The rise of identity politics and political polarization has created a breeding ground for influence peddlers to exploit societal divisions for their own gain. These actors strategically employ divisive tactics to pit different identity and political groups against each other, aiming to shape public discourse, sway policy outcomes, and ultimately, sell influence 1. This article delves into the mechanisms, digital strategies, financial incentives, and real-world impacts of these tactics, examining the roles of social media, targeted advertising, and algorithmic manipulation in amplifying divisive messages and facilitating influence peddling.
Strategies and Tactics of Divisiveness
Influence peddlers utilize a range of strategies and tactics to sow discord and capitalize on existing societal vulnerabilities. These tactics are often employed in a coordinated and multifaceted manner, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of division and polarization.
One framework for understanding these tactics comes from the work of Kipnis et al. (1980), who identified eight dimensions of influence:
- Assertiveness: Using forceful approaches, such as demands, harsh language, or intimidation, to persuade others.
- Ingratiation: Seeking to gain favor by flattering or praising others.
- Rationality: Using logical arguments and factual information to persuade others.
- Sanctions: Threatening negative consequences for non-compliance.
- Exchange: Offering rewards or benefits in exchange for compliance.
- Upward Appeals: Seeking the support of higher authorities to influence others.
- Blocking: Obstructing or hindering those who oppose their goals.
- Coalitions: Forming alliances with others to exert influence2.
These tactics can be further categorized into broader strategies, as outlined in a report by the Center on International Cooperation (CIC) at New York University (NYU) 3:
- Adversarial Narratives: This strategy involves framing issues in a simplistic “us versus them” narrative, where one group is portrayed as the victim and another as the aggressor or threat. This often involves simplifying complex societal issues into binary oppositions, such as “immigrants versus native-born citizens” or “religious conservatives versus secular liberals.” By creating a sense of threat and opposition, influence peddlers can rally support for their agenda and demonize those who hold different views.
- Identity Politics as a Weapon: Influence peddlers often exploit existing identity-based divisions by pitting groups against each other based on race, religion, gender, or other social categories. This tactic often promotes a narrow, non-intersectional viewpoint that prevents solidarity and collective action. For example, they might highlight racial disparities to fuel resentment among different ethnic groups or exploit religious differences to create conflict between communities.
- Exploiting Fear and Insecurity: Fear is a powerful motivator, and influence peddlers often use it to their advantage by framing certain groups as existential threats. This can create a sense of hopelessness and bolster support for authoritarian figures who promise security and order. For instance, they might stoke fears about immigration by portraying immigrants as criminals or terrorists, or they might exploit economic anxieties by blaming certain groups for job losses or economic hardship.
- Zero-Sum Game Framing: This strategy involves presenting issues as a win-lose scenario where one group’s gain is inherently another group’s loss. This discourages compromise and cooperation, often redirecting frustration towards marginalized groups. For example, they might frame debates about social welfare programs as a competition between those who “deserve” assistance and those who are “undeserving,” or they might portray environmental regulations as a threat to economic growth and job creation.
- Populist Rhetoric: Influence peddlers often claim to represent “the people” or the “silenced majority” while positioning themselves against “the establishment.” This tactic often involves attacking minority groups and neglecting meaningful reforms that address real societal issues. They might use inflammatory language to demonize immigrants, minorities, or political opponents, while offering simplistic solutions to complex problems.
- Information Laundering: This involves disguising the origins of divisive messages by using seemingly credible sources or individuals to spread misinformation and propaganda. This can involve creating fake grassroots organizations or using social media influencers to promote divisive narratives. By concealing the true source of the information, they can make it appear more credible and objective.
- Technological Manipulation: Influence peddlers employ sophisticated digital tools and techniques, such as targeted advertising, algorithmic manipulation, and bot farms, to amplify divisive content and create an illusion of widespread support for extremist views. They might use social media bots to spread misinformation or create fake accounts to harass and intimidate opponents.
