The second administration of Donald Trump operates under a new, disturbing principle: everything is content. From aggressive immigration raids broadcast on X (formerly Twitter) by the Department of Homeland Security, to the direct influence of online conspiracy theories on policy decisions, the line between the internet and governance has blurred beyond recognition. This isn’t just about a president who tweets; it’s about an administration actively shaped by the dynamics of online engagement—a phenomenon experts now call a “clicktatorship.”
The Rise of Online-Driven Governance
For years, Trump exploited social media to build visibility and set the national conversation. But today, the situation is far more extreme. According to public policy professor Don Moynihan, the administration isn’t merely using social media; it’s making decisions based on how they will perform online. The priority isn’t reality, but what resonates with right-wing online communities. This shift reflects a fundamental change in how power operates, where public policy is determined by what generates engagement and validation in digital spaces.
The “Clicktatorship” Defined
The term “clicktatorship” describes a form of government where policy decisions are directly responsive to the online world. This isn’t simply about communication; it’s about beliefs, judgment, and decision-making being fundamentally shaped by the demands of platforms like X and the communities they host. As Moynihan explains, the administration views everything as potential content, including actions that would have been unthinkable just a decade ago—like justifying military occupation of cities or cutting off resources to states based on online approval.
From “TV Presidency” to “Truth Social Presidency”
Trump’s first term was often dubbed a “TV presidency,” where cable news and his own reality-show persona heavily influenced his approach. The current administration operates under a different logic—the “Truth Social or X presidency.” The messaging is steeped in inside references, coded language that only makes sense to those immersed in specific online communities. Even senior policymakers exhibit online behaviors, like Senator Pam Bondi presenting printed X posts as evidence in a Senate hearing, demonstrating how digital norms are now shaping real-world governance.
The Addicted Policymaker
Social media doesn’t just manipulate politicians; it alters their thinking. Leaders like Trump and Elon Musk aren’t merely consumers of content; they’re addicted to it, affected by the very narratives they promote. Moynihan points to the case of USAID, which was eliminated partly due to Musk’s belief in baseless conspiracy theories, resulting in potentially millions of preventable deaths. This illustrates how weaponized misinformation can translate into lethal policy decisions.
Content as Justification
The administration actively seeks out images and narratives that justify extreme measures. When Trump deployed the National Guard to Portland, Oregon, he wasn’t responding to a genuine crisis; he was leveraging online content to create the perception of one. The more chaos portrayed online, the greater the justification for authoritarian actions. This underscores how reality itself is being manufactured to serve political ends.
The Democratizing Force Reversed
Social media once promised democratization, enabling ordinary voices to reach power. Now, the “platform-to-policymaking pipeline” is controlled by those who manipulate the system. Musk’s restructuring of X rewards conspiratorial content, elevating influencers over experts, while the Trump administration actively seeks out these voices for positions of influence. The result is a closed loop where unchecked misinformation dictates policy.
The Interdependence of State and Platform
The relationship between X, Musk, and the Trump administration is deeply symbiotic. Musk’s platform supports the president’s agenda, while the administration reciprocates through contracts and regulatory favors. While legally distinct, their interdependence is undeniable: X functions as an extension of the state, and vice versa. The current administration operates under a new, disturbing principle: everything is content. From aggressive immigration raids broadcast on X (formerly Twitter) by the Department of Homeland Security, to the direct influence of online conspiracy theories on policy decisions, the line between the internet and governance has blurred beyond recognition. This isn’t just about a president who tweets; it’s about an administration actively shaped by the dynamics of online engagement—a phenomenon experts now call a “clicktatorship.”
The rise of the “clicktatorship” signals a dangerous shift in governance, where online validation trumps factual reality, and the pursuit of engagement overshadows responsible policymaking. The long-term consequences remain to be seen, but the erosion of trust in institutions and the weaponization of misinformation pose an existential threat to democratic governance.
