On Student Council
By: Andy Horrigan
Student Council campaigning has bred toxicity. Over the past year, the standard manner of campaigning has shifted in accordance to COVID-19 restrictions, yet candidates continue to do anything to get their name out there, even if it borders on breaking campaigning guidelines. Social media has been flooded with campaign posters, and drama is at an all time high. Last fall, email campaigning was banned due to abuse of the format. This past presidential cycle, social media has been abused in a similar manner. There must be restrictions enacted by the elections committee regarding the style of campaigning over social media, whether it be action against the perpetuation of misleading posters online or the pestering of the student body to repost posters.
In theory, posters spread on social media have the same effect as political yard signs: raising awareness about the upcoming election and convincing on-the-fence voters to vote for a specific candidate. However, due to the overwhelming number of people posting campaigns over social media, candidates desperately try to draw in potential voters with outrageous promises. Feeling the need to create posters with proposals that have no realistic ability to be passed, candidates perpetuate years of inaction by Student Council’s Executive Board. This campaign style has bred the common opinion that candidates do not heed their promises. Social media campaigning has increased the prevalence of these issues. Something needs to be done to ground our candidates to reality and ensure realism in StuCo.
In an entirely virtual campaign season, the number of posters seen and circulated online have dramatically increased. Personally, I received a total of thirteen messages online (and numerous more in person) requesting I repost their posters. Within those thirteen messages, eight were from the same candidate. This is not campaigning; it is harassment. We’ve reached the point where everyone knows the only reason someone reposts a poster online was because they were asked to by that candidate. There’s a severe issue when people are posting a candidate’s message not because they believe in it but because they hope to be left alone. Our election process has been stripped of all authenticity. Instead, StuCo elections have devolved into a competition of which candidates can message the most people. The only reason that a person should repost a campaign ad is because they believe in a cause the candidate promotes. The elections committee must work to ensure that campaigning does not make expression of true beliefs obsolete. As such, harmful styles of campaigning must be eradicated, greatly changed or ultimately diminished in importance. StuCo needs to create a system where students can report candidates for asking either verbally or online to repost one of their posters.
Much needs to be done to restrict the actions of StuCo candidates on social media. Posters have lost their significance, their sole purpose to be filled with as many trigger words as possible, ultimately leaving voters disappointed and upset when those promises are not fulfilled. Candidates have also become aggressive in ensuring their posters are circulated. This cycle must be broken; it can be most effectively eliminated by students publicly denouncing it or by the elections committee prohibiting harmful manners of campaigning through legislation. Why should elections be a burden to the voter? Instead of sharing impossible platitudes, the StuCo executive board must refocus their priorities and enact actual change that will in the long term help the student body.