- Undermining Trust: This strategy involves eroding public trust in institutions, experts, and mainstream media by promoting conspiracy theories and alternative narratives. This creates an environment where people are more susceptible to manipulation and divisive messaging. They might spread false information about government agencies, scientific research, or the media, aiming to discredit these sources and sow doubt in their credibility.
In addition to these strategies, influence peddlers also consider the characteristics of the actors involved, the specific situation, and the target audience when choosing their tactics 4. They might tailor their messages to appeal to specific demographics, exploit existing prejudices, or use emotional appeals to bypass rational thought.
Furthermore, it’s important to understand the context in which these tactics are employed. Influence peddling often occurs within the framework of lobbying, which involves attempting to influence government decisions on behalf of individuals or organizations 5. Lobbying efforts can target various levels of government, including Congress, executive branch agencies, and the courts. Different types of lobbying exist, such as single-issue lobbying, where groups focus on a specific policy goal, and multiple-issue lobbying, where organizations advocate for a broader range of issues.
Case Studies: Divisiveness in Action
Examining specific instances where influence peddlers have successfully used divisive tactics provides valuable insights into the real-world impact of these strategies. One notable example is the case of Jack Abramoff, a lobbyist who used divisive tactics to advance the interests of his clients, including Native American tribes seeking to establish gambling on reservations 6. Abramoff employed a range of tactics, including:
- Exploiting religious divisions: He enlisted the help of Republican political activist Ralph Reed and his firm, Century Strategies, to rally Christian organizations in Alabama against a bill that would have allowed casino-style games on dog racing tracks, framing it as a moral issue that threatened family values6.
- Cultivating relationships with key politicians: Abramoff fostered close ties with influential politicians like Tom DeLay and Bob Ney, providing them with gifts, lavish trips, and campaign contributions in exchange for favors that benefited his clients. This allowed him to gain access to decision-makers and influence their votes on legislation6.
- Using misinformation and deception: He misled his clients about the progress of his lobbying efforts and charged exorbitant fees for his services. This highlights the unethical behavior that can be driven by the financial incentives of influence peddling6.
Abramoff’s case demonstrates how influence peddlers can exploit divisions and manipulate political processes for personal gain, ultimately undermining public trust in government and institutions 6. His actions led to several convictions and exposed the corrupt practices that can occur within the lobbying industry.
Another example of divisive tactics can be seen in the political campaigns of recent years. Candidates and political parties have increasingly used divisive rhetoric and identity politics to mobilize their base and attack their opponents. This can involve using inflammatory language to demonize immigrants, minorities, or political opponents, or exploiting social and cultural anxieties to create fear and division.
The Role of Social Media and Algorithmic Manipulation
The rise of social media has provided influence peddlers with powerful new tools to amplify divisive messages and shape public discourse. The very nature of these platforms, with their emphasis on user engagement and algorithmic personalization, creates an environment where divisive content can thrive 7.
Amplifying Divisive Content: Research has shown that social media algorithms tend to favor content that evokes strong emotional responses, including anger, outrage, and fear 9. This creates a perverse incentive for algorithms to amplify divisive and inflammatory content, as it is more likely to go viral and keep users engaged on the platform 9. As users interact with this type of content, the algorithms learn to show them more of it, creating a feedback loop that reinforces existing biases and deepens divisions.
Targeted Advertising: Influence peddlers can leverage the sophisticated targeting capabilities of social media platforms to deliver divisive messages to specific demographic groups, further exacerbating existing divisions 1. This can involve microtargeting users based on their political affiliations, religious beliefs, or other sensitive personal information. By tailoring their messages to specific audiences, they can exploit existing prejudices and anxieties to manipulate opinions and behaviors.
Creating Echo Chambers: Algorithmic personalization can also contribute to the formation of echo chambers, where users are primarily exposed to information and perspectives that reinforce their existing beliefs 8. This can further entrench divisions and make it more difficult for people to engage in constructive dialogue across ideological lines. As users are increasingly surrounded by like-minded individuals and information, they may become more resistant to opposing viewpoints and less willing to consider alternative perspectives.
