Post review: No election misinformation found on Facebook or Twitter


Mark Finchim (the Republican candidate to oversee the Arizona elections as Secretary of state) made a last minute fundraising bid Wednesday using one his favorite talking points: The imminent threat of voter Fraud.

Finchim incorrectly claimed on Facebook and Twitter, that his Democratic opponent, Adrien fontes, a member the Chinese Communist Party, and a “cartel crime”, had “rigged election before.”

We have posted bogus conspiracy theories about election fraud online before. Finchem falsely reported that Fontes had been “funded” by George Soros and Mike Bloomberg, claiming that they wanted “our RIG Elections and our voter lists”.

Since years, Facebook and Twitter have pledged to combat falsehoods that could confuse users about America’s electoral system. They flagged questionable posts with accurate information about voting, and removed any misinformation. According to a Washington Post review, 26 candidates have made inaccurate claims about the election since April. However, the platforms have done little to refute them.

This contrasts with the 2020 election cycles, when Facebook and Twitter combined to add labels to dozens if election-related posts of Donald Trump. The labels directed readers towards reliable information about the electoral process or warned readers that the information could be misleading. Between January 1, 2020 and January 1, 2020, Facebook identified at most 506 posts by Trump. January 62021, according studyFrom left-leaning Media Matters for America and Twitter too He added labels to Trump’s tweets, questioning the validity or voting process.

However, such designations were not possible in this election cycle, as a Post review revealed. Hundreds of Congressional seats will be designated, along with thousands of local and state positions.

Facebook announced in August that it had received feedback that its stickers promoting reliable info were being used too much. So the company decided to use the stickers in a more strategic and targeted way. Twitter began using disinformation stickers designed by a new company late last year. The company claims that this has resulted in a decrease in replies, retweets, likes of lies, as well as an increase in people clicking on debunking links.

Civil rights firms accuse big tech companies are failing to fight electoral lies

Fenchim is not the only Republican candidate who has argued on social networks that next week’s midterm election could be rigged. Sandy Smith, Republican Party Candidate to Competitive America Northeastern North Carolina’s House of Representatives seat responded to a ruling by the state Supreme Court on election rules. They published a Facebook post titled “Cheaters will cheat.” Lefties won’t cheat if they don’t cheat. Theodore Dixon (the Republican candidate for Michigan governor) stated that election manipulation was “being mobilized as you speak” via Twitter in April. None of these posts were rated.

The Post reviewed thousands upon thousands of social media posts on Twitter, Facebook, and other smaller platforms by nearly 300 Republican-elected officials to evaluate how they have portrayed the upcoming election over the past six month and the reactions to it. Reliable review Previous post-October analysisI checked the records of every Republican candidate for the House, Senate or major state office to see if they had challenged the results of the 2020 election.

Majority of GOP candidates reject or question the results of the 2020 election

The review revealed that 17 candidates claim that the 2022 elections are rigged or that certain aspects of the voting process are corrupt, fraudulent, or fraudulent. These allegations were made in 40 posts to Facebook and Twitter. The review concluded that these posts were not challenged by social media companies without any ratings from Facebook or Twitter.

The Post’s analysis also revealed that 18 Republican rejectionists claimed recently that the 2020 election had been rigged or that President Biden was unlegitimate at least 52 of these platforms. These posts were not challenged by social media companies, according to the review.

This is a marked difference from 2021 and 2020, when platforms placed labels on posts to warn readers about misleading content or direct users to correct information about the voting process.

Twitter acknowledged that it had increased its enforcement of its policies against lies about election results between March 2021-August 2022 and that it activates the civic integrity policy approximately 90 day before Election Day. Twitter recently launched a rating tool that is managed by its users and not its employees.

It is not clear how Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter will affect this. Musk promised to improve content editing and recalculate former President Donald Trump. However, it is not clear how the site will monitor claims of election fraud. mass layoffsThe Twitter staff’s Friday tweets.

Musk earlier in the week had promised civil rights groups and activists that Twitter would continue to adhere to its current election integrity policies until the midterm elections have ended. There are signs that Musk may be willing to interfere in Twitter’s decision regarding sanctions against specific candidates.

I asked The Post Twitter about Finchem’s tweets regarding electoral fraud. The social media giant seemed to have limited its ability to post, according to my question. According to his tweets. Musk replied to a Newsmax contributor tweeting about the restrictions Monday evening, saying he was looking into the matter. Later that evening Finch was TwitterMusk thanked Musk once again for “stopping the public figure that suspended me from Twitter a few weeks before the elections.”

