Rep. Chuck Edwards says traditional, social media can amplify political division
A reporter recently asked me why there is so much political divisiveness today. Today, news cycles run 24/7, and each network’s efforts to attract viewership from their competitors and sell advertising are stronger than ever. Too often, contentious headlines, artificial political excitement, and algorithm-driven content are among the methods media uses to compete. This environment has become one of the most powerful forces shaping public opinion. The media often uses misleading headlines, selective reporting, and intentionally omitted or erroneous information to create sensationalism that provokes public outrage and fuels political divisions and outrage. These tools are employed to generate revenue and biasedly sculpt public opinion.
News outlets thrive on controversy and nothing grabs attention like conflict. Since coming to Congress, my colleagues on both sides of the aisle have come together to pass more than 430 bills and amendments. That doesn’t make for entertaining news. So to help create conflict, news outlets often create a black hole of information by limiting views or regularly misrepresenting or ignoring them. This imbalance fuels division.
During my recent town hall in Asheville, a man was asked to leave for shouting profanities livestreaming into homes across America. Immediately, thousands of headlines appeared that glorified the man's views as though he was denied his First Amendment rights.
Does one’s right to speak include using FCC airwaves to spew profanity into our living rooms? The United States Supreme Court and Constitution say obscenity and threats are unprotected categories of speech that do not have to, and should not be, tolerated in a respectful public forum.
Media outlets awarded the man's behavior with airtime. They failed to mention his use of profanity, threats, or his own political bias. There was no mention that he is a failed Democrat congressional candidate. One news outlet, WLOS, allowed this obscene behavior to be used for political theater. It irresponsibly framed its story with false statements about the conservative actions taking place in Washington, D.C. Citizens, including myself, are tired of divisive politics. This is why I went against the advice of my own Party leaders and held the town hall. Sadly, the media became a co-conspirator of a political stunt from the opposing Party.
Instead of informing and uniting people, WLOS deepened the political divide. Whether through sensationalism, bias, or social media, today’s media landscape is accelerating polarization that threatens our democracy.
The media sets aside reasonable discussions about policy and replaces them with inflammatory soundbites, dramatic confrontations, and outrage that fuels divisiveness. Instead of presenting a balanced picture, many outlets prioritize the most extreme voices and create a false impression that compromise is impossible, when the reality is that the U.S. House often works in a bipartisan fashion.
Partisan reporting has led to extreme bias among the American people. Media outlets will publish the same information but with a partisan interpretation, resulting in conflicting conclusions using the same data or facts.
The media should be a reliable source of information, but this contradictory reporting has made it difficult for people to agree on basic facts. Instead, Americans consume the mainstream media, which caters to their political beliefs and supports their pre-existing biases, dismissing opposing viewpoints. Good faith debate has become all but obsolete.
Traditional media alone isn’t to blame — social media has amplified division to unprecedented levels. Platforms like Facebook, Twitter and TikTok use algorithms that prioritize content that users are most likely to engage with, meaning people are often fed a steady diet of information that aligns with their existing beliefs — creating echo chambers, where opposing perspectives are rarely encountered, further entrenching political identities and making productive discourse even more difficult.
If the media is a driving force behind division, it must also be part of the solution. Journalistic institutions must prioritize factual, balanced reporting over sensationalism. Viewers and readers must take responsibility for consuming a variety of perspectives rather than retreating into ideological bubbles. Social media should reevaluate algorithms that reward outrage over understanding.
The media can shape people's beliefs and how they engage with those who disagree. If left unchecked, it’ll continue to pull America further apart; but if used responsibly, it can be a tool for bridging divides rather than deepening them.