Weaponizing Information: The Digital Influence Machine (DIM), as described by Data & Society, is a complex infrastructure of data collection, targeting, and automated decision-making that can be weaponized to manipulate public opinion and undermine democratic processes 1. This involves using data-driven techniques to identify and exploit vulnerabilities in specific groups and individuals, amplifying existing anxieties and resentments to influence their political behavior 1. For example, political campaigns might use data analysis to identify voters who are susceptible to fear-mongering or misinformation and target them with personalized messages designed to sway their vote.
However, it’s important to recognize that the influence of social media is not solely due to algorithms and technology. As highlighted in one study, the real power of social media lies in its ability to connect individuals and allow them to share their thoughts and opinions with people they know 10. This can amplify divisive messages within personal networks, as individuals are more likely to be influenced by the views of their friends and family.
Financial Incentives and Networks
The financial incentives behind divisive influence peddling are significant. Lobbyists, political consultants, and other actors can reap substantial rewards by successfully exploiting societal divisions to advance the interests of their clients. These incentives can drive a range of unethical behaviors, including:
- Bribery and Corruption: Offering financial inducements to politicians and government officials in exchange for favorable policies or decisions 11. This can involve direct payments, gifts, or other forms of compensation to influence their actions.
- Influence Peddling: Using one’s position or connections to gain favors or advantages for others, often in exchange for financial gain 11. This can involve using personal relationships with government officials to secure contracts, obtain permits, or influence policy decisions.
- Embezzlement: Misappropriating funds or resources for personal gain 11. This can involve stealing money from government coffers, diverting funds intended for public services, or using public resources for private benefit.
- Campaign Finance Manipulation: Using loopholes in campaign finance laws to funnel money to political campaigns and influence election outcomes 12. This can involve creating shell organizations to hide the true source of donations or using complex financial schemes to circumvent campaign finance limits.
- Dark Money Networks: Operating through opaque and complex networks of organizations and individuals to conceal the true source of funding and influence 1. This can involve using non-profit organizations or shell corporations to channel money into political campaigns or advocacy efforts without disclosing the original donors.
These financial incentives create a system where those with the most resources can exert disproportionate influence on the political process, often at the expense of the public interest. This can lead to policies that favor special interests over the needs of ordinary citizens and undermine public trust in government.
The influence of financial incentives can also be seen in other sectors, such as the financial industry. Research has shown that broker incentives can skew results and potentially contribute to divisive narratives 13. For example, brokers might be incentivized to promote certain investments or financial products, even if they are not in the best interest of their clients. This can lead to biased advice and potentially harmful financial decisions.
Real-World Impacts: Polarization and Erosion of Trust
The real-world impacts of divisive influence peddling are far-reaching and potentially devastating. Some of the most significant consequences include:
- Political Polarization: Increased division and animosity between different political and identity groups, making it more difficult to find common ground and address societal challenges 14. This can lead to political gridlock, where opposing sides are unable to compromise or reach consensus on important issues.
- Erosion of Trust: Declining public trust in institutions, experts, and mainstream media, leading to increased skepticism and susceptibility to misinformation 16. This can make it more difficult to address societal challenges, as people may be less likely to trust information from official sources or believe in the efficacy of government solutions.
- Weakening of Democracy: Undermining democratic processes and institutions by fostering cynicism, apathy, and distrust in government 17. This can lead to decreased voter turnout, political instability, and a decline in civic engagement.
- Social Unrest and Violence: Increased risk of social unrest, violence, and conflict as divisions deepen and tensions escalate 15. This can manifest in protests, riots, and even civil war, as people feel increasingly alienated from each other and from the political system.
- Exacerbating Public Health Crises: Disinformation campaigns can undermine public health interventions and exacerbate public health crises, as seen in the rise of measles cases following disinformation campaigns connected to the 2016 US presidential elections and the spread of misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic 16. This can lead to increased disease transmission, vaccine hesitancy, and a distrust of public health authorities.
These impacts pose a serious threat to the fabric of society and the stability of democratic systems. They can erode social cohesion, undermine public trust, and create an environment where conflict and instability are more likely to occur.
