The California wildfires have been devastating to Californians and Americans alike, and the lasting effects are unknown as of now. As California residents are experiencing a tragedy no one should face, the rest of the world watches behind a screen. As social media becomes more integrated into our daily lives, access to recent events and perspectives becomes instantaneous. The fast spread of information has been beneficial in many ways, as many residents know when to evacuate, safe zones to relocate to, and where the fire is spreading. There is another side to the issue, as the vast amount of information can be overwhelming and may promote the spread of misinformation. The coverage has also been used to fuel ever-increasing political turmoil as both parties scramble to garner public support for their policies and political officials alike.Â
Social media has provided ways for Californians to find shelter, specifically by using Airbnb, as they’re offering free/reduced rates of their properties to those affected. Their partnership with LA211 has also been spread through social media to those in need. This method of transmitting information has proved to be effective in times of need, and social media platforms are used across all incomes, making information more accessible than ever. The danger of the fires also sparked fire tracking websites to pop up, and these websites also direct people to resources if needed.Â
Many individuals and companies have started reaching out to the public for monetary support. The rise of these campaigns can be seen on every social media platform, and GoFundMe is a popular site among those affected. Donating to these causes is easier than ever, and the promotion of the sites attracts more potential donors. Some social media platforms allow creators to earn “commissions” on posts if they perform well. Sponsored posts also allow creators to connect with brands and get paid for their advertising power, also called influencing. Many have taken advantage of these opportunities by asking viewers to engage in content, making monetization more effective/likely.Â
The rise in social media activity has made information more accessible but has also increased the volume of monetized posts and requests for donations. As users are bombarded with posts relating to helping those affected by (many) tragedies, they may be less likely to engage with the content. As the most prominent users of social media, Gen Z consumes more information relating to these types of posts, and the effect on each person ranges. Desensitization has been used to describe the effects of watching violence idolized on television and in video games, but a similar phenomenon is occurring with these subjects.
Unsurprisingly, as more information is released about the tragedies afoot, politicians take the chance to advocate for policies they believe will assist the disasters, and place blame on the other party for the disaster’s effects.Â
Republican criticism of California’s water infrastructure has led to President Trump adding stipulations to federal financial relief, including “Voter ID and release of water into LA”, referring to California’s lack of ID necessity at polling places and the federally controlled water sources being used for other purposes. The Republican party has since been divided on the many executive orders, as some agree with his infrastructure ideas. Other political figures voiced their opposition, saying, “wildfires have no political affiliation”. More Republicans have spoken against this measure, saying stopping aid to California would cause more disruptions and damage than necessary, while others praise his cause of restructuring federal funding. The transmission of information about the wildfires, largely through social media, has been quick and overwhelming. Most news outlets use some social media platforms, and most are subject to bias. Trump has also blamed the wildfires on “liberal policy”, referring to the allocation of water sources to environmental preservation. Newsome, California’s governor, has claimed there is no shortage of water supply, and the allocation of water sources has been redirected to support those affected. Fire experts have also stated that high winds have escalated the fires to this extent, but the cause has not been properly determined.Â
Democratic focus has been on how the fires are spreading and those in need of relief. Support for fund allocation without additional stipulation seems to be a common consensus among Democrats. With an important water source, the Santa Ynez Reservoir, closed for maintenance at the time the fires broke out, there were “dry” fire hydrants across California while the fires were raging. The issue was resolved in time, but the damage was already done. LA’s mayor has also been the subject of criticism for reducing the fire department’s budget by $17.6m. This led to over 100 fire apparatus’ being out of service, and LA’s fire chief was opposed to the budget cut, even when it was proposed. The reduction in funds and personnel has been criticized by both parties alike. Though this could’ve contributed to the scale of the wildfires, social media coverage has been lacking on this decision. Democrats are taking every opportunity to slam Trump’s EOs as inhumane for the scale of the disaster, and the Republican response focuses on forest mismanagement.Â
Social media platforms continue to produce polarizing information related to the fires and their destructive path. The stark political and public reaction to the fires has been overwhelming, and it is often hard to sort out the facts from baseless claims. Writing this article proved to be challenging due to the amount of information and the lack of evidence for claims on both sides of the coin. As California is ravaged by these fires, the political sphere continues to take advantage of people’s polarizing opinions and uses the conflict as a surface-level distraction to the deeper problem of resource mismanagement and the ever-polarizing political stage founded on greed.