Rumors and Misinformation

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      How Talk Radio Unites Ron Johnson and His Wisconsin Voters

      by

      MILWAUKEE — Other senators spend countless hours promoting their political messages and personal brands on cable news and social media.Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin simply calls up a receptive talk radio host — and then another, and then another.Since the beginning of this year, Mr. Johnson has made at least 325 appearances on talk radio shows, including 186 hits in Wisconsin. In the Senate, he has spent about four and a half hours speaking in committees and floor speeches. On the radio, listening to all of his appearances would take more than four full days.It is a staggering investment of time by a United States senator. And it is paying off.Long thought to be this year’s most endangered Republican in the chamber because of his low approval ratings, Mr. Johnson has opened up a lead in the polls over his Democratic challenger, Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes. Democrats would dearly love for Mr. Barnes to win, both because Senate control could hang on the race and because Mr. Johnson, one of the nation’s leading purveyors of misinformation, has been the bane of Wisconsin liberals’ existence for a dozen years.But they are finding that it’s not so easy to oust Mr. Johnson, an analog creature in the modern digital world, whose political resilience stems in great part from an omnipresence on the radio airwaves that has made him nearly as much a fixture of Wisconsin as cheese curds, beer and the Green Bay Packers.Mr. Johnson, 67, has refined an old-school playbook of communicating with Republican base voters who listen to hours of conservative talk radio a week, a function of the medium’s unique power in Wisconsin’s media environment and of his own political upbringing as a figure endorsed and promoted by the state’s leading right-wing talkers.Radio-bred reality is quick to spread through Republican politics in Wisconsin.Taylor Glascock for The New York Times“Were it not for talk radio, I don’t think conservatism would have a chance,” Mr. Johnson said.Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York TimesThe time on the radio serves as a direct line to Mr. Johnson’s political base. Hosts who share his worldview rarely challenge him on conservative talking points about elections, public health or his past statements. Listening on the other end is a large, devoted audience that has little trust in the state’s shrinking newspapers and television stations.“Talk radio is crucial to the conservative movement, because we don’t have the mainstream media on our side,” Mr. Johnson said in a recent interview. “Were it not for talk radio, I don’t think conservatism would have a chance. We’d be overwhelmed by the liberal media.”That radio-bred reality is quick to spread through Republican politics here. Republican elected officials on the receiving end of anger on talk radio will hear about it quickly — and most soon find a way back into the hosts’ good graces.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsElection Day is Tuesday, Nov. 8.Bracing for a Red Wave: Republicans were already favored to flip the House. Now they are looking to run up the score by vying for seats in deep-blue states.Pennsylvania Senate Race: The debate performance by Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, who is still recovering from a stroke, has thrust questions of health to the center of the pivotal race and raised Democratic anxieties.G.O.P. Inflation Plans: Republicans are riding a wave of anger over inflation as they seek to recapture Congress, but few economists expect their proposals to bring down rising prices.Polling Analysis: If these poll results keep up, everything from a Democratic hold in the Senate and a narrow House majority to a total G.O.P. rout becomes imaginable, writes Nate Cohn, The Times’s chief political analyst.“You can pick any issue you want, but whatever the hot topic on talk radio is, you’ll hear it come up,” said Mayor Rohn Bishop of Waupun, Wis., who until last year was the chairman of the Republican Party in Fond du Lac County.Listening to Mr. Johnson on Wisconsin’s radio airwaves can serve as a tour into a universe in which the state’s Democrats are constantly scheming to steal elections; the F.B.I. is out to get the senator; and Mr. Barnes, his Democratic opponent, is an anti-American zealot who “thinks our national parks are racist” — an accusation Mr. Johnson made more than a dozen times in September alone.Other conspiracy theories and misinformation abound. Since the beginning of September, he has claimed the F.B.I. tried to rig the 2016 election for Hillary Clinton, then “not only corrupted the 2020 election, they’re corrupting the 2022 election.” He has promoted hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for Covid and has suggested that Democrats planned the Capitol riot.Mr. Johnson on Capitol Hill this year with Ted Cruz, a far more digitally inclined Republican senator.Michael A. McCoy for The New York TimesIn the interview, Mr. Johnson said he made no apologies for any of his statements that have departed from the truth.