One particularly concerning aspect of this phenomenon is the rise of “infodemics,” which are defined as “an excessive amount of information concerning a problem such that the solution is made more difficult” 16. Disinformation campaigns can contribute to infodemics by spreading false or misleading information about public health issues, creating confusion and distrust among the public.
Potential Solutions and Countermeasures
Addressing the issue of divisive influence peddling requires a multi-pronged approach that involves:
- Promoting Media Literacy: Educating the public about how to critically evaluate information, identify misinformation, and resist manipulation 14. This can involve teaching critical thinking skills, providing resources for fact-checking, and raising awareness about the tactics used by influence peddlers.
- Enhancing Transparency: Increasing transparency in political financing and lobbying activities to expose hidden networks of influence and hold bad actors accountable 18. This can involve requiring disclosure of political donations, lobbying activities, and financial interests, as well as strengthening oversight of campaign finance laws.
- Strengthening Regulations: Implementing stricter regulations on social media platforms to address algorithmic manipulation, targeted advertising, and the spread of disinformation 19. This can involve requiring platforms to be more transparent about their algorithms, limiting the use of microtargeting for political advertising, and taking stronger action against the spread of misinformation.
- Fostering Dialogue and Understanding: Creating opportunities for constructive dialogue and engagement across ideological divides to build bridges and foster mutual understanding 14. This can involve promoting civil discourse, supporting initiatives that bring people together from different backgrounds, and encouraging empathy and perspective-taking.
- Empowering Civil Society: Supporting civil society organizations and initiatives that promote social cohesion, tolerance, and democratic values 20. This can involve funding community-based organizations, supporting independent media, and promoting civic engagement.
- Government Accountability: Government agencies must acknowledge and address the threat of divisive influence peddling, both domestically and internationally 20. This can involve conducting investigations, implementing countermeasures, and working with international partners to address this challenge.
- Addressing Public Perception: Recognizing the importance of public perception in shaping policy and taking steps to address concerns about corruption and undue influence 21. This can involve increasing transparency, strengthening ethical guidelines, and promoting accountability among government officials.
These solutions require a collective effort from governments, civil society organizations, technology companies, and individuals to counter the divisive forces that threaten to undermine social cohesion and democratic values. It requires a commitment to ethical behavior, responsible technology use, and a renewed focus on building a more inclusive and resilient society.
Interestingly, while Americans express negativity towards political divisiveness, they also favor specific solutions like term limits for members of Congress and abolishing the Electoral College 19. This suggests a desire for systemic change to address the issue and a willingness to consider alternative approaches to governance.
Conclusion
Influence peddlers who exploit societal divisions for profit and power pose a significant threat to the well-being of individuals and communities. By understanding the mechanisms, digital strategies, financial incentives, and real-world impacts of these tactics, we can begin to develop effective countermeasures and build a more resilient and inclusive society. This requires a commitment to critical thinking, media literacy, and a renewed focus on democratic values and institutions.
The strategies employed by influence peddlers are often subtle and multifaceted, ranging from the creation of adversarial narratives to the manipulation of social media algorithms. These tactics are driven by significant financial incentives, creating a system where those with the most resources can exert undue influence on the political process. The consequences of these actions are far-reaching, leading to increased polarization, erosion of trust, and a weakening of democratic institutions.
Addressing this challenge requires a comprehensive approach that involves promoting media literacy, enhancing transparency, strengthening regulations, fostering dialogue, and empowering civil society. It also requires holding government agencies accountable for addressing the threat of divisive influence peddling and recognizing the importance of public perception in shaping policy.
Ultimately, building a more resilient and inclusive society requires a collective effort from all stakeholders. It requires a commitment to ethical behavior, responsible technology use, and a renewed focus on the values that underpin a healthy democracy. By working together, we can counter the divisive forces that threaten to undermine social cohesion and create a more just and equitable society for all.
