The result is that voters are placed in a filter bubble against their will and even unconsciously . They are shown what the data companies think they know about what they like to hear and where their interests lie. No voter will then see party program points that do not or less suit him in this way. Not everyone gets the same information anymore. That can be misleading and can quickly turn into 'manipulation'. More than in other years, selective points from the programs are specifically aimed at selected groups of voters. Voters who do not always vote for a certain party with prejudice can therefore possibly provide a surprise this time.
Blowing bubbles.
Of course, a voter who wants to make a well-argued choice can always watch television or study election programs . But how many voters do that? It is now possible for parties to recruit voters by bombarding them with selective information online . The distinctiveness of a party is quickly lost in the process. Voters can cast their vote based on a limited insight, in fact a single slogan and one-liner. In this way, parties can respond much more specifically to current themes among specific target groups or in regions, without the rest of the program receiving attention.
I wonder how decisive this selective advertising, with which certain groups are talked to, will be in fax lists these elections. In addition, many young people are struggling with the corona measures and there is a declining interest in politics among them. If they can be reached online with targeted one-liners, it is difficult to predict what they will do with it.
The emphasis on selective online promotion gives smaller parties a better chance of attracting voters' attention. This could increase the chance of them being voted for, which could lead to increased fragmentation in parliament.