Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

We need a TikTok president

Opinion

TikTok
DeFodi Images News/Getty Images

Thiele Strong is a sociology professor at San José State University a public voices fellow at the The OpEd Project.

The United States is quickly approaching a presidential election that no one is jazzed about. The incumbent’s approval rating is substantially lower than his disapproval rating. And the biggest contender for his opposition, who just won the Iowa caucuses, is a habitual liar facing 91 felony charges and who will be remembered for inciting an insurrection, introducing alternative facts and calling social activists public enemies. Both are elite, cishet white men who would be president in their eighties if they were to win the election.

Even in a deeply polarized society, many can agree that the candidates are abysmal. This lackluster slate does not reflect who we are as a nation. We are full of accomplishments, innovation, creativity and development. Aren’t we worthy of a leader who reflects the magnitude of our potential?

Let’s allow TikTok to provide democracy to a nation that deeply deserves it and has not tasted it in some time. As social media content creators delve into New Year's resolutions, intentions and directions, I urge us to vision board and act now to find a politically viable presidential candidate.


We do not want 2024 to follow the current political path. We are the so-called leaders of the developed world, so we should be thrilled with our political candidates.

There’s someone who is burning for the chance to be heard and taken seriously as a presidential candidate. Someone who does not have massive campaign financing, who does not have the support of the mega donors, who is not a D.C. staple and yet who feels the time is right for them to listen and lead.

This is not only a pipedream. As a sociologist who teaches and researches social class and stratification, I know that we have more to gain from solidarity than from division. Solidarity is a sustainability resource. Sociologists have long forecasted that capitalism run amok would enter the next stage of its evolution when the masses were given the means and the tools to unite on their political behalf. Through social media we have a non-violent, cost-effective solution to tap into our collective wealth to provide a sustainable political future.

We have always had the numbers. There have always been more members of the working classes than there have been of the corporate, economic and political elites. But the socio-economically and politically powerful corporate elites work together. They meet and party together. And sometimes, they are incredibly irresponsible.

We, with social media as our tool, can do better.

It is important that we work to take control of our government for the people, by the people, before the billionaires get more deeply entrenched into our politics. Our political system has long been a bastion of power for people who have money. We have had millionaires in politics, now we have billionaires with unmatched resources. In the 2016 election, “ The Great Hack ” showed, those who supported Trump used their money to target so-called “persuadables” – swing voters in swing counties of swing states – with psychological warfare in order to shape politics. Their candidate, the political nihilist, won.

For decades, the media has bonded and shaped us. For example, in the early 2000s we saw Madonna and Britney kiss. During the pandemic, it was Nathan Apodaca, Fleetwood Mac and cranberry juice on Tiktok.

We love our TikTok, an opiate of the masses by the masses. They want to take it. Let’s give those in power another reason to be wary of the power of TikTok. Let’s use it to find a 2024 presidential candidate worthy of the powerful position.

This will not work if we promote someone who is not capable of the job. As a reminder, the Constitution requires that a presidential candidate: be 35 years or older, be a natural born citizen and have lived in the United States for at least 14 years. Based on these criteria, many people qualify.

Recently, there have been calls for humanities and artists to get into politics. We also need social scientists to get into politics. We need people who are capable of integrity, organization, mediation and de-escalation. Scan your screens and your consciousness and come up with someone in your networks who you think can go viral for a presidential candidacy.

It’s the 2024 TikTok challenge: #swaythepresidentialplay

To be sure, TikTok challenges are not known for their promotion of social well-being. Instead, they have been linked to teenage endangerment and risky behavior. Elites will say that we cannot elect a candidate from TikTok. But this is not the first time TikTok has entered politics. Remember t when TikTok teens and K-pop stans falsely registered for Donald Trump’s campaign event? We can use TikTok to find eligible people who can rule a nation.

America has the potential to be great, and greatness is never achieved by electing government officials through a classist, racist, sexist and outdated system. Amazing things have come from Tiktok – let’s add another tick to that list.

In past years, celebrities have called for us to rock the vote. Now, let us TikTok the vote.

Read More

Meta Undermining Trust but Verify through Paid Links
Facebook launches voting resource tool
Facebook launches voting resource tool

Meta Undermining Trust but Verify through Paid Links

Facebook is testing limits on shared external links, which would become a paid feature through their Meta Verified program, which costs $14.99 per month.