Works cited
1. Weaponizing the Digital Influence Machine: – Data & Society Research Institute, accessed March 10, 2025, https://datasociety.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/DS_Digital_Influence_Machine.pdf
2. Influence Tactics and Objectives in Upward, Downward, and Lateral Influence Attempts – ResearchGate, accessed March 10, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gary-Yukl/publication/232570561_Influence_Tactics_and_Objectives_in_Upward_Downward_and_Lateral_Influence_Attempts/links/02e7e52ed0e26eab43000000/Influence-Tactics-and-Objectives-in-Upward-Downward-and-Lateral-Influence-Attempts.pdf
3. 8 Strategies Used by Divisive Entrepreneurs to Exploit Societal Vulnerabilities – Pathfinders, accessed March 10, 2025, https://www.sdg16.plus/resources/8-strategies-used-by-divisive-entrepreneurs-to-exploit-societal-vulnerabilities/
4. Influence Strategies/Tactics in the Workplace – Management – Oxford Bibliographies, accessed March 10, 2025, https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/abstract/document/obo-9780199846740/obo-9780199846740-0202.xml
5. Lobbying in the United States – Wikipedia, accessed March 10, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying_in_the_United_States
6. Abramoff: Lobbying Congress – Ethics Unwrapped – University of Texas at Austin, accessed March 10, 2025, https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/case-study/abramoff-lobbying-congress
7. Social Media Effects: Hijacking Democracy and Civility in Civic Engagement – PMC, accessed March 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7343248/
8. Engagement, User Satisfaction, and the Amplification of Divisive Content on Social Media, accessed March 10, 2025, https://knightcolumbia.org/content/engagement-user-satisfaction-and-the-amplification-of-divisive-content-on-social-media
9. Holding Social Media Companies Accountable for Enabling Hate and Disinformation – ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute, accessed March 10, 2025, https://www.iseas.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/ISEAS_Perspective_2024_51.pdf
10. Social Media Fuels Division and Angst – But Solving the Underlying Issues at Play is Hugely Complex, accessed March 10, 2025, https://www.socialmediatoday.com/news/social-media-fuels-division-and-angst-but-solving-the-underlying-issues-a/616881/
11. Corruption – Wikipedia, accessed March 10, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption
12. Campaign finance reform in the United States – Wikipedia, accessed March 10, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_finance_reform_in_the_United_States
13. Unintended Consequences: How Broker Incentives Skew Results | Paul Merage School of Business | UCI, accessed March 10, 2025, https://merage.uci.edu/news/2024/07/Unintended-Consequences-How-Broker-Incentives-Skew-Results.html
14. Divided we stand: The rise of political animosity – Knowable Magazine, accessed March 10, 2025, https://knowablemagazine.org/content/article/society/2024/latest-research-what-causes-political-polarization
15. The Polarizing Impact of Political Disinformation and Hate Speech: A Cross-country Configural Narrative – PMC – PubMed Central, accessed March 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10106894/
16. Disinformation and Epidemics: Anticipating the Next Phase of Biowarfare – PMC, accessed March 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9195489/
17. How Disinformation Erodes the World’s Largest Democracy – The Institute for Global Governance Research (GGR) ,Hitotsubashi University, accessed March 10, 2025, https://ggr.hias.hit-u.ac.jp/en/2024/02/26/how-disinformation-erodes-the-worlds-largest-democracy/
18. Opinion: Corruption is a pandemic. The solution is democracy. | IFES, accessed March 10, 2025, https://www.ifes.org/publications/opinion-corruption-pandemic-solution-democracy
19. Americans Hate Divisiveness. We Need to Demand More From Our Leaders, accessed March 10, 2025, https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/about/news-room/opinion/2023/12/12/americans-hate-divisiveness-we-need-to-demand-more-from-our-leaders
20. Comer on Fox News: Here’s What Too Many Federal Agencies Don’t Understand About the Chinese Communist Party – United States House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, accessed March 10, 2025, https://oversight.house.gov/blog/comer-on-fox-news-heres-what-too-many-federal-agencies-dont-understand-about-the-chinese-communist-party%EF%BF%BC/
21. Perceptions of Corruption and Campaign Finance: When Public Opinion Determines Constitutional Law, accessed March 10, 2025, https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1029&context=faculty_scholarship