls.html"},"modified":"2016-11-10T18:58:25","modified_gmt":"2016-11-10T18:58:25","slug":"analysis-of-social-media-did-a-better-job-at-predicting-trumps-win-than-the-polls","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.rbsitsoftwaresolution.in\/blog\/analysis-of-social-media-did-a-better-job-at-predicting-trumps-win-than-the-polls.html","title":{"rendered":"Analysis of social media did a better job at predicting Trump\u2019s win than the polls"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n<\/p>\n

Many of the polls forecasted an easy win for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in the U.S. presidential election, but we now know their prediction models were flawed. While data scientists are scrambling to figure out what went wrong, a number of social media analytics firms are touting the fact that their measurements did a better job of tracking the\u00a0situation out in the real world, and saw the potential for Trump\u2019s win well in advance.<\/p>\n

\u201cAnalysts monitoring the social media activity of both campaigns on the major social media channels saw the outcome of this election coming months ago, and kept talking about the massive silent voter base that was forming around the Republican nominee,\u201d said\u00a0Phil Ross, a social media analyst at Socialbakers<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\u201cSocial media analysts continually sounded the alarm that all of the polls were not reflecting the actual situation on the ground in the pre-election landscape,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n

Clinton outspent Trump on TV ads, set up more field offices, and sent staff to swing states earlier, but\u00a0Trump simply better leveraged social media to both reach and grow his audience.<\/p>\n

It seems, too, that Trump benefitted from that old adage, \u201cany press is good press.\u201d<\/p>\n

While the October 7th leak of the Access Hollywood tape was reported\u00a0as a low moment in the Trump campaign, it expanded his social media audience more than any other until Election Day, Socialbakers found.<\/p>\n

\"socialbakers\"<\/p>\n

During the\u00a0campaign, many analytics firms noticed that a growing number of swing voters were engaging with Trump\u2019s messages on social media.<\/p>\n

Of course, at the time, it was unclear that social media engagement would translate into real-world votes that could put Trump in the Oval Office. After all, social media is often home to more passive participation when it comes to\u00a0key matters \u2013 and routinely criticized for it.<\/p>\n

Pundits have long dismissed social media engagement<\/a>\u00a0as holding little meaning beyond raising awareness at best, and not often resulting concrete change.<\/p>\n

In a recent\u00a0example, critics scoffed at the armchair activism of the Facebook Dakota pipeline check-in movement. A million people virtually checked in at Standing Rock <\/a>after a viral post told them it would protect\u00a0the protesters in North Dakota from police surveillance. (That wasn\u2019t<\/a> necessarily the case).<\/p>\n

In other words, historically speaking, no one was sure that a like or re-share\u00a0meant Trump was getting\u00a0a vote. Especially as\u00a0the polls told us otherwise.<\/p>\n

\"simply-measured-social-data-election2016_positivetrends\"<\/p>\n

Outside of engagement alone, other firms like SimplyMeasured<\/a> saw that social media sentiment towards Donald Trump trended more positively than sentiment towards Hillary Clinton on Election Day.<\/p>\n

Over the course of the campaign, Trump saw more mentions on social media associated with positive sentiment than his rival, as well. She closed that gap in late October and early November, but the good vibes for Trump soared once again just ahead of November 8th.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, though Trump had trended more negatively than Clinton up until the final debate, negative sentiment was close for the two candidates as they headed into Election Day.<\/p>\n

\"simply-measured-social-dataelection2016_negativetrends\"<\/p>\n

A similar trend was spotted by the analytics firm 4C Insights, today\u00a0cited by The WSJ<\/a>, which found that Trump had more support on Facebook and Twitter from the beginning of October through November 7th. Positive sentiment for Trump was 58% to Clinton\u2019s 48%, the firm said.<\/p>\n

And finally,\u00a0Brandwatch\u2019s analysis <\/a>also found that Trump had more Twitter mentions throughout most of the election cycle, including on Election Day.\u00a0Between the start of November 8th and November 9th at 1:30am EST, Trump accumulated more than 4.9 million mentions while Clinton has just over 2.7 million.<\/p>\n

\"election-day-trump-pres\"<\/p>\n

But not all social media analytics firms\u00a0believed their data could point to a Trump win. A contrarian report\u00a0from CNET,<\/a> for example, noted how one\u00a0firm, Spredfast, believed\u00a0there were too many conflicting signs on Election Day for them to make a prediction.<\/p>\n

Still, even social media may\u00a0have missed many Trump voters. During this election cycle, there were a number of silent Trump supporters, as well as those who were quietly leaning in his direction, who\u00a0may have not made their views known on social media.<\/p>\n

It appears that at least some\u00a0of these\u00a0supporters only took to social media once a Trump win looked possible. After Trump took swing states Florida and Ohio, positive tweeting in support of Trump spiked, Spredfast\u00a0told CNET.<\/p>\n

However, social media\u2019s success likely means it will be given more attention in future elections. But it can\u2019t see it all. That\u2019s why we still need\u00a0polls \u2013 preferably accurate ones next time.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Article source: http:\/\/feedproxy.google.com\/~r\/techcrunch\/social\/~3\/uinGisMInLM\/<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Many of the polls forecasted an easy win for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in the U.S. presidential election, but we now know their prediction models were flawed. While data scientists <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[3],"tags":[10,7,14,15,6,12,11],"class_list":["post-1520","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-latest-update","tag-computer-news","tag-downloads","tag-microsoft-download-news","tag-networking-updates","tag-technology-update","tag-wordpress-plugin-download","tag-wordpress-theme-download"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t