Get help from the best in academic writing.

The Brexit Process Objectives. Apus History Essay Help


The Brexit Process Quantitative Methods. online history assignment help: online history assignment help


Quantitative Methods

For research to be determined as factual, it must be backed up by credible data and figures. Our research on the influence of social media on Brexit will be gathering information from social media platforms to determine what contributed to the final outcomes. We will use primary and secondary data to understand what the two camps involved in the Brexit process arrived at a conclusion to exit the European Union. To ensure credibility, we are going to utilize polling data from Huff post Pollster, and the polls were largely performed over the internet between the two populations that are those advocating for the exit and the opposer who against the exit move. The polls were conducted during the discussion period of the Brexit referendum that occurred during the April and June of 2016.

The study sorts out to investigate three key themes related to the Brexit issue, which we thought greatly determined the outcome of the Brexit choice. The three key themes revolved around understanding the greater meaning of what Brexit meant to Britons and if they understood what would be the greater impact of this decision in the long run. With this, we would be in a position to determine what were the most pushing factors that led to the Brexit choice and how they reached towards making the conclusion and what were the major influencing factors. The second theme would revolve around understanding the hashtags identified to be trending about Brexit and how these hashtags were formulated to influence the decisions of social media users (Stocker, 2017). Thirdly would be the names of the Twitter users who propagated the Brexit hashtags all over the platforms as there is a direct relationship that certain Twitter users were more influential based on their profiles and the positions they held within government and therefore had a higher tenancy of influencing the perceptions of social media users.

The data collected was based on close to over 30 million tweets that were trending with the Brexit banter, and out of this, close to 23,876, 470 tweets were in English, and another 3,503,769 were new profiles created during the Brexit discussion period. While collecting the data, several considerations came to place, and we largely concentrated on understanding when the tweet was created, the time and date, the number under the tweet, and how long the Twitter account has been in existence. Of keen interest was also the language used on the tweet since this greatly determines the perception created to other users about the tweet’s thoughts and ideas about Brexit. This wide casting of our information greatly enhanced the credibility of our results since the several factors considered would ensure thorough conclusions and recommendations were formulated. The tweets were then declassified and separated to represent the tweets that were for Brexit and those against the Brexit move. This revealed that 310,932 tweets were advocating for remaining within the European Union while another 182,533 were supporting the move for the Brexit process (Coleman, 2020). The tweets that seemed not to reflect any form of inclination were consequently not utilized during the classification.

This quantitative methodology revealed that the person advocation for the Brexit process was more active on social media than those calling for the remaining within the European Union. Out of these tweets, it was revealed that most news outlets had used the tweets to offer facts about what the Brexit move really entailed in educating social media users using facts and figures to influence their outcomes. The message passed across by these tweets was that of having a generally positive impact on the economic rating standards of Britain rather than having a rational outlook on the repercussion that Britain is likely to suffer from the Brexit move (Zappettini, & Krzyżanowski, 2021). It was also noted that through the polls collected, and most users formed their decisions based on the voting numbers of previous users rather than critically reviewing the arguments presented on how the Brexit move would affect Britain at large. Britain’s prime minister David Cameron who at the time exited the scene, states that the Brexit move was the most ironic situation at that time and social media played a great role in influencing the perceptions of citizens. Through social media forces presented by most users, the larger population was really dependent on the views presented on social media to make their decision in favour of the Brexit move.


The Brexit Process Derived Method. history assignment help writing services

Derived Method

The derived method is used in research when looking at worded data whereby it verifies the pre-worded statements’ implication to determine their desired influence on the readers. This is the case on the Brexit issue as depicted through social media platforms. The proponent of the movement tended to use strong language to show their stand on the issue, which depicted some form of seriousness about their opinions. Social media users coming across such strong statements will likely believe them and use them to form their opinion and later on make a decision. The wording of these states is usually framed in a manner that will directly influence the reader’s outcomes, and this was largely utilized through news sites whereby journalist give their opinions through social media posts to influence the decision making process of the readers. Similarly, journalists apply this method whereby they do not take their time to research persons with great knowledge and information about a certain topic. Rather, they just approach an individual by virtue of their position in government. Such individuals tend to ignorant of the subject matter and therefore give vague opinions, and through their comments that will be used to make headlines, viewers and social media users will take up their opinions from such baseless beliefs.