“Everything I’ve been saying is proven out to be true,” he said. “There’s not one thing that I’ve said about Covid that wasn’t true, including gargling.”The senator was referring to a comment he made at a town-hall meeting in December suggesting that a “standard gargle, mouthwash, has been proven to kill the coronavirus.” Afterward, he defended his stance on a tour of local radio shows. In the recent interview with The New York Times, Mr. Johnson offered to provide evidence that he was right. So far, he has not done so..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.Wisconsin Democrats long ago decided not to make Mr. Johnson’s false assertions the focus of their campaign to unseat him. In part, that’s because he has been making them for so long that they have become part of the firmament of the state’s politics.“In a rural state, people are listening to this,” said Representative Mark Pocan, a Democrat from Madison who has spent years sparring with Mr. Johnson. “Those no longer become viewpoints. They become facts and they become repeated facts and they’re part of allegedly what’s reality here.”The shows have attracted a legion of loyal listeners across Wisconsin, though the public Nielsen radio station ratings do not report how many people are tuned in at specific times. Mr. Johnson appears on shows throughout the state, from the 50,000-watt station in Milwaukee’s 1.5-million listener market to stations with tiny signals in Wausau and programs syndicated on public radio stations across Wisconsin.Ryan Seaman, 31, who works in construction, said he was a frequent caller to conservative talk radio shows in Milwaukee, where he lives.“They try to offer perspective on both sides without really giving too much of their input,” Mr. Seaman said. “It’s not like they’re trying to force something down on you. That’s how I think the news should be. It should be fair, but accurate about what’s going on.”Shawn Kelly, a Republican retiree from Fond du Lac who in 2013 was appointed as his county’s register of deeds by Gov. Scott Walker, said what he heard on local talk radio was often “the exact opposite” from what he saw on television or read in the newspapers.“I don’t think there is a middle-of-the-road news organization around here,” Mr. Kelly said.Jerry Bader was a conservative talk show host who refused to support Donald J. Trump. Now, he is the minister of a church that serves Green Bay’s poor and homeless.Taylor Glascock for The New York Times“I wasn’t prepared for what happened to the conservative landscape,” Mr. Bader said.Taylor Glascock for The New York TimesMr. Johnson’s relationship with Wisconsin’s conservative talk radio hosts dates to the dawn of his political career.In early 2010, when he was a plastics executive unknown in Wisconsin politics, he gave a speech at a Tea Party rally. An attendee soon helped introduce him to Charlie Sykes, then the most powerful conservative talk radio host in the state.“I said, ‘Well, how would you describe yourself?’” Mr. Sykes said. “Either that day or the next day, he sent me a picture of his bedside table, which was stacked up with Wall Street Journals. His point was, ‘I’m a Wall Street Journal editorial page conservative.’”Mr. Sykes became the single biggest promoter of Mr. Johnson’s 2010 campaign for Senate. He read parts of Mr. Johnson’s speech during his show the next week, and Mr. Johnson sent a recording in which Mr. Sykes praised him to the chairs of the Republican Party in each of the state’s 72 counties.Not long after, Mr. Johnson won the endorsement of the Republican Party of Wisconsin at its annual convention — a coup for someone with just a few weeks of political experience.Mr. Johnson, right, in 2018. His rise to prominence began eight years earlier, when, as a plastics executive unknown in Wisconsin politics, he gave a speech at a Tea Party rally. Erin Schaff for The New York TimesMr. Sykes never stopped promoting Mr. Johnson’s candidacy, and Republican voters followed. After Mr. Johnson won and took office, the two had a standing off-air call for 40 minutes each week in which the senator sought feedback on how he was doing and the mood of his political base.In a 2011 interview with Peggy Noonan of The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Johnson said Mr. Sykes’s promotion was “the reason I’m a U.S. senator.”Conservative talk radio hosts in Wisconsin often move as a bloc, and Mr. Johnson has moved with them. In the 2016 presidential primary, all of the state’s major radio hosts — and all but one of the Republicans in the State Legislature — opposed Donald J. Trump’s candidacy.But once Mr. Trump was the nominee, the Republican base quickly rallied behind him, and so did Mr. Johnson. The radio show hosts who didn’t would soon learn the consequences. Mr. Sykes, who once lectured Mr. Trump on air about civility, announced before Mr. Trump won the general election that he was leaving his show.In Green Bay, Jerry Bader spoke with Mr. Johnson a few times a month on a radio show he hosted for 14 years that, he said, was “about everything from a conservative worldview.”In a recent interview, Mr. Bader said he couldn’t recall ever disagreeing with Mr. Johnson on the air — even though Mr. Bader served as the M.C. at a rally for Senator Ted Cruz during the 2016 primary and steadfastly opposed Mr. Trump even after the general election.Mr. Bader said his ratings dipped after Mr. Trump took office. Callers to the show were “very vehement” in their anger at him. When he was eventually fired in 2018, he said, the station’s management told him it was because he wouldn’t support Mr. Trump. A number of the Republican officials who had been regulars on his show called to offer condolences, but Mr. Bader said he never heard again from Mr. Johnson.