More stories

  • in

    The Rise of Salem Media, a Conservative Radio Juggernaut

    In recent months, the conservative personalities Eric Metaxas, Sebastian Gorka and Charlie Kirk have used their nationally syndicated radio shows to discuss baseless claims of rigged voting machines, accuse election officials of corruption and espouse ballot fraud conspiracy theories.Now, the three men are joining a live speaking tour that will take them across Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania and other battleground states to promote those views — and Republican candidates — ahead of the Nov. 8 midterm elections.The radio hosts and their tour are united by a common backer: Salem Media Group, a publicly traded media company in Irving, Texas. Mr. Metaxas, Mr. Gorka and Mr. Kirk have contracts with the company, which is also hosting the Battleground Talkers trip. The tour features more than half a dozen other conservative media personalities as well, including Hugh Hewitt and Dennis Prager, who also have deals with Salem.Created as a Christian radio network nearly 50 years ago by two brothers-in-law, Salem has quietly turned into a conservative media juggernaut as it increasingly takes an activist stance in the midterm elections. The company has publicly said it wants a strong turnout of conservative voters for Nov. 8, and its hosts have amplified the messages of conspiracy theorists, including misinformation about the voting process.“The war for America’s soul is on the line,” Salem said in promotional materials for the tour. It added that the radio hosts were traveling to “influence those who are undecided.”Salem, which has a market capitalization of nearly $45 million, is smaller than audio competitors like Cumulus Media and iHeartMedia, as well as conservative media organizations such as Fox News. But it stands out for its blend of right-leaning politics and Christian content and its vast network of 100 radio stations and more than 3,000 affiliates, many of them reaching deep into parts of America that don’t engage with most mainstream media outlets.Salem also operates dozens of religious and conservative websites, as well as podcasts, television news, book publishing and a social media influencer network. The company, which describes its news content as “the antidote to the mainstream media,” has said it reaches 11 million radio listeners.Salem expanded into film this year by financing “2000 Mules,” a widely debunked but popular movie that claimed voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election.Charity Rachelle for The New York TimesThis year, it expanded into film by financing “2000 Mules,” a widely debunked but popular movie that claimed significant voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election. It was directed by Dinesh D’Souza, a conservative figure who has a deal with Salem, and features interviews with others who have shows on Salem. The company plans to publish a book version of the film this month.The general public may not be familiar with Salem, “but their hosts are big names and they have huge reach, which makes them one of the most powerful forces in conservative media that hardly anyone knows about,” said Craig Aaron, president of Free Press, a nonprofit that fights misinformation and supports media competition.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsWith the primaries over, both parties are shifting their focus to the general election on Nov. 8.The Final Stretch: With less than one month until Election Day, Republicans remain favored to take over the House, but momentum in the pitched battle for the Senate has seesawed back and forth.A Surprising Battleground: New York has emerged from a haywire redistricting cycle as perhaps the most consequential congressional battleground in the country. For Democrats, the uncertainty is particularly jarring.Arizona’s Governor’s Race: Democrats are openly expressing their alarm that Katie Hobbs, the party’s nominee for governor in the state, is fumbling a chance to defeat Kari Lake in one of the most closely watched races.Herschel Walker: The Republican Senate nominee in Georgia reportedly paid for an ex-girlfriend’s abortion, but members of his party have learned to tolerate his behavior.Salem did not respond to requests for interviews. Phil Boyce, the company’s senior vice president of spoken word, said in a news release for the battleground states tour that “there has never been a more important midterm election than this one, and Salem is thrilled to be front and center, leading the charge.”Mr. Metaxas, Mr. Prager, Mr. Kirk, Mr. Hewitt and Mr. D’Souza did not respond to requests for comment. In his response for comment, Mr. Gorka said The New York Times was “FAKENEWS fraud.”Sebastian Gorka, a right-wing personality who has a radio show on Salem Media, had former President Donald J. Trump on his show this year.Scott McIntyre for The New York TimesSalem has faced legal challenges as its hosts have discussed conspiracy theories about voter fraud. Eric Coomer, a former executive of Dominion Voting Systems, a maker of election technology, has filed lawsuits against Salem, Mr. Metaxas and several media outlets since 2020 for defamation after being accused on air of perpetuating voter fraud and joining the left-wing antifa movement. Nicole Hemmer, a political historian at Vanderbilt University and author of “Messengers of Right: Conservative Media and the Transformation of American Politics,” said Salem’s effect was far-reaching.“They are using their many different properties for coordinated messaging to promote misinformation, which is undermining democracy,” she said.Salem was started in 1974 with two tiny radio stations in North Carolina owned by two brothers-in-law, Edward G. Atsinger III and Stuart W. Epperson. Over time, they steadily added more stations across the country and sold blocks of airtime for sermons. Salem is now in most major radio markets..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.The company went public in 1999 as the internet was rising. In its public offering prospectus, Salem said it would focus on acquiring digital platforms and cross-promoting content across its channels to attract new audiences.In 2006, Salem bought the conservative political website Townhall.com; other deals for conservative sites followed, including HotAir, Twitchy and PJ Media. It purchased a publishing company, Eagle Publishing, in 2014 in a deal that included RedState, a conservative blog, and Regnery, a publisher with conservative authors like Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham. Regnery said last year that it was “proud to stand in the breach” with Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, when it agreed to print his book after Simon & Schuster dropped the title in the wake of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.This summer, Salem said it had added a podcast hosted by two “culture warriors,” Rob McCoy and Bryce Eddy of the talk show “Liberty Station.” In January, the company awarded its Culture Warrior of the Year award to Ron DeSantis, the Republican governor of Florida, who has made a point of goading liberals.More recently, Salem has promoted to advertisers its “360-degree deals,” meaning that it can amplify messages across radio, podcasts, books, film and websites.Salem has said it is “thrilled to be front and center, leading the charge” in next month’s midterm elections.Rebecca Noble for The New York TimesPolitics were not new to Salem’s founders. Mr. Epperson unsuccessfully ran for Congress in 1984 and 1986 as a Republican. Mr. Atsinger contributed to Republican candidates like George W. Bush and Larry Elder, a Salem radio host who mounted a failed campaign in the California governor’s recall election last year. In Washington, Salem fought to remove regulatory hurdles that complicated its acquisition spree.At the beginning of the year, Mr. Atsinger stepped down as Salem’s chief executive and became chairman, succeeding Mr. Epperson, who took on the title of chairman emeritus.Salem’s executives largely stayed out of editorial decisions — until the Trump administration, said Ben Howe, a former employee of RedState; Craig Silverman, a former Salem radio commentator in Denver; and a third former employee, who declined to be identified for fear of retaliation.In July 2017, Salem held an event at the White House, and several radio hosts interviewed top Trump administration officials. At a Salem reception at the Capitol the next day, the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, and the House Republican leader, Kevin McCarthy, gave speeches.“There was a lot of closeness,” said Mr. Silverman, who attended the events. “McConnell and McCarthy praised Salem, and vice versa. It felt like some sort of team effort.”In April 2018, Salem’s RedState blog fired several employees who had been vocal critics of Mr. Trump. The site’s unofficial slogan had long been “Take on the left. Clean up the right,” said Mr. Howe, a writer for the site who was one of those fired. “But one to two years into office, everything changed. It was like it was no longer good for business to be critical of Trump.”Mr. Silverman said his radio show was cut off in November 2019 as he excoriated Mr. Trump over accusations that the president had pressured Ukraine to investigate Joseph R. Biden Jr., then a Democratic presidential candidate, by withholding aid to the country. Mr. Silverman said he was then fired.“The political environment has never been as interesting and as heated and intense as it is right now,” David Santrella, Salem’s chief executive, said on a recent earnings call.Business Wire, via Associated PressSalem said in press reports at the time that such dismissals were not politically motivated, explaining that it had fired the RedState employees because of financial considerations and Mr. Silverman because he had appeared on non-Salem shows. Mr. Silverman said those appearances were allowed under his contract.As Mr. Trump’s term wound down, Salem ran into financial pressure. In 2019, the company said four board members, including two of the co-founders’ sons, had resigned because “Salem has faced several unique financial headwinds and we are looking for ways to cut costs while not impacting revenue.” Both sons have since returned to the board.In May 2020, the company moved to eliminate new hiring, suspend its dividend, reduce head count, cut pay and request discounts from vendors, blaming the pandemic for forcing it to conserve cash. It reported $11.2 million in forgiven loans from the government’s Paycheck Protection Program.But Salem’s finances have improved since then. Its net income rose to $41.5 million in 2021 from a loss in 2020, while revenue increased to $258.2 million from $236.2 million a year earlier.Salem’s political platforms are a bright spot. On an earnings call in August, Salem executives said that so far this year, political advertisers had spent nearly twice as much on Salem platforms as they did over the same period in the presidential election year of 2020, which had been the “biggest political year ever.” David Santrella, the chief executive, has predicted that “hot button” issues like abortion would probably boost ad revenue.“The political environment has never been as interesting and as heated and intense as it is right now,” he said.Kitty Bennett More