In these statements, concentration is more skewed towards the economic aspect, which tends to elicit comments and consequently influence the decisions of the listeners and readers. Social media influencers who were aiming at wooing Britons on supporting the Brexit move capitalized their statements of the implications that Britain would have to endure in terms of monetary issues. They implicated that Britain would suffer major monetary threats that would result in economic sanctions and greatly affect the development and growth of the country in case they went with the Brexit decision. To trickle down the effect, they even stated that the family unit stood at a loss in the event that the Brexit decision went on since most households greatly depended on the industry involved in trading within the larger European Union region. Therefore, for opinion makers to influence their ideological inclinations, it meant that gather evidence in the form of pictures and figures to depict the great loss that Britain would suffer in the event they went down the Brexit way (Haba, & Holland, 2021). There was also a form of disparity noted that the upper class within society advocated for the Brexit move, and they used their popularity within social circles to push their agendas since they had greater access to social media platforms. ON the other end were the ordinary citizens who were largely interested in making a daily living and not so much concerned about the repercussions that the economy would have to face in the future arising from the Brexit decision.

Among the upper class within society, the argument was clear that they were looking for their personal gains from the exit plan. This was revealed during the Prime Minister transition period whereby Cameron was skeptical and was seen as an advocate against the exit plan while incoming Prime Minister Boris Johnson really want Britain to exit from the European Union bloc. Both these moves were being propagated in the limelight through social media posts and formed a bigger part of influencing most social media users. There was also the psychological warfare that Britons would continue to suffer from in the vent that the exit did not materialize. Since the process had already been initiated, most citizens would be gripped by fear mongering on what would be the outcomes after exiting the European Union. This means that most decisions were based on the imagination of fear in terms of what to expect after Brexit rather than the ration consider on the available options present when Britain chooses to either exit or remain within the economic bloc.


The Brexit Process Conclusion. history essay help: history essay help


The above discussion reveals that the Brexit decision was largely prompted by economic and security reasons that Britain would have to go through after making the Brexit move. The influence was majorly spread through information shared and interpreted through social media platforms. The accessibility to social media by the political elites contributed immensely to the spread of information since they used these mediums to drive their agendas and inculcated the economic and security reasons within their messages. A major catalyst that was used to drive the Brexit agenda was the use of fear to intimidate Britons on the consequences they stood to suffer in terms of job and life security as well as the greater depression factor they would face, and this was propagated through news channels (Kumar, 2017). The Brexit move that occurred after a referendum back in 2016 is a great revelation of social media can be used to influence the opinions of citizens towards a certain agenda successfully.

In this research, we have largely adopted two methodological approaches to make our conclusions. The quantitative methodology proved to be the most effective in that the actual data and figures obtained represented a true image of the sentiments shared on various social media sites. This was easier to analyze and make conclusions since the derived data basically was a reflection of the influential position that social media played to skew the Brexit move. The derived method, on the other hand, employed an analysis of the words used to determine the desired outcome by the composers of the message. These statements created a social division among the population since each side of the spectrum was working towards achieving their own personal goals. The political elites were more concerned about their wealth after the Brexit decision, while the common man was more concerned about how their lives would continue, and they would still have job security to be able to fend for themselves. The derive method was more of a skewed method since the citizens were greatly dependent on the opinions of the political elites for them to make a conclusive judgment. Therefore, social media plays a great in shaping the opinions of other social media users, and most users take those opinions without giving them a rational approach. The same case applies to Brexit cause the majority of Britons supported the move based on what influential social media users posted on their pages, and they did not give themselves ample time to analyze what it really meant by the Brexit move.


Top of Form

Bossio, D. (2017). Journalism and Social Media: Practitioners, Organisations, and Institutions. Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Top of Form

Coleman, S. (2020). How people talk about politics: Brexit and beyond.