This change solidifies that verification badges are now meaningless signifiers. Yet it wasn’t always so; the verified internet was built to support participation and trust. Beginning with Twitter’s verification program launched in 2009, a checkmark next to a username indicated that an account had been verified to represent a notable person or official account for a business. We could believe that an elected official or a brand name was who they said they were online. When Twitter Blue, and later X Premium, began to support paid blue checkmarks in November of 2022, the visual identification of verification became deceptive. Think Fake Eli Lilly accounts posting about free insulin and impersonation accounts for Elon Musk himself.

This week’s move by Meta echoes changes at Twitter/X, despite the significant evidence that it leaves information quality and user experience in a worse place than before. Despite what Facebook says, all this tells anyone is that you paid.

Keep ReadingShow less
artificial intelligence

Rather than blame AI for young Americans struggling to find work, we need to build: build new educational institutions, new retraining and upskilling programs, and, most importantly, new firms.

Surasak Suwanmake/Getty Images

Blame AI or Build With AI? Only One Approach Creates Jobs

We’re failing young Americans. Many of them are struggling to find work. Unemployment among 16- to 24-year-olds topped 10.5% in August. Even among those who do find a job, many of them are settling for lower-paying roles. More than 50% of college grads are underemployed. To make matters worse, the path forward to a more stable, lucrative career is seemingly up in the air. High school grads in their twenties find jobs at nearly the same rate as those with four-year degrees.

We have two options: blame or build. The first involves blaming AI, as if this new technology is entirely to blame for the current economic malaise facing Gen Z. This course of action involves slowing or even stopping AI adoption. For example, there’s so-called robot taxes. The thinking goes that by placing financial penalties on firms that lean into AI, there will be more roles left to Gen Z and workers in general. Then there’s the idea of banning or limiting the use of AI in hiring and firing decisions. Applicants who have struggled to find work suggest that increased use of AI may be partially at fault. Others have called for providing workers with a greater say in whether and to what extent their firm uses AI. This may help firms find ways to integrate AI in a way that augments workers rather than replace them.

Keep ReadingShow less
Parv Mehta Is Leading the Fight Against AI Misinformation

A visual representation of deep fake and disinformation concepts, featuring various related keywords in green on a dark background, symbolizing the spread of false information and the impact of artificial intelligence.

Getty Images

Parv Mehta Is Leading the Fight Against AI Misinformation

At a moment when the country is grappling with the civic consequences of rapidly advancing technology, Parv Mehta stands out as one of the most forward‑thinking young leaders of his generation. Recognized as one of the 500 Gen Zers named to the 2025 Carnegie Young Leaders for Civic Preparedness cohort, Mehta represents the kind of grounded, community‑rooted innovator the program was designed to elevate.

A high school student from Washington state, Parv has emerged as a leading youth voice on the dangers of artificial intelligence and deepfakes. He recognized early that his generation would inherit a world where misinformation spreads faster than truth—and where young people are often the most vulnerable targets. Motivated by years of computer science classes and a growing awareness of AI’s risks, he launched a project to educate students across Washington about deepfake technology, media literacy, and digital safety.

Keep ReadingShow less
child holding smartphone

As Australia bans social media for kids under 16, U.S. parents face a harder truth: online safety isn’t an individual choice; it’s a collective responsibility.

Getty Images/Keiko Iwabuchi

Parents Must Quit Infighting to Keep Kids Safe Online

Last week, Australia’s social media ban for children under age 16 officially took effect. It remains to be seen how this law will shape families' behavior; however, it’s at least a stand against the tech takeover of childhood. Here in the U.S., however, we're in a different boat — a consensus on what's best for kids feels much harder to come by among both lawmakers and parents.

In order to make true progress on this issue, we must resist the fallacy of parental individualism – that what you choose for your own child is up to you alone. That it’s a personal, or family, decision to allow smartphones, or certain apps, or social media. But it’s not a personal decision. The choice you make for your family and your kids affects them and their friends, their friends' siblings, their classmates, and so on. If there is no general consensus around parenting decisions when it comes to tech, all kids are affected.

Keep ReadingShow less