It is unclear why Finchem has had his account closed or restored. Twitter did not respond repeatedly to requests for comment. Fenchem, Smith and Dixon did not respond on multiple requests from the Washington Post for comment.

Andy Stone, a spokesperson from Meta, Facebook’s parent company, said that Facebook does not place labels on posts that contain misleading electoral information. He stated that many of the publications that Washington Post asked about were not his. “Examples standard political content include candidates promoting their campaign websites and asking questions at congressional hearings or responding to court decisions.” He also criticised The Post’s inability to review misinformation via text.

He said that “experts have identified the videos as a primary vector for problematic electoral content, but Washington Post intentionally excluded YouTube TikTok” in the statement.

Social media platforms’ low ratings on misleading or dubious assertions emerge this Year amid a long-running struggle over how social media platforms should govern political discourse of world leaders.

Facebook’s rules do not prohibit posts claiming widespread voter fraud. This is in contrast to Twitter, which bans false claims and claims that could “undermine public trust in elections,” including lies regarding the outcome of the 2020 presidential race.

Both companies prohibit distortion of how, when, or where to vote. They consider this a form voter suppression. Both companies encourage accurate information about elections in their information centers on social media. Facebook, for instance, offers voting information CenterIt links to government websites that will help users register to vote. Twitter launches axles Promote real-time information about elections from state election officials, news outlets.

Disinformation experts claim that platforms have a lot to do with the number of Republican candidates spreading disinformation about the recent election. Joshua Tucker, a professor at New York University, said that this problem is actually caused by political elites.

The Washington Post review found that misinformation is a serious problem. Michigan Republican nominee Cristina Karamo for secretary of state accused Jocelyn Benson on Facebook of refusing the removal of thousands of deceased voters from Michigan’s voting rolls.

Kim Crockett was the Republican candidate for Minnesota’s secretary-of-state. She posted on Twitter and Facebook in September that her opponent’s opposition of voter identity rules “is because voter fraud has been part of his electoral strategy.” (Neither Karamo nor she responded to The Post’s requests to comment.

Fenechem, for his part, focused on Arizona’s participation at ERIC – a voter data system that seeks to remove voters who have left the state. Fenechem posted on Twitter in September that “our voter lists continue being corrupted by Soros-backed ERIC regim.” (PolitiFact fact checkers have confirmed that the PolitiFact has verified that). He saidEric and Soros do not have a connection.

The Post reviewed 82 posts on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram from 28 candidates to draw attention to delicate issues in election management. Nothing has a label.

Tucker, a New York University student, said that he sympathizes about the platforms’ decisions regarding reporting statements. Tucker stated, “When someone states that I’m concerned about the possibility for fraud in this election,” Tucker said. “It’s hard to say this is something that should be removed. However, the problem is the cumulative effect of people saying it over and over again.”

Denial of the 2020 election result is rampant.

A Post review found 190 tweets and Facebook posts from 47 candidates. It cited Dinesh D’Souza’s 2000 Mules, which it claimed shows “mules” voting absentee in violation of state rules. This should invalidate Biden’s election. Although there is not much evidence to support this, Twitter had stopped disapproving of election disapproval by the time the film was released.

Mark Alford (the Republican candidate for the US Congress from Missouri) posted on Facebook an invitation to a viewing party at the campaign office. “It exposes widespread and coordinated voter fraud in the 2020 election, enough to alter the overall result,” a false claim. No label has been applied.

They should moderate all posts that mention the film. “This is a bridge too far,” said Shannon McGregor, a professor of communications at the University of North Carolina. “But at most, classifying it would go a long way in the right direction.”

Alleged voter intimidation in Arizona drop box keeps officials under surveillance

The review also revealed that the term “election integrity” is now common, even ambiguous, in hundreds of publications pertaining to at least 80 candidates.

John Molinar (right), a Michigan congressman, included him in a laundry-list of campaign promises, along with the “Right to Life, Second Amendment” and keeping taxes low in a July Facebook post. Burt Jones, the Republican nominee to be Georgia’s deputy governor, also promised to “restore electoral integrity” and enhance public safety, improve education, and eliminate state income tax in May before the primary.

MacGregor claims that this is an “identity marker” that allows voters who are willing and able to reject an election to hear what their heart desires without alienating moderate voters.

Source link

[Denial of responsibility! is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, all materials to their authors. If you are the owner of the content and do not want us to publish your materials, please contact us by email – The content will be deleted within 24 hours.]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Post

American Crypto Optimism brings British Football to you

Next Post

Twitter is already testing its $8 per Month verification plan

Related Posts