  • in

    The Boys and Girls Off the Bus. Way Off.

    Campaign reporting has changed enormously since the days of Theodore White, Timothy Crouse and Richard Ben Cramer. Today, a chat with two Times reporters who live in the brave new world of American politics.Campaign reporting used to be pretty straightforward: You hopped on the bus and followed candidates around as they spoke at rubber-chicken dinners, Rotary Clubs and union halls, or wormed your way into posh homes to eavesdrop on the pitches they made behind closed doors.That was the old days.Now, the most influential player in a Senate or House race might not be the head of the local Chamber of Commerce, but a MAGA influencer or a TikTok cooking star who dabbles in politics.For better or worse, the smoke-filled rooms where party bosses once decided who won and lost no longer rule. A chat on a platform like Telegram or a sit-down on a seemingly obscure podcast can move more votes than an interview with a local Walter Cronkite on the 11 o’clock news.So, with Election Day now less than a month away, I chatted with two reporters at The New York Times who are steeped in this brave new world of political power — tracking fringe movements and conspiracy theorists, meeting with election deniers and hearing from new breeds of political activists who don’t play by the old rules.Alexandra Berzon focuses on efforts to undermine the security and integrity of the American election system; Ken Bensinger covers the right-wing media outlets and social-media stars that have become central to U.S. politics in the digital age.Here is our conversation, lightly edited for length and clarity:Ali, you worked with former colleagues last year on groundbreaking reporting that showed how Steve Bannon and his calls for a “precinct strategy” are shaping the midterms. What are you seeing and hearing now?Alexandra: The false idea that our election system is fundamentally broken — spurred by debunked conspiracy theories from Donald Trump and his allies about the 2020 election — has proved incredibly sticky. You see it in polling of the Republican base, of course, but also in the scores of groups that operate under the moniker of “election integrity,” which have proliferated since 2020 all over the country and have helped keep this notion alive and energized a base of activists who are not just active online but are holding frequent gatherings.It’s really an extension or morphing of the Tea Party movement, but now focused on the actual administration of elections as a core issue — in fact the precinct strategy that you mentioned was an effort for these activists to take over local county Republican groups, which gives them some amount of involvement in the elections process. Nick Corasaniti and I wrote a brief summary yesterday of some of what has happened on this front since Jan. 6, 2021.And Ken, your story on chatter about “civil war” was pretty eye-opening. What did you find the most disturbing as you delved into why the notion that the U.S. could be headed for political violence is gaining so much traction?Ken: Academics and others who track extremism have written extensively over the past couple of years about how a growing slice of the public may be receptive to, or even welcome, political violence. What was once really a fringe sentiment among only the most radicalized of Americans has moved closer to the political mainstream.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsWith the primaries over, both parties are shifting their focus to the general election on Nov. 8.The Final Stretch: With less than one month until Election Day, Republicans remain favored to take over the House, but momentum in the pitched battle for the Senate has seesawed back and forth.A Surprising Battleground: New York has emerged from a haywire redistricting cycle as perhaps the most consequential congressional battleground in the country. For Democrats, the uncertainty is particularly jarring.Arizona’s Governor’s Race: Democrats are openly expressing their alarm that Katie Hobbs, the party’s nominee for governor in the state, is fumbling a chance to defeat Kari Lake in one of the most closely watched races.Herschel Walker: The Republican Senate nominee in Georgia reportedly paid for an ex-girlfriend’s abortion, but members of his party have learned to tolerate his behavior.Research done out of the University of Chicago now indicates that as many as 20 million Americans approve of violence for political ends. While nobody thinks there are millions of folks with assault rifles locked, loaded and ready for battle, it still is a very troubling finding. And it helps explain why politicians seem so much more comfortable with rhetoric about a civil war, or what some politicians call a “national divorce” in which red and blue states are somehow violently separated.Just a few weeks ago, Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser for Trump, claimed in a speech that governors had the power to declare war and “probably will” in the near future. In fact, they cannot do that. The more salient point is this: Flynn was making this speech at a fund-raising event for Mark Finchem, a candidate for secretary of state in Arizona, and the audience — people who paid a minimum of $300 a plate to be there — was eating it up.What are election officials worrying about most right now?Alexandra: The concern I hear about most from election officials (aside from the day-to-day concerns of election administration such as finding venues for polling places and recruiting enough poll workers) is about the impact of misinformation and disinformation. There’s long been a sense that if you bring skeptical people into the process and have them working elections or monitoring them, a lot of their concerns and anxieties will be alleviated.Elections officials and experts are hoping this will be the case now with people who are steeped in election