How platform power shapes political choices

In his 2024 campaign, Donald Trump adopted a novel political strategy by aligning with powerful influencers like Elon Musk, Joe Rogan, and Peter Thiel. Unlike traditional political endorsements or party strategies, Trump’s approach marked a significant shift in how candidates can reach audiences directly through influential figures who command large, loyal followings.
This strategy harnessed the reach of these influencers to engage new constituencies, especially younger and independent-minded voters, creating a “political D2C” model that bypassed traditional media and party structures. By leveraging these prominent voices, Trump not only revitalised support among his base but also expanded it to include groups that had not previously engaged with his campaign, including Latinos and some African-American voters.
For this campaign, Trump capitalised on the unique reach of individuals who have cultivated credibility with specific audiences. Joe Rogan, the host of the massively popular “The Joe Rogan Experience” podcast, engages millions of listeners with his direct, unfiltered discussions, which appeal to younger, individualistic voters who often view mainstream media with scepticism. By connecting with these audiences through Rogan, Trump was able to reach people who might otherwise feel disconnected from politics, let alone a candidate from a traditional conservative party.
Perhaps the most influential of these allies was Elon Musk, whose support on his own platform, X (formerly Twitter), reshaped how Trump’s messaging reached the public. Musk’s endorsement wasn’t limited to statements of support; he used his position as the platform owner to amplify Trump’s message, sometimes even bypassing normal content limitations. This was a striking departure from 2021 when Trump was banned from Twitter during the final days of his term. He had over 88.9 million followers at that time.
Musk’s involvement gave Trump a reach of over 200 million users (Musk’s follower count is 203 million), enabling him to directly access a younger, tech-savvy demographic that values Musk’s free-speech ideals and entrepreneurial perspective. This influence extended well beyond Musk’s immediate followers, reaching millions who may not have sought out political content or even supported Trump initially. The fact that Musk owns the platform itself introduces complex questions about the power of private individuals over public discourse, as well as the influence of platform owners over elections.
And seemingly, it works both ways. Tesla’s shares surged 12% during premarket trading, post the results, translating to around a $100 billion bump up in market capitalisation. On Tuesday, Trump appointed Musk to lead a department of government efficiency.
One of the most noteworthy outcomes of this influencer strategy was its effectiveness in reaching non-traditional conservative voters, especially within Latino and African-American communities. Trump’s campaign, aided by this new “political D2C” model, delivered messages that addressed issues directly relevant to these communities, from economic opportunities to issues of individual freedom. Influencers offered a sense of authenticity and relatability that traditional political channels often lack, allowing Trump to attract minority voters in a way that was previously challenging for his campaign.
By bypassing conventional media, this D2C approach effectively mirrored digital marketing strategies used in consumer industries, where brands reach customers directly through trusted voices. This allowed Trump to connect with audiences who had historically been either indifferent or oppositional to his platform, creating new avenues for support within demographics that have felt overlooked by mainstream political messaging.
This growing influence of private individuals in politics raises significant questions about democracy’s future. As recently as 2018, a storm broke out on a revelation that Facebook shared data with Cambridge Analytica, which used the data to psychologically target voters during Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. The firm was also accused of interfering with the Brexit referendum.
Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified in front of the US Congress and the firm apologised for its role in data harvesting. Facebook was fined $5 billion by the Federal Trade Commission due to its privacy violations. The firm also paid a £500,000 fine to the UK Information Commissioner’s Office for exposing the data of its users. Cambridge Analytica filed for bankruptcy. Clearly, all this water is under the bridge now.
Trump’s campaign demonstrated that tech moguls, podcast hosts, and investors now wield substantial power over public opinion, often rivalling that of traditional news outlets or political party machinery. The intertwining of political support with digital platform ownership, as seen with Musk, points to a future where platform bias could shape election outcomes, prompting discussions on whether new regulations are needed to ensure fair political discourse.
The implications extend beyond the United States, as nations like India observe similar trends where influencers hold sway over public opinion. In regions with large youth populations or rapidly growing social media use, influencer-driven politics could redefine how campaigns engage with voters. To maintain a balance between free speech and fair political influence, democracies worldwide may need to consider regulatory frameworks that prevent potential abuses of power by platform owners while safeguarding open discourse.
Trump’s 2024 campaign exemplifies how influencer endorsements and platform power are reshaping political strategy.
Lloyd Mathias is a business strategist and an independent director. The views expressed are personal