“I wasn’t prepared for what happened to the conservative landscape,” said Mr. Bader, who is now the minister of a Green Bay church that serves the city’s poor and homeless. These days, he prefers to ignore politics.Mr. Bader’s time slot soon went to Joe Giganti, a pro-Trump host. Mr. Johnson is a regular guest, appearing on the show 18 times this year. In an interview, Mr. Giganti said that not only had he never disagreed with Mr. Johnson on the air, but that he also shared his skepticism on issues including Covid vaccines, the F.B.I.’s conduct and Wisconsin’s system of voting.Mr. Giganti’s show has been a success thanks in part to Mr. Johnson, who the host says helps drive ratings higher. He is now syndicated in two other Wisconsin markets and five more across the country — all places where he promulgates Mr. Johnson’s false theories.“There are,” Mr. Giganti said, “plenty of unanswered questions from the 2020 election.” More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      How Mike Lindell’s Pillow Business Propels the Election Denial Movement

      by

      Three days after federal agents seized his cellphone as part of an investigation into voting machine tampering, Mike Lindell seemed energized and ready to sell pillows.He strode onstage at a rally of Trump supporters in western Idaho, defiantly waving a cellphone. Eric Trump greeted him with a hug.“When they start attacking the MyPillow guy,” the former president’s son declared, “you know we have a large problem in this country.”Mr. Lindell, smiling broadly in a blue suit and red tie, leaned into the mic. “Use promo code ‘FBI’ to save up to 66 percent!” he yelled, raising his fist in the air. The crowd roared its approval.And pillows were sold. On Sept. 14, the day after Mr. Lindell’s encounter with the F.B.I., daily direct sales at his bedding business, MyPillow Inc., jumped to nearly $1 million, from $700,000 the day before, according to Mr. Lindell. Propelled by a blizzard of promotions, memes and interviews on right-wing media outlets, sales remained elevated for two days.American entrepreneurs have long mixed their business and political interests. But no one in recent memory has fused the two quite as completely as Mr. Lindell. In less than two years, the infomercial pitchman has transformed his company into an engine of the election denial movement, using his personal wealth and advertising dollars to propel the falsehood that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald J. Trump.In the process, Mr. Lindell has secured a platform for his conspiracy theories — and a devoted base of consumers culled from the believers.By his account, Mr. Lindell has spent as much as $40 million on conferences, activist networks, a digital media platform, legal battles and researchers that promote his theory of the case — the particularly outlandish conspiracy theory that the election was stolen through a complex, global plot to hack into voting machines.But a New York Times analysis of advertising data, along with interviews with media executives and personalities, reveal that Mr. Lindell’s influence goes beyond funding activism: He is now at the heart of the right-wing media landscape.Already the largest single advertiser on Fox News’s right-wing opinion prime-time lineup, according to data from the media analytics firm iSpot.tv, MyPillow has since early last year become a critical financial supporter of an expanding universe of right-wing podcasters and influencers, many of whom keep election misinformation coursing through the daily discourse.Mr. Lindell’s promotion of election conspiracy theories have cost him sales at mainstream retailers, he says.Erin Schaff/The New York TimesHis chief vehicle for that support is a sprawling system of promo codes handed out to podcasters, pundits and activists, giving them a stake in each sale and incentive to promote Mr. Lindell’s products — and, in the process, his election theories.Podcasters and advertising executives say the arrangement has cemented Mr. Lindell’s influence. Stephen K. Bannon, the former Trump adviser whose “War Room” podcast ranks among the top news shows on Apple, described him in an interview as “the most significant financier in all of conservative media.” Mr. Bannon last year devoted as much as a third of the promotional time on his podcast to MyPillow, although that share has fallen since, according to an analysis by the analytics firm Magellan AI.Mr. Lindell’s message is being received. He has called on his followers to find evidence to back up his claims, and they have inundated