Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Americans Are Doomscrolling Their Way to the Ballot Box and Only Getting Empty Promises

Opinion

Man lying in his bed, on his phone at night.

As the 2026 election approaches, doomscrolling and social media are shaping voter behavior through fear and anxiety. Learn how digital news consumption influences political decisions—and how to break the cycle for more informed voting.

Getty Images, gorodenkoff

As the spring primary cycle ramps up, voters are deciding which candidates to elect in the November general election, but too much doomscrolling on social media is leading to uninformed — and often anxiety-based — voting. Even though online platforms and politicians may be preying on our exhaustion to further their agendas, we don’t have to fall for it this election cycle.

Doomscrolling is, unfortunately, part of daily life for many of us. It involves consuming a virtually endless amount of negative social media posts and news content, causing us to feel scared and depressed. Our brains have a hardwired negativity bias that causes us to notice potential threats and focus on them. This is exacerbated by the fact that people who closely follow or participate in politics are more likely to doomscroll.


A 2024 report found that 31% of adults in the U.S. who use social media indicated they doomscroll “a lot” or “some,” and a 2026 study found that more than one-third of Americans doomscroll before bed. Meanwhile, 21% of Americans get their political and election news from social media, and 53% of people get at least some of their general news from social media, which will undoubtedly impact their 2026 election choices.

Our social media timelines are filled with stories about the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the war in Gaza, military strikes on Iran, inflation, the high cost of housing, and every other problem in the world. When we see these potential threats, we keep scrolling to learn more about them; it is part of our natural fight nor flight response to threats, evolutionarily ingrained in us as a form of self-protection and survival.

Social media companies know this, and they inevitably benefit from it. When we endlessly doomscroll, we see advertisements that make enormous profits for these companies even at the expense of users. Recently, a California jury determined that social media companies often put profits over people.

For politicians, our doomscrolling provides a different but related opportunity. Politicians take advantage of our fears and anxieties by offering themselves as the remedies to all the threats in the world. They tell voters that they alone can prevent the danger, and that we neither need to fight or flee; instead, we only have to vote for them.

Social media has led to our fears growing deeper than any specific news topics and right to the very issue of our survival as a country. According to an American Psychological Association survey, “The future of the nation” was the most common source of significant stress for 77% of Americans in 2024, followed closely by the economy and the presidential election.

With this in mind, politicians campaign on solving all of our problems and offer themselves as the release for the pent-up anxiety caused by our doomscrolling. They don’t assert their candidacy as a form of statesmanship and governance, but rather as the way to protect us from the world’s instability.

Still, just as it always has been, the world is a dangerous place. Our ancestors knew that, only they didn’t spend hours each day scrolling on social media, constantly looking for those dangers like so many of us do now. That is where doomscrolling has gotten us.

Social media companies make billions of dollars, and politicians who offer true governance often get ignored. We instead elect politicians who promise to do the impossible of alleviating all the threats we see online, despite the fact that they know — and we should also know — that they cannot.

So how do we stop this? The standard advice to “put down the phone” is no longer enough. We need a strategic refusal to quit treating the ballot box like an anxiety-release valve. To break the cycle, we need to apply a “scroll-check” to every candidate. We need to ask ourselves: “If the digital threat this candidate is shouting about disappeared tomorrow, what would be left of their vision?” If the answer is an empty room, they aren't a leader; they are a symptom of the news feed.

While the dangers of the world cannot be eliminated, we can at least lessen some of the anxiety by remembering that politicians can’t fix everything, despite their empty promises. As Carl Jung said, “The man who promises everything is sure to fulfil nothing.”


Andrew Selepak, Ph.D., is a media professor at the University of Florida who teaches courses on social media and media and politics, including “Social Media and Society” and “Media and Politics.”

Read More

computer keyboard
a black keyboard with a blue button on it

America at 250 Needs a First-Rung Compact

A country asking what it wants to become over its next 250 years should pay close attention to the first opportunity it gives its young adults to become useful, trusted and independent.

The Fulcrum’s Letters to America project has deliberately elevated voices ages 14 to 30 as the generation carrying the American story forward. That civic invitation deserves an economic counterpart: a credible path into the work where young adults gain responsibility, judgment and a stake in institutions.

Keep ReadingShow less
Typing on a computer
person using laptop

America Needs a Digital Equity Policy, Not Just Tech Innovation

The United States invests billions in artificial intelligence research and development‚ semiconductor fabrication‚ and next-generation connectivity. Yet millions of Americans cannot consistently access the internet or afford the devices needed to submit an online application for social services or a job application․ This is not an oversight․ It is a policy choice that is costing the country dearly․

Connectivity is a floor, not a ceiling:

Keep ReadingShow less
Android portrait, Deep Learning, Artificial Intelligence Background

1,200 AI agents broke isolation, self-organized, and hacked Hugging Face — then covered their tracks. An argument for international AI controls, now.

blackdovfx/Getty Images

AI As a Darth Vader Menace

The enemy is in our midst, but the enemy is not us; it's AI. Whatever negative thoughts I had about AI—how it is being misused, how that use would weaken America, and how it should be regulated—were naive (see my article, "AI - Its Use, Misuse, and Regulation").

AI is instead showing itself already, in its infancy, as a three-headed gorgon that could one day destroy us. Yes, as I acknowledged in my article, AI does have positive uses, but the negative potential far outweighs the positive.

Keep ReadingShow less
 In an aerial view, the Stargate Oracle AI data center campus.

In an aerial view, the Stargate Oracle AI data center campus is seen on August 26, 2026 in Abilene, Texas

Brandon Bell/Getty Images

Is AI Worth the Cost to Communities?

Picture a family living on a quiet street in an idyllic small town. Then a data center moves in next door. Trees are knocked down for a sprawling industrial campus, an enormous windowless building rises, and a maddening hum continues day and night. The family closes its windows, abandons the backyard, and struggles to sleep. Open space disappears, electric bills rise, and the company announces plans to expand—all in the name of jobs, tax revenue, and so-called progress.

While the family is fictional, its experience is not. Across the country, communities are confronting noise, rising electricity demand, water consumption, lost open space, and data centers approved with little public discussion. These costs raise a question the technology industry would rather avoid: Are the promised benefits of the artificial-intelligence boom worth what communities are being asked to sacrifice?

Keep ReadingShow less