In The Personalization of Politics: Political Identity, Social Media, and Changing Patterns of Participation, Lance Bennett argues that social media and communication technology have created a shift from the identity politics of the mid-twentieth century to what he calls personalized politics. 

According to Bennett, personalized politics includes tolerance for various viewpoints, individual personal action frames that lower the barriers to identification and political participation by individuals over social technology. He argues this is a change from the previous identity politics of groups and specific issues. Bennett writes that social media and communication based technology allowed people to reach each other in large numbers, enabling diverse mobilizations. He attributes this change to the economic globalization of the 1970s. Bennett thinks that the phenomenon is prevalent in young people, as they tend to share among large networks online, lack clear guidelines for public life and tend to ignore precedent. Bennett also argues that the ability of technology to spread information has allowed for the exposure of issues and the rallying of people around those issues. For example, when a company is called out by the press online, thousands of people can see it and join the movement to hold companies accountable. This reminds me of the agenda-setting theory we discussed in a previous class. Bennett also argues that the downside of personalized politics is that despite the timely spread of information and involvement, policy change is usually slow. 

This piece was written in 2012, and I would be interested to hear how Bennett would reflect on the political shifts of the last decade. Would he argue that politics has become even more personalized? I think I would argue that in some ways we have lost some personalization of politics with the political division of the last ten years. Under Bennett’s definition, personalized politics involves tolerance of a range of viewpoints. I would argue that many people on both sides of the political spectrum, as well as even some media sources, have become increasingly intolerant of the other side’s opinions. I have heard of family members who no longer speak because of differences in political opinions. Also, unlike Bennett’s definition, I think nowadays we do have pretty specific barriers to identification. I would argue that the 2016 and 2020 elections resulted in a “Trump supporter” vs. “Clinton/Biden supporter.” Some Republicans were quick to label themselves as anti-Trump. “S/he’s a Trump supporter,” is a full sentence that is extremely identifying. Bennett writes that “These often dense communication networks enable political organization and expression that often lacks, or activerly shuns, clear centrtal leaders and organizations.” I just don’t think this was the case under President Trump. There were “Make America Great Again” groups all over social media. There were even anti-Trump groups. However, Bennett’s definition also involves increased political participation online, which I certainly think is the case over the last decade. I often felt like all of my social media timelines were full of political content. So this fact I believe would be consistent with Benett’s argument of increasingly personalized politics.