election officials with requests for voting records, audits and even access to voting machines. Mr. Lindell and his network of allies are mobilizing right-wing activists to act as self-styled election vigilantes searching for evidence of misconduct in the midterm elections.The Spread of Misinformation and FalsehoodsElection Fraud Claims: A new report says that major social media companies continue to fuel false conspiracies about election fraud despite promises to combat misinformation ahead of the midterm elections.Russian Falsehoods: Kremlin conspiracy theories blaming the West for disrupting the global food supply have bled into right-wing chat rooms and mainstream conservative news media in the United States.Media Literacy Efforts: As young people spend more time online, educators are increasingly trying to offer students tools and strategies to protect themselves from false narratives.Global Threat: New research shows that nearly three-quarters of respondents across 19 countries with advanced economies are very concerned about false information online.Some critics — including the voting machine companies that have sued him for defamation, libel and slander — charge that Mr. Lindell’s operation is simply an enormous grift. “The lie sells pillows,” lawyers for Dominion Voting Systems argued in a still-pending $1.3 billion lawsuit filed against Mr. Lindell last year.Mr. Lindell disputes the allegations and insists that his activism has lost him money.“I didn’t do this to make a profit,” he told The Times in an interview. “I did it to save our country.” He said he pours “every dime I make” into his cause.It is difficult to assess that claim. As a privately held company, MyPillow does not disclose financial information and Mr. Lindell has frequently given conflicting accounts about his spending.Mr. Lindell has spent nearly $80 million on advertising on Fox News’s prime-time lineup of opinion shows since accelerating his activism in January 2021, according to estimates by iSpot.TV. His advertising on podcasts in that same period is valued at more than $10 million, according to estimates from Magellan AI. In addition to the tens of millions he says he has spent on activism and lawsuits, Mr. Lindell has given $200,000 to state and federal political action committees since January 2021, public records show.That investment has built a brand loyalty that goes well beyond appreciation for a rectangle of shredded foam that lists for $49.98 (but sells for as low as $19.98 with a promo code).His customers are “supporting a guy they believe shares their worldview,” said Benjamin Pratt, an advertising executive who focuses on conservative media. They say, said Mr. Pratt, “we’re going to support him, he’s being attacked and they’re trying to silence him. OK, we’ll buy more pillows.”Mr. Lindell says he was disengaged from politics until meeting Donald Trump in 2016. Jordan Vonderhaar For The New York Times/Getty Images North AmericaFinding a MarketMr. Lindell, a 61-year-old recovering crack cocaine and gambling addict who previously managed a string of bars in suburban Minneapolis, says he started MyPillow in 2004 after receiving the idea in a dream.He initially sold his signature pillows directly, through homespun infomercials and in booths at home and garden shows, as well as through cut-rate newspaper ads and radio spots. He perfected a relentlessly high-energy sales pitch. In an effort to squeeze as much value as possible out of these advertising dollars, he began pairing each ad with a distinct promotional code that would allow him to track its performance in inducing direct sales.By 2019, he told The Times, the company had annual revenues of over $300 million. He had also expanded to more conventional distribution deals with large retailers like Walmart and Bed Bath & Beyond.MyPillow’s work force, which numbered just 300 in 2012, had grown to more than 1,500 by 2018, according to legal filings, and the company reported having sold more than 40 million pillows since its founding. As he built his company, Mr. Lindell says, he was disengaged from politics — until being called to a meeting with Mr. Trump in 2016, where the then-candidate expressed an interest in MyPillow’s American manufacturing operations. Mr. Lindell became an ardent Trump supporter.In early 2021, he became an integral part of a growing movement to somehow retroactively reverse Mr. Trump’s defeat. On Jan. 15 of that year he was seen entering the White House with a sheaf of papers on which the phrase “martial law” was visible. (Mr. Lindell has insisted he was merely delivering the papers and had not read them.).