conspiracy theories getting involved in being poll workers and poll watchers. And the officials are certainly expressing confidence that they can run safe and secure elections. But there is also serious anxiety now about these people serving as vigilantes and injecting more uncertainty into the process.Ken, I remember you saying once that you keep your messages open on Twitter as a kind of listening post. What does your direct-message inbox look like on an average week, and are you seeing any trends lately?Ken: I love my fans! As a rule, I like to keep my DMs open because I think it’s important to hear what people have to say, even if it’s not exactly polite. Plus, there are often great story tips buried there between the cryptocurrency spam and scams.Lately, however, I’ve noticed a marked increase in conspiracy-minded messages. A number of people routinely reach out to show me more “proof” that President Biden is dead, or that he has been secretly replaced by a Chinese operative, or that — and I swear I’m not making this up — he’s actually a “lizard person” wearing a cutting-edge silicone mask designed by the C.I.A. You can tell, they say, by the little rubberized tabs visible around the president’s ears.Among a steady stream of Jeffrey Epstein theories and memes plucked straight from 4Chan, I’ve also noticed lately a lot of stuff claiming the Democratic Party is this extremely hawkish institution that wants to trigger global thermonuclear war and is using the conflict in Ukraine as a pathway to do that. It’s an interesting reversal, since for decades it was the Republican Party that was accused of being full of warmongers. I suppose all political trends eventually go full circle.What is happening in American politics that you think deserves more attention?Ken: With each passing day, there seems to be more and more misinformation and disinformation being served up to a public that seems increasingly receptive to it.I’m seeing lots of politicians amplifying this trend in two ways.One is by repeating untruths spread on the internet without attempting to verify them, and becoming some of the primary spreaders of bad info by virtue of their huge followings and reach.The other way is by relentlessly attacking and, lately, ignoring what they call the mainstream media and by telling their followers to do their own research. And while we’ve seen politicians displaying hostility to the press for some time, a new trend seems to be completely ignoring most journalists in favor of communicating directly with voters through social media or a select group of reporters judged to be sympathetic.Candidates like Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida rarely, if ever, talk to most reporters, while others, such as Doug Mastriano, the Republican candidate for governor of Pennsylvania, appear to have no communications apparatus at all, leaving phone calls, emails and text messages perpetually unanswered.Some candidates don’t campaign in traditional ways anymore, shunning public appearances for carefully controlled interviews on narrowly targeted podcasts and radio shows, and using messages sent via influential surrogates on Twitter, Facebook and, in particular, Telegram.The result, it appears, is that an expanding portion of the public never hears anything remotely close to a diversity of information, while misinformation served up in bad faith morphs into accepted and undeniable fact for untold numbers of people. As a journalist, confronting that is difficult: It feels as if even the most thorough fact-checking efforts are never so much as seen by half the country.Republican candidates who questioned the 2020 election.The New York TimesWhat to read about democracyMore than 370 Republicans on the November ballot have cast doubt on the 2020 election, a Times investigation led by Karen Yourish found. Most are still doing it. Many will win.A memo from Georgia’s elections director gave the false impression that third parties or partisan actors could challenge voters’ eligibility on the spot, much to the concern of the Black community. On Thursday, he clarified that is not the law.Colorado’s secretary of state owned up to a clerical error that led to postcards being sent to noncitizens with instructions on how to register to vote. But the manipulation of quotation marks around the word “accidentally” by election deniers has fueled conspiracy theories.A Republican congressional candidate in Maine is backtracking from claims he made that litter boxes were being placed in school bathrooms for students dressing up as cats, a widely debunked myth. The candidate, Ed Thelander, has also peddled election falsehoods. NBC News has more on the origins of the litter-box myth.viewfinderA supporter saluting Donald Trump last Sunday at a rally in Mesa, Ariz.Rebecca Noble for The New York TimesA rally saluteAfter baking in the unrelenting Arizona sun for at least 10 hours, a rally official gestured to us weary and sunburned pool photographers. We peered over the red, white and blue banner separating us from the audience as the sun set behind Donald Trump’s at his rally last Sunday in Mesa, Ariz., to see a lone, elderly veteran saluting the former president.To me, the salute embodies the fierce dedication of Trump’s supporters. To attend a Trump rally, especially to arrive early enough to get a good seat, requires a serious amount of perseverance through hours of standing in line and waiting for his eventual arrival.Thank you for reading On Politics, and for being a subscriber to The New York Times. — BlakeRead past editions of the newsletter here.If you’re enjoying what you’re reading, please consider recommending it to others. They can sign up here. Browse all of our subscriber-only newsletters here.Have feedback? Ideas for coverage? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com. More

  • in

    Turkey Allows Jail Terms for What It Deems ‘Fake News’

