Florida Governor Ron DeSantis finally made his official announcement (that surprised no one) that he was running for President of the United States in 2024. What did surprise many people including the legacy media was how Gov. DeSantis made his announcement. Instead of the traditional press conference on television, DeSantis elected to use Twitter Spaces which is a relatively new function of Twitter allowing people to have live audio conversations with anyone on the platform. There were several takeaways from this historic event.
First, the good:
DeSantis’s decision and Elon’s involvement was a clear shot across the bow to legacy media. Several publications threw out headlines talking about the numerous glitches and issues the stream had. However, in their own words they inadvertently pointed out why it was arguably such a good decision. Had Ron DeSantis gone the traditional route, he would have been subject to the media’s broadcast and potential stickhandling and control. The media clearly does not want DeSantis to become the Republican nominee. They claim it’s because he’s a heartless fascist, but the real reason is probably because DeSantis stands the best chance of beating Joe Biden in a general election. But that’s a topic for another blog. What many in the media unintentionally pointed out was that Twitter’s main issue was the service crashed because so many people tried to join the stream. I will use some excerpts from a New York Times article to illustrate.
“The Republican presidential candidate’s announcement on Twitter had a high of about 300,000 concurrent listeners and a total of 3.4 million listeners as of Thursday.” - Ryan Mac & Tiffany Tsu, NY Times
Keep those numbers in mind and compare them to the last huge political event on television. How many people were there? To offer some context, the highest confirmed attendance for a single Trump rally was 29,000. That’s not a fair comparison, true and it does lead into one of the pitfalls of DeSantis’s decision that I’ll touch on later, but bear with me.
The article goes on to mention how David Sacks, who moderated the conversation, said it was “by far the biggest room ever held on social media”. Well, that was false as NY Times rightly pointed out, but the events that beat DeSantis’s announcement were vastly different:
“Consider that a 2016 Facebook Live event, featuring two BuzzFeed employees placing rubber bands around a watermelon until it exploded, drew more than 800,000 concurrent viewers and a total of five million views within hours of its conclusion. The 2017 livestream of a pregnant giraffe on YouTube brought in five million viewers a day.” - Ryan Mac & Tiffany Tsu, NY Times
Fair enough but notice how they didn’t bring up another example of a political streaming event. Admittedly, I don’t have a counter example and that’s likely because this is uncharted territory. So how does it compare to a previous political event that appeared on television?
“Although television does not generally pull in the same numbers that it did a decade ago, some political events that are broadcast live still garner large audiences. When President Biden delivered his State of the Union address on Feb. 7, for instance, the speech was aired live to 27.3 million people watching on 16 TV networks, according to Nielsen.” - Ryan Mac & Tiffany Tsu, NY Times
Wow! 27.3 million people vs 300,000. Seems like a clear winner. Indeed, it probably is, but let’s dig into the differences of these two events. Firstly, we’re talking about a State of the Union Address, which many Americans who don’t even vote and people who are ineligible to vote tune into. Secondly, people who did not vote for the President giving the address will often tune in as well. Thirdly, how many of those viewers are passive viewers? Meaning, how many of those people are just CNN junkies (we all know they’re out there) or people who were simply watching tv and decided that there wasn’t anything better on? Then there’s the Nielson rating system to consider. Nielson ratings are estimates, pure and simple. Twitter’s numbers on the other hand were raw data. If Twitter says 300,000 people were watching the stream, then you know who those people were. Which is one of the many reasons online advertising is much more effective than traditional television, but again that is a topic for another blog. Case and point, these numbers can be spun and it’s clear the legacy media is being biased and trying to put a negative spin on them, which proves DeSantis right in the end. To join this Twitter Space took active participation. I would bet that of the 300,000 that joined live most of them are DeSantis supporters and/or Elon supporters. This gives the DeSantis camp some very clear and reliable data potentially.
The stream was also great for Twitter. In true Elon fashion, the event was also a test. It was a test of Twitter’s capability and the reaction from the people having a political candidate so accessible. It’s truly ironic that some journalists compare the streaming issues with Elon’s recent rocket explosion because once again, it shows their willful ignorance of the big picture. Of course, some rocket tests will blow up. Newer internet services will crash when they’re stressed. Have you seen the picture on a 1950s television? Hell, even a 1990s television. These lead to improvements and these issues often lead to a product or service becoming a leader in the field. After the reception from everyday people on Twitter, Elon could (and is likely going to) position Twitter as a medium that will be an option for political debates in the near future.