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.Within days, national retailers carrying MyPillow products dropped the brand. But Mr. Lindell only plunged deeper into election denial, seizing on fanciful theories about “algorithms” manufacturing votes and China hacking into machines.In an interview, Mr. Lindell said losing the big box stores has cost MyPillow 80 percent of its retail sales, which had accounted for a little less than half of its overall sales.MyPillow kept its steady presence on Fox News, which does not promote his election theories. So far this year, its spots have accounted for nearly 8 percent of all ad impressions — more than any other outside advertiser — on the network’s prime-time shows hosted by Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham, according to iSpot.tv. MyPillow’s strategy of saturating one network with ads, even at risk of annoying viewers, is “an anomaly in television,” Jason Damata, an analyst for iSpot.tv.Starting in early 2021, the company moved aggressively into podcast advertising. In the first quarter of this year, the number of podcasts MyPillow supported jumped to 45, from 29, while the number of spots it aired nearly doubled to more than 1,200, according to Magellan AI, which monitors advertising on the top 3,000 podcasts weekly.Joe Schmieg, MyPillow’s vice president for sales and marketing, said the company’s executives targeted podcasts popular with Christian audiences and conservative women in their 40s and 50s. “They’re typically the ones that are buyers,” he said. It offered the outlets a dedicated promotional code and a share — 25 percent or more — of all sales linked to that code. (Mr. Lindell disputed that the company directly targeted a conservative audience.)The strategy partly offset the loss of the chain stores, Mr. Schmieg said. According to Mr. Lindell, the company’s overall sales dipped only 10 percent in 2021 — though they have fallen further since losing its contract to sell in Walmart stores this year. (Mr. Lindell provided no documentation to support the numbers.)Mr. Lindell, center, with the far-right agitator Jack Posobiec, left, and Stephen Bannon, a former Trump adviser, at a conference this year.Emil Lippe for The New York TimesBuying a MegaphoneThe strategic shift to podcasts put Mr. Lindell on the vanguard of right-leaning media. In this decentralized ecosystem, where audience sizes vary widely and programming spans from the conventionally conservative to the conspiratorial fringe, MyPillow promotions are ubiquitous.A Times analysis that identified 125 codes found the list of affiliates included well-known figures like Glenn Beck and Dan Bongino, whose daily shows are both among Apple’s top 50 news podcasts in the country, as well as Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s former lawyer.Jack Posobiec, the far-right agitator known for promoting the disinformation campaign “Pizzagate,” had a code, as did Vincent James Foxx, a media entrepreneur who espouses anti-Semitism and white supremacy.(After The Times asked him about his relationship with Mr. Foxx, Mr. Lindell said he was cutting ties with him — not because of Mr. Foxx’s views but because he said Mr. Foxx had misrepresented the terms of his affiliate deal on his show.) Lines between promotion and politics are blurry on MyPillow’s affiliate podcasts. Mr. Lindell regularly appears as a guest on shows, and even when he doesn’t, his pet theories are present.On a recent episode of BardsFM, a podcast that layers Christian nationalism, anti-vaccine beliefs, QAnon and election denialism, the host, Scott Kesterson called the coming election a “a clown show” that would be stolen via an “algorithm.”In 2022, nearly two-thirds of all advertising minutes on BardsFM have been dedicated to MyPillow, according to data from Magellan AI.“Every dollar you spend at MyPillow helps fund Mike Lindell’s efforts for this nation,” Mr. Kesterson said on his podcast in September. “He’s done that as they’ve tried to destroy his company.”By his account, Mr. Lindell has spent as much as $40 million advancing his election theories.Erin Schaff/The New York TimesUsing His LeverageSome on the right have tried to keep a distance from Mr. Lindell and his far-fetched voting machine theories — either out of fear of legal liability or skepticism. He has not made it easy.At times, he has publicly threatened to withhold advertising support from outlets that he doesn’t see as sufficiently supportive. He once carried through on those threats, pulling MyPillow spots from Fox News for nearly two months last year after the network refused to allow him to advertise one of his conferences.Mr. Bannon, who has often called himself “not a machine guy” and said he doesn’t understand the theories about hacking, nonetheless often features Mr. Lindell on “War Room.” He has twice broadcast from Mr. Lindell’s conferences that convene activists to swap conspiracy theories about election machines. In an interview at one in Springfield, Mo., in August, Mr. Bannon said Mr. Lindell had started to convince him.“I do know the machines have to go,” said Mr. Bannon, who on Friday was sentenced to four months in prison for contempt of Congress.In November 2021, Mr. Lindell threatened to pull his advertising from Salem Media Group, a publicly traded conservative radio and podcast company with a roster that includes Charlie Kirk, a young right-wing commentator, and Jenna Ellis, a former Trump lawyer. Mr. Lindell claimed the company wasn’t sufficiently covering his particular election theories.