    Rights advocates fear the government could use newly passed legislation to restrict speech and target critics in the run-up to crucial elections in June.ISTANBUL — Turkey’s Parliament has passed sweeping new legislation intended to stamp out disinformation, allowing the government to jail journalists and social media users for up to three years for spreading information deemed to be false or misleading.The final piece of the legislation, which also requires social media companies to hand over the personal details of users suspected of spreading “fake news,” was approved on Thursday night with votes from President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s governing party and its allies, who control a parliamentary majority.Mr. Erdogan, who has concentrated more power in his hands in recent years while growing less tolerant of dissent, had argued it was necessary to fight disinformation and called social media a threat to democracy.But a range of critics — including opposition lawmakers, media freedom advocates and legal scholars — have criticized the law itself as a threat to democracy, saying that its vague provisions could have a chilling effect on free expression and enable the government to prosecute critics or journalists who publish information about wrongdoing or corruption.Those worries are particularly acute in the run-up to presidential and parliamentary elections scheduled for June, in which Mr. Erdogan and his party will seek to stay in power, despite galloping inflation that has seen their popularity sag in the polls.The disinformation legislation is the most recent step in what rights watchdogs have called a constriction of free expression in Turkey under Mr. Erdogan, who has been the country’s premier politician since 2003 and president since 2014.In recent years, the websites of foreign news outlets, including the Voice of America and Germany’s DW, have been blocked, Turkish TV stations and newspapers have fallen increasingly under the control of the state, and citizens have been arrested on charges for such crimes as “insulting the president.”But social media and online news sites enjoyed a greater degree of free expression, which the new law threatens to undermine.Representatives of journalist associations and unions protested against the new legislation last week in Turkey’s capital, Ankara.Adem Altan/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesTo drive that point home, Burak Erbay, an opposition lawmaker, spoke from the Parliament’s podium to the millions of young Turks who will be eligible to vote for the first time next year.“You have only one freedom left: the phone in your pocket,” Mr. Erbay said. “If the law here passes in Parliament, you can break your phone like this.”Then he smashed a cellphone with a hammer.Mahir Unal, a senior lawmaker from Mr. Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party, defended the legislation in Parliament, saying it did not target free expression or criticism that “does not exceed the limits.”During a TV interview in May, after his party proposed the law, he said, “We are working on this so that freedom of expression, criticism and freedom of the press will not be limited.”To come into force, the new legislation must be signed by Mr. Erdogan within 15 days. He can also send it back to Parliament for revision.Turkey was under fire for limiting freedom of expression even before the new legislation. Freedom House, a democracy promotion group, rates Turkey “Not Free” on its Freedom in the World index. Reporters Without Borders ranked Turkey 149 out of 180 countries in its press freedom index.The Venice Commission, the Council of Europe’s legal advisory body, acknowledged in a legal assessment of the legislation the threat that disinformation poses to democratic societies. But at the same time, it called on Turkey not to enact the law, saying it had “serious doubts” about the need to criminalize disinformation in such a way.It also said the legislation could lead to self-censorship, especially during elections.The legislation is not a new law, but it consists of 40 amendments to existing laws.Of greatest concern to rights advocates is Article 29. It allows for prison terms of one to three years for anyone who “disseminates false information about the country’s domestic and foreign security, public order and general health, with the sole aim of creating anxiety, fear or panic among the public and in a manner that is liable to disturb public peace.”Supporters of the legislation have compared it with similar laws in European countries and say it includes enough safeguards to prevent it from being used to punish peaceful, legitimate speech. But legal scholars say it gives the authorities great flexibility in how to apply it.“It is very vague and arbitrary, it will be used in an arbitrary and discriminatory way in Turkey,” said Yaman Akdeniz, a law professor at Istanbul Bilgi University. “It lacks adequate legal safeguards and provides wide discretion to the prosecutors and courts.”The law also significantly tightens regulations governing the operations of large social media companies in Turkey.If requested by the Turkish authorities, companies like Meta, Twitter, LinkedIn and YouTube must remove content and provide proprietary information, including user data of suspected perpetrators and algorithmic information used to determine rankings.Companies that fail to comply could face drastic slowdowns in the speed of their services in Turkey, a practice known as throttling, or fines equal to 3 percent of their global income.Mr. Akdeniz said these companies must decide whether they are going to respect the new requirements to continue to operate in Turkey, at the risk of enabling government crackdowns.“If you comply with this,” he said, “you risk becoming the long arm of the Turkish authorities.” More

  • in

    Twitter and TikTok Lead in Amplifying Misinformation, Report Finds

    A new analysis found that algorithms and some features of social media sites help false posts go viral.It is well known that social media amplifies misinformation and other harmful content. The Integrity Institute, an advocacy group, is now trying to measure exactly how much — and on Thursday it began publishing results that it plans to update each week through the midterm elections on Nov. 8.The institute’s initial report, posted online, found that a “well-crafted lie” will get more engagements than typical, truthful content and that some features of social media sites and their algorithms contribute to the spread of misinformation.Twitter, the analysis showed, has what the institute called the great misinformation amplification factor, in large part because of its feature allowing people to share, or “retweet,” posts easily. It was followed by TikTok, the Chinese-owned video site, which uses machine-learning models to predict engagement and make recommendations to users.“We see a difference for each platform because each platform has different mechanisms for virality on it,” said Jeff Allen, a former integrity officer at Facebook and a founder and the chief research officer at the Integrity Institute. “The more mechanisms there are for virality on the platform, the more we see misinformation getting additional distribution.”The institute calculated its findings by comparing posts that members of the International Fact-Checking Network have identified as false with the engagement of previous posts that were not flagged from the same accounts. It analyzed nearly 600 fact-checked posts in September on a variety of subjects, including the Covid-19 pandemic, the war in Ukraine and the upcoming elections.Facebook, according to the sample that the institute has studied so far, had the most instances of misinformation but amplified such claims to a lesser degree, in part because sharing posts requires more steps. But some of its newer features are more prone to amplify misinformation, the institute found.Facebook’s amplification factor of video content alone is closer to TikTok’s, the institute found. That’s because the platform’s Reels and Facebook Watch, which are video features, “both rely heavily on algorithmic content recommendations” based on engagements, according to the institute’s calculations.Instagram, which like Facebook is owned by Meta, had the lowest amplification rate. There was not yet sufficient data to make a statistically significant estimate for YouTube, according to the institute.The institute plans to update its findings to track how the amplification fluctuates, especially as the midterm elections near. Misinformation, the institute’s report said, is much more likely to be shared than merely factual content.“Amplification of misinformation can rise around critical events if misinformation narratives take hold,” the report said. “It can also fall, if platforms implement design changes around the event that reduce the spread of misinformation.” More

  • in

    These Republicans Questioned the 2020 Election — and Most Are Still Doing It. Many Will Win.

