Before voting, students must be taught to question their social media feed

Over 50 years ago, American fighter pilot and military strategist John Boyd invented the OODA loop—Observe, Orient, Decide, and Act. Warfare inspired the idea, which is unexpectedly relevant to social media politics today.

Boyd believed that humans observe and “orient” before making a decision. Orientation matters. We interpret what we observe using our past experiences, beliefs, assumptions, and knowledge. This thesis presents a critical question for young Indian voters today: What happens when someone influences our view of an issue before we decide?

As political parties and their strategy teams seek to use social media today to attract young voters, the role of universities and educators of all hues can be a fascinating subject of study. Indian colleges should consider the issue.

Politics always requires persuasion. Parties naturally want voters to perceive things their way. However, it would not be prudent to ask young people to avoid politics. In the age of social media, colleges should promote debate, political knowledge, and engagement.

Social media has altered persuasion speed and scale. The smartphone is a daily companion for most teenagers. Daily political messages come from Instagram reels, YouTube videos, memes, influencers, WhatsApp messages, truncated speeches, and short articles.

So it’s not only about young people having information. The broader concern is whether they comprehend how information is delivered, why they keep seeing it, and what it may be trying to convince them of. Agenda-setting was invented by communication scholars decades ago.

Media may not always tell people what to think, but it can dramatically impact what they think. People naturally think a problem is important if it keeps coming up. What follows is framing. The same event can be shown differently.

A political party may call a policy welfare. Some call it needless spending. Some call protests democratic resistance, others disturbance. The facts may persist. Frame shifts. This is stronger with social media. Over several days, a student can encounter memes, reels, comedian comments, short speeches, influencer opinions, and WhatsApp forwards with the same political message.

Each post need not state, “You must believe this.” But, repetition can shape later events’ perception. This is where OODA applies. Political influence need not always drive your decision. Your orientation before the decision may be influenced.

If one politician is displayed in flattering photos and another in embarrassing footage, our opinions may change. If we only witness one failure but rarely perceive the complexity, we may see the political situation through that lens.

Even so, the final verdict can feel like ours. Information can be accurate but misleading. Dividing media into “true” and “fake” is a major mistake in media education. Political communication is often more complex. The removal of speech from a 20-second video clip might make it seem real but misleading.

Correct statistics can be provided without context. Five real examples can be repeated while 20 are ignored. Rare events can be shown hundreds of times until they seem typical. So manipulation doesn’t necessarily involve a lie.

Selection, repetition, exaggeration, and omission can do it. False choice is another useful tactic. “You are with us or against us.” “If you criticise this leader, support the other party.” “If you oppose this policy, you oppose this community.” “If one side is wrong, the other must be right.” Politics rarely is this easy.

But social media encourages simplicity. Nuance takes time. Anger takes seconds. This is where education must help. Emotional political communication can persuade an engineer, MBA, or doctorate. Academic credentials do not guaranty independence.