“You better at least say something because you might not have products to sell at least from MyPillow,” he warned in a broadcast from his own online video site. “You don’t get to have your cake and eat it too. There will be no more MyPillow if you can’t address the election of 2020.”Mr. Lindell backed off the threat after speaking to a Salem executive, according to a person briefed on the conversation. (Salem did not respond to requests for comment, but at the time an executive told The Daily Beast that there was no policy blocking hosts from discussing any topics.)More recently, Salem was eager to promote Mr. Lindell’s encounter with the F.B.I. After Mr. Lindell went public about the investigation, a Salem executive sent an email urging hosts to talk about it on their shows, according to a person familiar with the email. Mr. Lindell’s supporters would want to know and help him, the email said.Soon, many of Salem’s political commentators were discussing the case at length, portraying Mr. Lindell as an innocent businessman unfairly targeted by federal agents. Mr. Lindell also made the rounds on shows himself, slipping in allegations about voting machines.“When you talk about evidence to get rid of machines, we’ve had that for a year and a half,” Mr. Lindell said on Mr. Kirk’s podcast.Mr. Kirk did not discuss voting machines, but told his listeners that he was buying extra sets of MyPillow’s Giza Dreams sheets himself to support Mr. Lindell. He urged his audience to do the same.“Use promo code: ‘Kirk’,” he said.Tina Peters at an event in June with Mr. Lindell in Colorado. She faces charges in an election plot.Daniel Brenner for The New York TimesThe Search for ProofAt MyPillow’s headquarters and factory in the exurbs of Minneapolis, Mr. Lindell’s politics intermingle with his business.In its warehouse, pallets of DVDs of “Absolute Proof,” a feature-length video promoting election conspiracy theories, share floor space with packaged pillows.On a morning last month in Mr. Lindell’s office, a picture of Mr. Trump leaned against a wall, as the executive juggled meetings with company officials and calls from his allies in his election crusade — as well as the lawyers who were crafting his response to the encounter with federal agents the previous week.The investigation involves Tina Peters, the county clerk of Mesa County, Colo., whom state prosecutors have accused of plotting to copy sensitive data from voting machines in an attempt to prove the 2020 election was rigged. Ms. Peters has pleaded not guilty to the state charges. Mr. Lindell, whom prosecutors identified as a potential co-conspirator in a related federal investigation, denies any involvement.He has promoted Ms. Peters and her data. At a conference Mr. Lindell hosted in South Dakota last year, Ms. Peters flew in on Mr. Lindell’s private plane and was celebrated as a hero onstage.Such conferences are a showcase of Mr. Lindell’s organizing power in the movement. At the recent gathering in Springfield, activists from all 50 states, many of whom gather weekly on calls hosted by Mr. Lindell, took turns describing their hunt for evidence of malfeasance in American democracy, notably turning their focus beyond the 2020 election.Activists from Alabama said they had fed fake ballots into machines ahead of the primary election in an attempt to prove how easily they could be tampered with. A county Republican official from Oklahoma urged attendees to be diligent in monitoring voting in midterm elections — even telling them to videotape absentee ballots as they are opened.After hours of presentations, Mr. Lindell bounded onstage: “By the way, if you’re watching from home use that promo code: ‘Truth45’,” he said. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Running an Election in the Heart of Election Denialism

      by

      Asthaa Chaturvedi and Mike Benoist and Dan Powell, Marion Lozano and Listen and follow The DailyApple Podcasts | Spotify | StitcherThis episode contains strong language. Hundreds of candidates on the ballot in November still deny that President Biden won in 2020 — a level of denialism that is fueling harassment and threats toward election workers. Few have experienced those attacks as viscerally as election workers in Arizona. Today, we speak with the top election official in the state’s largest county. On today’s episodeStephen Richer, the recorder of Maricopa County in Arizona. Stephen Richer is the top election official in Maricopa Country, Ariz. Many of the voters in the state doubt the legitimacy of the electoral process.Michael Chow/The Arizona Republic, via Associated PressBackground readingElection officials are on alert as voting begins for midterm elections, the biggest test of the American election system since former President Donald J. Trump’s lies about the 2020 results launched an assault on the democratic process.Over 370 Republican candidates have cast doubt on the 2020 election despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, according to a New York Times investigation.There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here’s how.We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode’s publication. You can find them at the top of the page.The Daily is made by Lisa Tobin, Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, Luke Vander Ploeg, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Dave Shaw, Sydney Harper, Robert Jimison, Mike Benoist, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Rachelle Bonja, Diana Nguyen, Marion Lozano, Corey Schreppel, Anita Badejo, Rob Szypko, Elisheba Ittoop, Chelsea Daniel, Mooj Zadie, Patricia Willens, Rowan Niemisto, Jody Becker, Rikki Novetsky, John Ketchum, Nina Feldman, Will Reid, Carlos Prieto, Sofia Milan, Ben Calhoun and Susan Lee.Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Paula Szuchman, Lisa Tobin, Larissa Anderson, Cliff Levy, Lauren Jackson, Julia Simon, Mahima Chablani, Desiree Ibekwe, Wendy Dorr, Elizabeth Davis-Moorer, Jeffrey Miranda, Renan Borelli, Maddy Masiello and Nell Gallogly. More