Top of Form

D’Silva, M. U., & Atay, A. (2020). Intercultural communication, identity, and social movements in the digital age.

Bottom of Form

Bottom of Form

Top of Form

Graefer, A. (2019). Media and the politics of offence.

Top of Form

Haba, K., & Holland, M. (2021). Brexit and After Perspectives on European Crises and Reconstruction from Asia and Europe.

Top of Form

Kaiser, B. (2019). Targeted: My inside story of Cambridge Analytica and how Trump, Brexit and Facebook broke democracy.

Bottom of Form

Bottom of Form

Bottom of Form

Bottom of Form






Kumar, P. (2017). Corporate Privacy Policy Changes during PRISM and the Rise of

Surveillance Capitalism. Media and communication, 5(1), pp. 63 – 75.

Entrepreneurial finance and Nondiversifiable risk. online history assignment help

We have seen that in the long run that stock investments tend to substantially outperform bond investments. However, it is not uncommon to observe investors with long horizons holding only bonds. Are such investor irrational? Why or why not?

These kinds of investors are considered irrational as the stock market is irrational as the truth of the fact. This is because the nature of the stock market is considered irrational in terms of time, where they tend to be as much longer than what seemed to be reasonable (Ross et al., 2016). These investors are very high riskers in business involving stocks as the potential return they get from the stock investment is very high. This is what makes them seem to be irrational as they are putting much risk on stocks that they can lose much if the business fails, and that even what they have placed in the stock market, its ahs also a high probability of being lost and even if the stock exchange markets fail, they losses even the capital. The stock market investors also seem irrational, as they use their money in funding entities in raising money and selling shares/stocks. This at times is very beneficial as when the market records a better profit, they usually benefit a lot from the company/firm/business where they are even entitled to excess earnings and even in deciding the management through democratic voting means (Chen etal., 2010).

What are the implications of the efficient markets hypothesis for investors who buy and sell stocks in an attempt to “beat the market”?

Various implications occur when investors have made the market hypothesis, brings about the elimination of the probability of being beaten in the market. This brings about much more profits, much sales of the products and the services, and a quality improvement on the products one is dealing with to be able to fight back the market competition. It also brings about the low-cost operation in ten investments and the presence of a passive portfolio. Also, the profit margin is never “beaten” due to the unavailability of mispricing the products and the services as they would never exist. The stock prices are noted to follow a certain random walk such that the current stock prices aren’t determined by the past stock prices (Reilly et al., 2019).

In broad terms, why are some risks diversifiable?

Some risks are diversifiable because they have a uniqueness to a specific asset and that, they can be removed by carrying out different investments of assets. An example of this is when a company ensures the lives of many people other than a single individual life as the outcome for one person is unpredictable, but for a considerable population, it’s possible to predict.

Why are some risks non-diversifiable? Does this mean that an investor can control the level of unsystematic risk in a portfolio but not the level of systematic risk?

Some risks are non-diversifiable because of the risk, which is said to apply to all kinds of assets, as the systematic risk can affect the investment. This means that an investor can control the unsystematic risk because it originates from the internal factors which can be taken control of. Such internal factors include a lack of commitment to work where an investor can look for a manager to take charge and control the investment being carried out.  The systematic risk cannot be taken control of as the different asset classes have different reactions to the macroeconomic factor start to affect the investment. An example of a non-diversified risk is when an investor is operating two investments simultaneously, such as having a textile industry and a vehicle auto spares selling merchandise, thus spreading the risk (Petukhov, 2019).






Chen, H., Miao, J., & Wang, N. (2010). Entrepreneurial finance and Nondiversifiable risk. Review of Financial Studies, 23(12), 4348-4388.

Petukhov, A. (2019). Non-diversifiable risk and endogenous innovation. SSRN Electronic Journal.

Reilly, F. K., Brown, K. C., Gunasingham, B., Lamba, A., & Elston, D. F. (2019). Investment analysis & portfolio management. Cengage AU.