    Hundreds of Republican midterm candidates have questioned or spread misinformation about the 2020 election. Hundreds of Republican midterm candidates have questioned or spread misinformation about the 2020 election. Together they represent a growing consensus in the Republican Party, and a potential threat to American democracy. Together they represent a growing consensus in the Republican Party, […] More

  • in

    Enthusiasm for Trump Fluctuates Among Republicans on Campaign Trail

    MINDEN, Nev. — Surrounded by a half-dozen construction cranes hoisting floodlights, loudspeakers and American flags into the chilly desert twilight, Joe Lombardo stood in front of an attentive audience at a Trump rally and delivered a warm tribute.“We’re here to rally for the Republican ticket, and who’s going to help us?” Mr. Lombardo, the party’s nominee for governor of Nevada, told a crowd on the Minden, Nev., airport tarmac that outnumbered the town’s population of 3,500. “The greatest president, right? Donald J. Trump!”But the praise from Mr. Lombardo, a longtime Clark County sheriff, contrasted sharply with his tepid testimonial of Mr. Trump a week earlier.Seated in a Las Vegas television studio with his hands pressed tightly together in his lap, Mr. Lombardo demurred when asked during his only scheduled debate with Gov. Steve Sisolak, the Democratic incumbent, if Mr. Trump had been a great president.“I wouldn’t use that adjective — I wouldn’t say great,” Mr. Lombardo answered. “He was a sound president.”Heading into the final weeks of the midterm campaigns, Republican candidates locked in close races, as Mr. Lombardo is, have twisted themselves into political contortions as they puzzle out how to handle their party’s most powerful figure — and its most controversial — while toggling between the debate stage and the rally stage.At a rally last week in Nevada, Joe Lombardo referred to Donald J. Trump as “the greatest president.” But during a debate, when asked, he said “he was a sound president.”Bridget Bennett for The New York TimesThe challenge confronting Republican contenders across the country is how to win over moderate and independent swing voters without alienating the party’s base of Trump loyalists — or the former president himself. Mr. Trump often views politics in deeply personal terms and is known to respond in kind to acts of defiance, even when retribution could jeopardize an election for his party.Democrats are similarly trapped in an awkward dance with President Biden, whose low approval ratings have forced candidates to keep him at an arm’s distance. But polls show that Mr. Biden’s political brand is not as polarizing as Mr. Trump’s. To like Mr. Trump is to love him, while disapproval is often on par with disdain.In a New York Times/Siena College poll last month, more than half of the voters who said they viewed Mr. Trump favorably said they viewed him very favorably, while four out of five who had unfavorable opinions of the former president said they viewed him very unfavorably.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsWith the primaries over, both parties are shifting their focus to the general election on Nov. 8.The Final Stretch: With less than one month until Election Day, Republicans remain favored to take over the House, but momentum in the pitched battle for the Senate has seesawed back and forth.A Surprising Battleground: New York has emerged from a haywire redistricting cycle as perhaps the most consequential congressional battleground in the country. For Democrats, the uncertainty is particularly jarring.Pennsylvania Governor’s Race: Attacks by Doug Mastriano, the G.O.P. nominee, on the Jewish school where Josh Shapiro, the Democratic candidate, sends his children have set off an outcry about antisemitic signaling.Herschel Walker: The Republican Senate nominee in Georgia reportedly paid for an ex-girlfriend’s abortion, but some conservative Christians have learned to tolerate the behavior of those who advance their cause.Striking the right balance — or not — could decide whether Republicans win control of the Senate and capture several governor’s offices in key battleground states.That calculation is complicated by political terrain that varies by state. A winning Republican coalition for J.D. Vance in the Senate race in Ohio — a state that Mr. Trump easily won twice — will most likely require a smaller proportion of independent voters than statewide contests in Nevada, which Mr. Trump narrowly lost twice, political strategists said.In North Carolina, Representative Ted Budd emerged from a crowded Republican Senate primary on the strength of an endorsement from the former president. Mr. Budd carried out a multimillion-dollar advertising blitz that prominently featured Mr. Trump’s backing, but he held few public events and skipped all four Republican primary debates..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-ok2gjs{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-ok2gjs a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.But while Mr. Trump won North Carolina twice, his victory two years ago was by fewer than 75,000 votes out of 5.5 million ballots cast.To like Mr. Trump is to love him, while disapproval is often on par with disdain.Bridget Bennett for The New York TimesAt a rally on Sept. 23 in Wilmington, N.C., Mr. Trump’s first event in the state during the general election, Mr. Budd teased a potential third Trump presidential campaign in 2024.“He made America great, and who knows, folks?” Mr. Budd said to thousands of Trump supporters. “He might just do it again.”But when Mr. Budd was asked at his debate on Friday with Cheri Beasley, the Democratic nominee for Senate, whether he wanted Mr. Trump to open another campaign for the White House, he would not say.“I’m going to exclusively focus on this one right now,” Mr. Budd said of his own race. “We have 32 days on this one. Let’s get on the other side of this and let’s have that conversation then.”Mr. Budd also hedged on his support for Mr. Trump’s false claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. Mr. Budd voted to overturn the results after a mob of Trump supporters rioted in the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and signed a letter after the election urging the Justice Department to investigate allegations of voter fraud and other irregularities.In late 2020, Mr. Budd also spread bogus claims that voting machines used in some states came from a company with ties to the liberal billionaire George Soros, according to text messages obtained by CNN that Mr. Budd sent to Mark Meadows, then the White House chief of staff.But during the Friday debate, Mr. Budd said he had voted to overturn the 2020 election in order to “inspire more debate.” Blake Masters won the Republican nomination for Senate in Arizona with the help of Mr. Trump’s endorsement.Rebecca Noble for The New York Times“Debate is healthy for democracy,” Mr. Budd added, without explaining what needed to be debated at the time of the vote. At that point, the Trump campaign had made several unsuccessful court challenges and each state’s Electoral College delegation had already met and cast its ballots.Similarly, in Arizona, Blake Masters won the Republican nomination for Senate with the help of Mr. Trump’s endorsement, which arrived months after Mr. Masters recorded a social media video in which he looked directly into the camera to tell viewers, “I think Trump won in 2020.” At the time, Mr. Trump made clear he was snubbing another Republican candidate who the former president believed had not done enough to support the lie that the election was rigged.But at a debate last week with Senator Mark Kelly, the Democratic incumbent, Mr. Masters agreed that Mr. Biden had been legitimately elected. He said that Mr. Biden had probably won because social media companies suppressed negative news about Hunter Biden, the president’s son.But pressed on whether he thought there had been a problem with the counting of votes in 2020, as Mr. Trump has claimed, Mr. Masters declined.“I haven’t seen evidence of that,” he said.Three days after the debate, Mr. Masters mingled with attendees before a Trump rally in Mesa, Ariz. In a brief interview as he shook hands and posed for pictures, Mr. Masters said he stood by his position on election fraud.Asked which position, Mr. Masters replied, “Both.”“Completely consistent,” he said.Mr. Masters smiled, turned and headed toward the stage where he would soon stand side by side with the former president. More