    • 63 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Republicans’ Persistent 2020 Election Doubts

      by

      Hundreds of Republicans running for offices this year have questioned the 2020 election.Hundreds of Republicans running for national and statewide offices have questioned or spread misinformation about the 2020 election, in some cases outright denying President Biden’s victory. To understand how thoroughly these views have seeped into American politics, my colleagues Karen Yourish and Danielle Ivory combed through statements from more than 550 Republican candidates. I spoke with them about what they found.Ashley: Why do many Republicans continue to question the 2020 election?Danielle: There are candidates who seem to genuinely believe what they’re saying, and some who probably feel like they have to talk about it. Donald Trump and many of the party’s core supporters have made questioning 2020 a litmus test for Republican candidates.Some Republicans have learned that they can’t drop this issue because there’s pressure from Trump or the people around him. One example is Tim Michels, a candidate for governor in Wisconsin. He said he would not prioritize decertification of the 2020 election, which is not legally possible. Then there was an uproar from Trump’s camp. So Michels started promoting “2000 Mules,” a documentary that purports to show election fraud but is based on an erroneous premise.You put the candidates into different categories: those who openly said the election was stolen and those who questioned the election in other ways. Why distinguish between them?Karen: We wanted to help readers understand the range of ways that candidates are promoting misinformation about 2020. We felt it was incorrect to label all candidates who questioned specific aspects of the election — including many who voted to object to the Electoral College count on Jan. 6 — as “election deniers.” There has been a lot of coverage on the most extreme examples, the people who explicitly say that the election was stolen. But many others cast doubt, often frequently, in ways that might seem more reasonable but are possibly more insidious.What are some of those ways?Karen: A great example is Robert Burns, a New Hampshire House candidate. In a local TV news interview in February, he said he didn’t believe that the “stolen election is a winning issue.” He then went on to say that Trump did not get more votes than Biden, but votes were “absolutely” stolen, without actually saying that the whole election was fraudulent.Another is Senator Mike Lee of Utah, who said on C-SPAN that “President Biden is the president of the United States” but then added that the conspiracy film “2000 Mules” raised “significant questions as to what might have happened” in the election and that those allegations should be investigated.Many candidates have recently taken to promoting an unfounded theory that the media, Facebook and the F.B.I. conspired to interfere in the 2020 election by censoring coverage of a negative news story about Hunter Biden, the president’s son.What surprised you about your findings?Danielle: Falsehoods about the election seem to have staying power that I didn’t expect, and that resilience seems increasingly relevant as we head into the midterm elections. So we thought it was important to separate out more recent statements about the election, almost two years after Donald Trump lost, versus those that were made in 2020 or 2021.What do your findings mean for next month’s midterm elections?Danielle: Hundreds of the candidates we identified as questioning the past presidential election are favored to win their races and take office. They represent a growing consensus in the Republican Party and a potential threat to one of the bedrock principles of democracy — that voters decide elections and candidates accept the results. And we will be interested to see how these candidates react if they do not win.Read the investigation here.Karen Yourish joined The Times in 2013 from The Washington Post. She has read all of Donald Trump’s tweets (twice) and watched more than 1,000 episodes of “Tucker Carlson Tonight.” Danielle Ivory joined The Times in 2013 from Bloomberg News. She has led efforts to collect and analyze data on Covid deaths in nursing homes and Russia’s war strategy in Ukraine.For more“These people are SICK”: Polarizing rhetoric has become entrenched among House Republicans.Some voters have already lost faith in the ability of America’s system of government to represent them.NEWSWar in UkraineMissile