Carrie Levine’s Voting Beat
we are 135 days later Starting with the 2024 presidential election, the fight against misinformation and disinformation has become hopelessly politicized, and the infrastructure built to combat bad or misleading information online is far less robust than it once was.
Notable efforts to combat misinformation about the election, for example: Stanford Internet Observatoryhave been reduced or closed. Some are facing Threatfurthermore Litigation and Investigation From the conservatives People who say the group is allied with the left Targeting speech that liberals disagree with.
Some experts say the Republican backlash has created a climate more conducive to misinformation. to destroy without basis Promotes faith in elections and political extremism.
“We may be less prepared 155 days before 2024 than we were under President Trump in 2020,” Sen. Mark Warner said. He told the Associated Press earlier this month:Warner, a Virginia Democrat, chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee.
There is a lot of bad or misleading information about elections, but not a lot of clear answers about what can be done about it, practically or legally. A potentially important decision could soon give us some direction. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule at any moment. A case that was watched closely The debate is over whether the White House and government agencies can force social media companies to remove content the government determines is misinformation.
Experts say incidents and allegations of partisan censorship have already had a chilling effect and that the federal government pulled back Efforts to combat misinformation. However, during oral arguments, many judges I felt hurt The court ruled that such efforts violated the First Amendment.
Other courts have struggled with the limits of press freedom.
The Michigan Supreme Court ruled last week in a case involving felony charges against two conservative political activists, Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman, who targeted Black voters in several states with robocalls in 2020. The robocalls falsely warned voters that information they provided when they voted by mail could be used to target people with unpaid debts and other potential problems.
~ inside verdictThe majority of the justices ruled that a provision in Michigan law prohibiting the use of threats or other improper means to prevent voting was too broad. They argued that false statements related to voting requirements could be punished without violating free speech rights, but only if they were “intentionally false statements related to voting requirements or procedures and made in an attempt to prevent or influence a voter’s vote.”
The court returned the case To the lower courtsIt directed the court to determine whether Wohl and Burkman’s actions violated the strictly structured phrase.
The Michigan case is still pending, but other jurisdictions have already ruled that Wohl and Burkman’s robocalls crossed the line. The pair agreed to pay It paid $1.2 million to settle a lawsuit in New York, pleaded guilty to related charges in Ohio, and the Federal Communications Commission fined it $5 million for illegal robocalls. dismiss the argument Political robocalls are exempt from consumer protection laws.
There aren’t many officials or groups that support the Burkman/Wohl robocall effort, and for good reason. But there’s less agreement on other misinformation issues.
Claire Wardle, a disinformation expert who co-founded and co-directs the Information Futures Lab at Brown University, said conservative attacks on experts and institutions that study and speak out against disinformation have made “funders more hesitant to support these types of projects.”
Individual researchers have stopped doing this work or have become less vocal, and the relationship between researchers, social media platforms, and governments has “almost completely broken down. There is very little communication between these groups, which means there is no knowledge sharing, no learning, or no problem flagging.”
Nina Jankowicz, who founded a new non-profit earlier this year, American Sunshine ProjectA similar point was made, citing the “collaborative environment” on election misinformation both inside and outside government as the biggest change in the fight against disinformation.
russia It’s just one of many foreign powers trying to influence the U.S. election. Jankowicz noted that at this point there is misinformation out there and that other countries are “laundering” efforts to hide the true source and make it appear more credible.
“It’s a much easier way to get the message out than buying advertising in rubles,” she said.
So what can the general public do when threats come from multiple directions?
The good news is that Americans are now more aware of how social media algorithms are tailoring information to them, and they are more literate about the information, Jankowicz said. Armed with that knowledge, she said, people should try things out a few times before sharing and make sure they come from a reliable source.
“Everyone has a responsibility to review their own information,” she said.
Carrie Levine is the editor-in-chief of Votebeat and lives in Washington, D.C. She edits and frequently writes for Votebeat’s national newsletter. Contact Carrie at: Clevin@Boatbeat.org.
Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration across the United States. A version of this post was originally distributed in Votebeat’s free weekly newsletter. Sign up to receive future editions, including the latest reporting from Votebeat bureaus and curated news from other publishers. Delivered to your inbox every Saturday.
Campaign Action
