According to a Gallup Poll in 2008, registered voters aged 18-29 favored President-elect Barack Obama over John McCain by almost 30%. While the youth clearly favored Obama, the competition between both candidates was more equal among the older groups. So the question begs, why did future President Barack Obama have such a huge youth approval rating over John McCain? Not only did youths become more likely to vote, the voter turnout of youths in 2009 also increased by an estimated 2.2 million from 2004. Obviously frustrated with the Bush Administration, one could argue that, with the war in Iraq and continuing recession, most young people wanted to see change. But that does not exclude the fact that increasing numbers of today’s youth are becoming more politically aware. In the midst of “iPhones” and “Blackberrys” at the forefront of communicating information between the masses, modern technology is becoming an increasingly powerful agent of political socialization for youths.

Political socialization is the process by which people develop their political values and opinions. As they develop their political values, they form a foundation which will be their political ideology. As this ideology is manifested, it outlines how most people will view political subjects, public issues, policies, and candidates. Like most forms of socialization, politics does not come naturally; thus, there are agents of socialization, which facilitate the understanding of politics for young people. Usually family members, churches, schools, and peers are the strongest agents of socialization. But with the emergence of modern technologies, television, radio, and the Internet have played a large part in socializing today’s youth. President Obama won with over 66 million popular votes, a little more than 8 million votes ahead of Senator McCain; and, according to exit polls, almost a 40% gap in youth votes for Obama. With over 24 million young people voting in the last election, more and more youths are becoming politically active each year.

Amongst all the innovations in the past thirty years, the Internet has had one of the biggest impacts on society.  Before the turn of the century, information came at a glacial pace; newspapers, radio stations, and even television presented only the most important issues. But with the invention of the Internet, people are able to look up information as fast as their broadband connections allow them to. The Internet allows for users to weed out the information they do not need, and find the issues that they are most interested in. Even political organizations like Barack Obama’s used “Facebook” and other social networks to socialize youths into the value of politics. Steve Schifferes, a professor of financial journalism at City University London and writer for the BBC, describes the advantage Obama had in the primaries, “When Senator Obama announced his campaign, his Internet site was already fully developed and ready to go – with a set of tools which allowed supporters to meet and mobilize as well as contribute money.” Not only did his website help securing funds for his campaign, but also finding an army of volunteers, Schifferes also writes that “two million Obama activists have already been mobilized to become volunteer workers for the campaign – a key advance in the “ground war” of getting out the vote.” In utilizing social groups that were popular with the youths, Obama was able to utilize a demographic in which interest in politics used to be apathetic. A decade ago teenagers did not have the same motivation to go out and make a difference, so what changed? In conjunction with the media, the Internet, and the decline of trust in government, teenagers finally took a stand; the flow of information allowed a new generation to pick and choose the information they wanted and needed to know.

Of course people will argue that this flow of information has nothing to do with political socialization, and will even argue that it is quite the opposite: that this emergence of technology has sullied the integrity of social communication. Opposition to this phenomenon of techno political socialization comes from people who believe that technology has alienated mankind from society and community. Robert D. Putnam, a political scientist and professor of public policy at John F. Kennedy School of Government in Harvard University, argues in his book Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of America Community, that people are doing just that: de-socializing themselves from society. Putnam argues that in order for society to function, one must have social capital or ways in which our lives are improved by social connections. But because of the technological individualization of our free time due to television, radio and Internet, Putnam argues that we lose these social connections required to form groups and communities. Without these groups and communities, he suggests that we are unable to communicate and interact with government, thus making democracy obsolete. But how is that possible? The emergence of modern technology is the epitome of this generation’s socialization; but one should understand that, only a few decades ago, the majority of people got their news from the radio. So it becomes logical that the previous generation might have a harder time accepting all the “Facebooks” and “Myspaces” as agents of political socialization, when the “iPhones” and the “Youtubes” are streaming live videos of dancing cats and dogs.

Youths are continually becoming more and more technologically savvy, and with information exchanging at lighting speed, society will continue to grow and evolve. With this evolution, people will have to learn to adapt to the ever-changing atmosphere; four to five decades from now another agent of socialization may affect the way youths vote. Obama knew that young voters were an untouched demographic and he utilized everything he had to pull in the votes he needed to win. Some might argue that young people are more susceptible to these tactics brought on by large political parties, but it is also clear that today’s youth are less likely to just take anybody’s word. Rather, the process of exchanging information will allow for young voters to make educated and informed decisions.

Works Cited

1. Dahl, Melissa. “Youth Vote May have been Key in Obama’s win” MSNBC, 5

November 2008. Web.

2. Newport, Frank and Jones, Jefferey M. “Young Voters Favor Obama, but How Many

Will Vote?” Gallup, 22 October 2008. Web.

3. Putnam, Robert D. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community,

New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000. Print.

4. Schifferes, Steve. “Internet Key to Obama Victories.” BBC News, 12 June 2008. Web.