  • in

    Elecciones EE. UU.: la desinformación en español y otros idiomas

    Cada vez más grupos de verificación de datos multilingües combaten traducciones engañosas, imágenes manipuladas y mentiras que atraviesan plataformas y fronteras.Los rumores sin corroborar y las falsedades se propagaron ampliamente entre las comunidades de migrantes antes de las elecciones presidenciales de 2020. Según los investigadores, mientras se aproximan las elecciones de mitad de mandato este fenómeno ha vuelto a presentarse, pero con un giro insidioso: ahora las cuentas de redes sociales que propagan desinformación están dirigidas a audiencias en más idiomas, en más temas y en más plataformas digitales, con poca resistencia por parte de las empresas tecnológicas.En semanas recientes, las publicaciones que exageran los efectos colaterales de la inflación se han dirigido a los estadounidenses de países latinoamericanos que han sido afectados por las decisiones económicas. Las teorías de la conspiración que se propagaron en agosto sobre un plan del Servicio de Rentas Internas y planes de un “ejército clandestino” ocasionaron que aumentaran las menciones en español de “Ejército IRS” junto con “IRS army”, el equivalente en inglés, según el grupo de investigación Zignal.La desinformación que circula en chino en Twitter, YouTube y WeChat sobre los votos que se envían por correo, el currículum escolar y los crímenes de odio “tiene consecuencias peligrosas” para los votantes asiáticoestadounidenses, que constituyen una fuerza política cada vez mayor, según el grupo Asian Americans Advancing Justice.“Definitivamente hay un envío de mensajes hiperdirigido”, dijo Nick Nguyen, confundador de Viet Fact Check, una organización que ofrece explicaciones sobre la desinformación que circula entre vietnamitas estadounidenses. “Aquí es donde la falta de fluidez en inglés puede hacer que las poblaciones sean vulnerables”.Viet Fact Check forma parte de un conjunto cada vez mayor de grupos que intentan contextualizar y desvirtuar los relatos falsos en internet en idiomas que no son el inglés. Factchequeado, un servicio en español con seis meses de antigüedad está analizando traducciones imprecisas, imágenes manipuladas, videos editados de manera engañosa sobre el cateo en Mar-a-Lago y la visita de Nancy Pelosi a Taiwán. Desifact, que se especializa en comunidades estadounidenses con origen en el sur de Asia, empezó en febrero publicando notas explicativas y aclaraciones sobre temas como inmigración y condonación de deuda estudiantil en hindi, bengalí y tamil.Viet Fact Check es uno de los grupos que está tratando de contrarrestar los relatos falsos en internet en idiomas que no son el inglés, pero puede ser difícil seguir el ritmo de la avalancha de información errónea.Jim Wilson/The New York TimesPero los verificadores multilingües dicen que no se dan abasto ante la avalancha de falsedades que proliferan en internet. Han pedido a las grandes plataformas de medios, como Facebook y YouTube, para que prioricen más los esfuerzos en otros idiomas, tal como harían con la desinformación en inglés.“Con la desinformación en español, sentimos que estamos luchando contra un gigante”, dijo Tamoa Calzadilla, la editora responsable de Factchequedo y exlíder de la operación de verificación de Univisión. “Es frustrante porque estamos intentando hacer algo y necesitamos apoyo de las plataformas; estamos haciendo nuestro trabajo pero los gigantes tecnológicos pueden hacer más”.Las empresas de redes sociales dijeron que moderaban el contenido o brindaban verificación de datos en muchos idiomas: más de 70 para TikTok y más de 60 para Meta. YouTube, dijo que tenía más de 20.000 personas que revisaban y retiraban información falsa, incluyendo en mandarín y español; TikTok dijo que tenía miles. Las empresas no quisieron comentar cuántos empleados trabajaban en idiomas distintos al inglés.TikTok ha traducido un centro de información sobre las elecciones de mitad de mandato en su aplicación a más de 45 idiomas. Twitter tiene un centro similar sobre las elecciones disponible en inglés y en español, junto con palabras clave que desmienten y “pre-desmienten” la desinformación en distintos idiomas, una técnica que en inglés se conoce como pre-bunk. Meta dijo que había invertido en iniciativas como servicios de verificación de datos en WhatsApp antes de las elecciones y que mostraría notificaciones relacionadas con la votación, tanto en inglés como en un segundo idioma, según la actividad del usuario.Las empresas también mencionaron mejoras más amplias. Meta dijo que sus modelos de predicción de desinformación en español para Estados Unidos ahora operaban a la par que sus modelos en inglés y que había aumentado significativamente la cantidad de contenido en español que se envía a los verificadores de datos para su revisión. Twitter dijo que sus etiquetas contextuales recién reformuladas, que se traducen según los ajustes de idioma de los usuarios, habían ayudado a reducir la interacción con la información errónea. YouTube afirmó que los paneles de información ahora aparecían en distintos idiomas para varios resultados de búsqueda y videos. También destaca el contenido de fuentes de noticias aprobadas en idiomas distintos al inglés según las preferencias de idioma y las búsquedas de los usuarios, indicó la empresa.Tamoa Calzadilla es la directora editorial de Factchequeado, una organización dedicada a examinar las traducciones engañosas al español.Eva Marie Uzcategui para The New York TimesPero hay preocupación entre los investigadores por el efecto que la desinformación que no está en inglés pueda tener en las votaciones de noviembre, al decir que las mentiras y los rumores en otros idiomas siguen permeando. Un informe difundido el lunes del grupo de vigilancia Media Matters encontró 40 videos en español en Youtube que impulsan información errónea