Now a highlight for DeSantis himself, he showed that he really seemed to know what he was talking about and that he knew what was going on. At one point Representative Thomas Massie asked Governor DeSantis his thoughts on the REINS Act and DeSantis knew exactly what he was talking about. It’s not unexpected for a politician to know some of the major events, but DeSantis is the governor of Florida and thus does not serve at the federal level.
Now, some of the critics were right in more ways than one.
DeSantis was as firm as ever on his “war on woke” and while the conservative base is eating it up, it leaves more moderate people wondering if he may be going just a bit too far. Many of DeSantis’s other talking points had the same effect. All of it was presented as the bold conservative Republicans fighting The Left, but some of the actions DeSantis has suggested or even done already in Florida may be too far in the other direction. This puts some independents who largely like Ron DeSantis in a bit of a pickle. For example, many are criticizing Florida’s new immigration law as too extreme and too far overreaching. For example, one of the main questions of the new law is how it affects DACA recipients. Technically speaking, as far as I’m aware, DACA grants someone legal status in the country, but it’s unclear how certain aspects of the law affect DACA recipients. There are provisions that could potentially negatively affect people with DACA. For example, parts of the law would remove in-state tuition rates for DACA students in Florida universities even if they graduated from a Florida high school. There is another provision that would make DACA recipients ineligible to enter the Florida Bar as a licensed attorney. Throw in provisions of the law that collect information on undocumented immigrants receiving care at Florida hospitals and the rampant reports of labor issues and shortages after the crackdowns and the areas of concern are obvious.
Then DeSantis touched on the idea of DEI (Diversity, Equity & Inclusion) standards for academic accreditation. While many see and agree with his point of view, his suggestion of having alternative accreditation that, he said, would deny accreditation to a school that had DEI programs was concerning. Is that not just the opposite side of the same coin? Then there is his stance on the teaching of gender/sex ideology in schools. Personally, I’m in full agreement that these kinds of things have no place in a classroom in elementary school. However, the lines get blurrier once kids reach middle school and especially high school. Indoctrination is one thing, but there are kids who are legitimately gay, or legitimately feel that they are transgender. With these kinds of laws and rules, many teachers and administrators will likely feel too afraid to help these young adults who are truly in need of guidance and potentially resources. It’s nice to think that all parents would love and accept their child no matter what, but sadly this is not the case. However minute the number, there ARE cases where a child is in danger should their parents find out about their sexual orientation. Many independent voters would agree that some of these laws have the potential to go too far without the proper checks, balances and oversight.
Speaking of the opposite side of the same coin, many are hailing Twitter as the bastion of free speech and open debate. While it certainly seems that way for now, we’ll see if Elon keeps his word about being truly fair. Elon has talked a big game about the openness of his Twitter, but really what is to stop Elon from censoring his critics or people who, dare I say, are simply too far to the left? Elon can curate and censor just like the other tech giants do, and it’s worth noting that everyone who asked Gov. DeSantis a question was clearly a fan. Now, on its face that may not be a big deal. It’s pretty typical that for an announcement of candidacy, the crowd is in favor. However, with Twitter’s touting of how open it is as a platform, it may have been nice to see DeSantis have to deal with a legitimate critic. Hopefully that happens soon, and whos’ to say that they wouldn’t have entertained a question like that had one been present.
Twitter also truly does need to take care of the glitches. They weren’t as influential as many in the legacy media are saying, but they are influential. The lack of video in today’s TikTok attention span is problematic. Now that we’ve had a 24-hour news cycle and the internet, the fireside chat just won’t cut it with voters. Some people may prefer to listen, but having the option to watch video would go a long way. This change is likely though as it seems Elon is making moves to change Twitter from a social media company to a straight up media company. Another pitfall is that while 300,000 people were listening to the stream, it sounded like 3. The lack of applause and an active audience really take away the enthusiasm. That can’t be fixed with technology. Perhaps Twitter will replicate how the media have done these in the past, but simply broadcast it on their own platform with more internet audience interaction. Then there’s DeSantis himself when it comes to lack of enthusiasm. Love him or hate him, Trump is just more fun to watch. It’s doubtful that DeSantis will ever compete with Trump in that arena, but he could make some improvements, nonetheless. One criticism I’ve had and heard is that Ron DeSantis sounds like he’s reading a speech. Even when he’s not. It’s early in what promises to be a rough race so Ron DeSantis has plenty of time to make some changes. However right now it seems that DeSantis is preparing for a debate when he should be preparing for a fight.