sobre las elecciones estadounidenses, entre ella la afirmación falsa de que a Estados Unidos entraban papeletas de votación fraudulentas procedentes de China y México.Expertos en desinformación, junto con algunos funcionarios electos, han presionado a plataformas de redes sociales para emprender más acciones y tener mayor transparencia.Este año, el Caucus Hispano del Congreso impulsó a Meta, TikTok, YouTube y Twitter a reunirse con sus principales ejecutivos para discutir la difusión de información falsa en español. YouTube puso a disposición a su directora ejecutiva, Susan Wojcicki; TikTok y Twitter enviaron a otros ejecutivos. El comité y Meta no pudieron agendar una reunión, y Meta dijo que planeaba presentar por escrito un comunicado.Un ejemplo del tipo de publicación que Factchequeado intenta desacreditar se ve en la computadora de Calzadilla. La organización puso un sello que dice “Falso” sobre esta imagen engañosa.Eva Marie Uzcategui para The New York TimesEn enero, la International Fact-Checking Network de Poynter envió una carta abierta a YouTube en la describía la facilidad con la que la información falsa fluía a través de las fronteras en la plataforma. Los investigadores han dicho que, a menudo, el mismo relato surge en diferentes sitios en distintos países y luego pasa por un proceso de polinización cruzada o transculturación en un círculo vicioso que hace que parezca más verosímil. Como argumentó un verificador, es más probable que una persona que quiere migrar confíe en una teoría de conspiración compartida tanto por su madre en El Salvador como por su amigo en San Francisco.La información errónea también puede hacer lo que los investigadores llaman salto de plataforma: originarse en inglés en redes marginales como Truth Social o Gab y después surgir en sitios más convencionales, en un idioma diferente o, a veces, con una traducción engañosa.Recientemente, Alethea Group, que ayuda a las corporaciones a protegerse contra la desinformación, analizó siete canales de YouTube con sede en Colombia pero que parecían estar dirigidos a hispanohablantes conservadores que viven o están vinculados a Estados Unidos. Los investigadores encontraron que, con frecuencia, los canales usaban relatos falsos o engañosos de medios conservadores o de medios propiedad de Estados extranjeros, las circulaban en español en YouTube y, en ocasiones, después enfocaban a las audiencias en plataformas como Twitter y Telegram, donde el contenido traducido seguía difundiéndose. A veces, los operadores del canal intentaron monetizar los videos con anuncios o solicitudes de donaciones o suscripciones.Una publicación traducida al español en Telegram repitió la afirmación falsa del expresidente Donald Trump de que los documentos fueron tirados en el suelo al azar.Althea descubrió una cuenta con más de 300.000 suscriptores que reutilizaba y traducía teorías sin sustento de que el FBI había plantado documentos deliberadamente en Mar-a-Lago para incriminar al expresidente estadounidense Donald J. Trump, según el informe. El título de un video era “S4LE LA V3RDAD” en lugar de “sale la verdad”, un posible intento de sortear a los moderadores de YouTube, creen los investigadores de Alethea. Otros investigadores han descubierto cuentas, que ya habían sido canceladas por algunas plataformas debido a la violación de sus pautas de desinformación, que reaparecieron con diferentes nombres.Dominik A. Stecula, un profesor asistente de ciencias políticas en la Universidad Estatal de Colorado y quien migró de Polonia, atribuye en parte la difusión de información falsa multilingüe en línea al lento ocaso de los medios de comunicación étnicos y locales que cubren temas comunitarios.“La gente no quiere pagar por el contenido y, como resultado, muchas de estas instituciones se están desmoronando”, dijo Stecula. “Lo que los remplaza es un tipo en Arizona con una cámara de alta definición y un micrófono”.Stecula observó que la moderación se complica por los matices culturales y las diferentes preferencias de comunicación y explicó que mientras que los inmigrantes de Asia tienden a favorecer WhatsApp, la gente de Polonia se inclina más hacia Facebook.Algunos expertos, que permanecen escépticos ante la posibilidad de que toda la desinformación en distintos idiomas pueda ser retirada, más bien impulsan otras formas de limitar la difusión. El año pasado, Twitter probó una función que permitía que algunos expertos en Estados Unidos, Corea del Sur y Australia identificaran tuits como engañosos.Evelyn Pérez-Verdía, la jefa de estrategia de la consultora We Are Más, en el sur de Florida, calcula que decenas de miles de personas siguen canales en español en Telegram que promueven las teorías de la conspiración de QAnon. Dijo que supo de un grupo, con casi 8000 suscriptores, por su estilista, quien es colombiano-estadounidense.Dijo que esos grupos han sido “muy inteligentes en asegurarse de que el mensaje se adapte a la cultura y subcultura”, a veces al utilizar símbolos como el puño levantado, que para los jóvenes nacidos en Estados Unidos puede representar esperanza y solidaridad pero a los inmigrantes de mayor edad les puede recordar a las dictaduras de izquierda latinoamericanas. Las publicaciones han combinado el sentir anticomunista con la retórica conspirativa de QAnon, y llaman al presidente Biden la “Lagartija” o se refieren a su partido como “Demoniocratas”.“No se trata solo de información errónea o desinformación, también debe existir la responsabilidad de comprender que las palabras y los símbolos significan cosas diferentes para otras comunidades”, dijo Pérez-Verdía. “No importa si eres de Vietnam o de Colombia, la mayoría de la gente ve el prisma de la política de nuestro país a través del prisma de la política de ellos”.Tiffany Hsu es reportera de tecnología y cubre desinformación e información falsa. @tiffkhsu More

  • in

    Misinformation Swirls in Non-English Languages Ahead of Midterms

    Unsubstantiated rumors and outright falsehoods spread widely in immigrant communities ahead of the presidential election in 2020. That is happening again in the run-up to this year’s midterm elections, researchers say, but with an insidious twist: The social media accounts pushing misinformation are now targeting audiences in more languages on more topics and across more digital platforms, with scant resistance from social media companies.In recent weeks, posts exaggerating the fallout from inflation have been aimed at Americans from Latin American countries that have been crippled by poor economic management. Conspiracy theories that spread in August about the Internal Revenue Service’s plans for a “shadow army” led mentions of “Ejército IRS” to surge alongside “IRS army,” its equivalent in English, according to the research group Zignal.Misinformation swirling in Chinese on Twitter, YouTube and WeChat about mail-in ballots, school curriculums and hate crimes “has dangerous implications” this year for Asian American voters, who are growing as a political force, according to the advocacy group Asian Americans Advancing Justice.“There’s definitely a hyper-targeting of messaging,” said Nick Nguyen, a co-founder of Viet Fact Check, a group that offers explanations about misinformation circulating among Vietnamese Americans. “This is where a lack of English-language fluency can make populations vulnerable.”Viet Fact Check is among a growing number of groups trying to contextualize and debunk false online narratives in languages other than English. Factchequeado, a six-month-old Spanish-language service, is examining inaccurate translations, manipulated images and misleadingly edited videos about the search of Mar-a-Lago and Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan. Desifacts, which focuses on South Asian American communities, began publishing explainers and clarifications about topics such as immigration and student debt relief in Hindi, Bengali and Tamil in February.Viet Fact Check is among a growing number of groups trying to battle false online narratives in non-English languages, but it can be hard to keep up with the flood of misinformation.Jim Wilson/The New York TimesBut the multilingual fact checkers say they cannot keep pace with the deluge of falsehoods online. They have called on the big social media platforms, like Facebook and YouTube, to do more for efforts in other languages as they would for misinformation in English.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsWith the primaries over, both parties are shifting their focus to the general election on Nov. 8.The Final Stretch: With less than one month until Election Day, Republicans remain favored to take over the House, but momentum in the pitched battle for the Senate has seesawed back and forth.A Surprising Battleground: New York has emerged from a haywire redistricting cycle as perhaps the most consequential congressional battleground in the country. For Democrats, the uncertainty is particularly jarring.Pennsylvania Governor’s Race: Attacks by Doug Mastriano, the G.O.P. nominee, on the Jewish school where Josh Shapiro, the Democratic candidate, sends his children have set off an outcry about antisemitic signaling.Herschel Walker: The Republican Senate nominee in Georgia reportedly paid for an ex-girlfriend’s abortion, but some conservative Christians have learned to tolerate the behavior of those who advance their cause.“With mis- and disinformation in Spanish, we feel like we are fighting a giant,” said Tamoa Calzadilla, Factchequeado’s managing editor and the former head of Univision’s fact-checking operation. “It’s frustrating because we are trying to do something, and we need support from the platforms — we are doing our work, but Big Tech can do more.”The social media companies said they moderated content or provided fact-checks in many languages: more than 70 languages for TikTok, and more than 60 for Meta, which owns Facebook. YouTube said it had more than 20,000 people reviewing and removing misinformation, including in languages such as Mandarin and Spanish; TikTok said it had thousands. The companies declined to say how many employees were doing work in languages other than English.TikTok has translated a midterms information hub on its app into more than 45 languages. Twitter has a similar elections center available in English and Spanish, along with prompts that debunk and “pre-bunk” misinformation in different languages. Meta said that it had invested in initiatives such as Spanish fact-checking services on WhatsApp in preparation for the elections and that it would show voting-related notifications in both English and a second language based on users’ activity.The companies also cited broader improvements. Meta said its Spanish misinformation prediction models in the United States were now working on a par with its English-language models and had significantly increased the amount of Spanish content sent to fact checkers for review. Twitter said its newly redesigned contextual labels, which are translated based on users’ language settings, had helped shrink engagement with misinformation. YouTube said information panels now appeared in different languages for certain search results and videos. It also highlights content from vetted non-English news sources based on users’ language settings and search queries, the company said.Tamoa Calzadilla is the managing editor of Factchequeado, an organization dedicated to examining inaccurate Spanish translations. Eva Marie Uzcategui for The New York TimesBut researchers worry about the effect of non-English misinformation on the coming vote, saying lies and rumors in other languages continue to seep through. A report released Monday from the watchdog group Media Matters found 40 Spanish-language videos on YouTube that advanced misinformation about U.S. elections, including the false notion that fraudulent ballots were coming into the United States from China and Mexico.Some disinformation experts, along with some elected officials, have pressed the social platforms for more action and transparency.This year, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus pushed Meta, TikTok, YouTube and Twitter for meetings with their top executives to discuss the spread of misinformation in Spanish. YouTube made its chief executive, Susan Wojcicki, available; TikTok and Twitter sent other executives. The caucus and Meta were unable to schedule a meeting, and Meta said it planned to instead submit a written update.An example of the kind of post Factchequeado seeks to debunk, shown on Ms. Calzadilla’s laptop. The organization placed a stamp that reads “Falso” over this misleading image.Eva Marie Uzcategui for The New York TimesThe International Fact-Checking Network at Poynter sent an open letter to YouTube in January, describing the ease with which misinformation on the platform was flowing across borders. Researchers have said the same narrative often emerges on different sites in different countries, and then cross-pollinates in a feedback loop that makes it seem more believable. As one fact checker argued, an immigrant is more likely to trust a conspiracy theory voiced by both the person’s mother in El Salvador and a friend in San Francisco.Misinformation can also do what researchers call platform-jump — originate in English on fringe services like Truth Social or Gab and then emerge later on more mainstream sites, presented in a different language or sometimes with a misleading translation attached.Alethea Group, which helps corporations guard against disinformation, recently looked at seven YouTube channels that were based in Colombia but appeared to target conservative Spanish speakers living in or tied to the United States. Researchers found that the channels often took false or misleading narratives from conservative or foreign state media, repeated it on YouTube in Spanish, and then sometimes pointed viewers to platforms like Twitter and Telegram, where the translated content continued to spread. Sometimes, the channel operators tried to monetize the videos through ads or requests for donations or subscriptions.Alethea found that one account with more than 300,000 subscribers repurposed and translated existing unsubstantiated narratives that the F.B.I. had deliberately planted documents at Mar-a-Lago to entrap former President Donald J. Trump, according to the report. The title of one video was “S4LE LA V3RDAD” instead of “sale la verdad” (the truth comes out), which Alethea researchers believe may have been a potential attempt to evade YouTube moderators. Other researchers have discovered accounts, previously terminated by platforms for violating misinformation guidelines, that reincarnated under different aliases.A post translated into Spanish on Telegram repeated former President Donald J. Trump’s false claim that documents were thrown haphazardly on the floor.Dominik A. Stecula, an assistant professor of political science at Colorado State University and an immigrant from Poland, attributed the spread of multilingual misinformation online in part to the slow decline of local ethnic media outlets covering community issues.“People don’t want to pay for content, and as a result, a lot of these institutions are falling apart,” Mr. Stecula said. “What replaces them is just some dude in Arizona with a high-definition camera and a microphone.”Mr. Stecula noted how moderation was complicated by cultural nuances and diverse communication preferences, explaining that while immigrants from Asia tend to prefer WhatsApp, people from Poland often gravitate toward Facebook.Some experts, skeptical that all multilingual misinformation can be removed, push instead for other ways to limit amplification. Last year, Twitter tested a feature that allowed some users in the United States, South Korea and Australia to flag tweets as misleading.Evelyn Pérez-Verdía, the head of strategy at the consulting firm We Are Más, in South Florida, estimated that tens of thousands of people followed Spanish-language channels on Telegram that promote the QAnon conspiracy theory. She said she had learned about one group, with nearly 8,000 subscribers, from her Colombian American hairstylist.She said such groups have been “very smart to make sure the message is tailored based on culture and subculture,” sometimes exploiting symbols like the raised fist, which can represent hope and solidarity to younger people born in the United States while reminding older immigrants of leftist Latin American dictatorships. Posts have blended anti-communist sentiment with conspiratorial QAnon language, calling President Biden “el Lagartija” (the Lizard) while describing his party as “Demoniocratas” (Demon-Democrats).“It’s not only about misinformation or disinformation — there also needs to be a responsibility to understand that words and symbols mean different things to other communities,” Ms. Pérez-Verdía said. “It doesn’t matter if you’re from Vietnam or from Colombia — most people see the prism of the politics of our nation through the prism of the politics of theirs.” More