damage in Zaporizhzia, Ukraine.Ivor Prickett for The New York TimesRussian forces pounded Ukraine’s power plants with some of the heaviest missile strikes in weeks.Russian authorities have resettled thousands of Ukrainian children in Russia, including some whose relatives want them back.InternationalXi Jinping formally secured another term as head of China’s Communist Party. Follow our updates.What Xi doesn’t say is as revealing as what he does. Key omissions from his messages at the Communist Party congress suggested worry about threats ahead.The former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson returned home yesterday from a vacation abroad, feeding expectations that he would seek another term.Liz Truss’s resignation was a result of the fallout from Brexit and the opposing factions it created among British conservatives, experts said.Hurricane Roslyn is expected to bring high winds and heavy rainfall to west-central Mexico as it makes landfall today.Other Big StoriesCases of the flu and other viruses are returning in the U.S. and could collide with an expected winter rise in Covid infections.New York City will increase the presence of police officers on the subway.FROM OPINIONLiberals must confront the demands of the Trumpist right and the illiberal left, not just denounce them, Ross Douthat argues in his inaugural newsletter. Sign up to receive it.Truss turned out to be a stooge for Boris Johnson, Maureen Dowd writes.The politics of Los Angeles’s affordable housing crisis are terrible. The politics of what’s needed to solve it are worse, Ezra Klein says.New York has a long history of moderate Republican governors. Lee Zeldin is not part of that tradition, The Times’s editorial board writes in its endorsement of Gov. Kathy Hochul.The Sunday question: Has Xi Jinping made China stronger?As he begins his third term as China’s leader, Xi has grown its economy, strengthened its military and made himself its most dominant politician since Mao, Bloomberg Opinion’s editorial board argues. But an economic slowdown, Xi’s disruptive zero-Covid strategy and his increasingly dictatorial rule could threaten those successes, says CNN’s Selina Wang.MORNING READSSkiers made their way up Mount Hood this year.Ruth Fremson for The New York TimesShifting snowmelt: What happens when the Pacific Northwest loses its snow?Something navy? Bold colors, beads and big sleeves at New York Bridal Fashion Week.Breaking up: With Peloton.Sunday routine: A 60-year-old D.J. pretends she’s a tourist in New York.Advice from Wirecutter: Bring these essentials trick-or-treating.BOOKSPaul Newman: His autobiography reveals a new side of “a man we imagined we knew,” the novelist Richard Russo writes for The Times.“The Passenger”: Cormac McCarthy’s novel offers two ways of seeing.Times best sellers: “Down and Out in Paradise,” Charles Leerhsen’s book about Anthony Bourdain, debuted as a hardcover nonfiction best seller. See all our lists here.THE SUNDAY TIMES MAGAZINEStephen Voss for The New York Times.On the cover: The rise of Marjorie Taylor Greene.Katricia Dotson: She was killed by the police. Why were her bones in a museum?Recommendation: Use “y’all,” the most inclusive pronoun.Humbled champions: What we lose when athletes retire on top.Eat: This Salisbury steak is no TV dinner.Read the full issue.THE WEEK AHEADWhat to Watch ForBritain’s Conservative Party plans to select a new prime minister this week.Candidates will meet for debates on several nights this week, including in Florida’s governor’s race tomorrow and Pennsylvania’s Senate matchup on Tuesday.The Trump Organization will face trial on Monday in a New York State Court on tax fraud and other charges.Two Minneapolis officers involved in George Floyd’s death go to trial on Monday on state charges.The W.N.B.A. star Brittney Griner is due in court on Tuesday in Russia to appeal her drug conviction.The deadline for Elon Musk, Tesla’s C.E.O., to complete an acquisition of Twitter is Friday.The World Series begins on Friday. The National League champion, either the San Diego Padres or the Philadelphia Phillies, will face the American League champion, either the Houston Astros or the New York Yankees.What to Cook This WeekLinda Xiao for The New York Times. Food Stylist: Monica Pierini.Cravings are highly personal, Emily Weinstein writes. She shares a few of her own: stuffed shells, roasted chicken with crispy mushrooms and breakfast burritos.NOW TIME TO PLAYHere’s a clue from the Sunday crossword:74 Across: “Mad” figure of fictionTake the news quiz to see how well you followed the week’s headlines.Here’s today’s Spelling Bee. Here’s today’s Wordle. After, use our bot to get better.Thanks for spending part of your weekend with The Times.Matthew Cullen, Lauren Hard, Lauren Jackson, Claire Moses, Ian Prasad Philbrick, Tom Wright-Piersanti and Ashley Wu contributed to The Morning. You can reach the team at themorning@nytimes.com.Sign up here to get this newsletter in your inbox. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      La desinformación es más difícil de combatir en EE. UU.

      by

      La proliferación de redes sociales alternativas ha ayudado a afianzar la información falsa y engañosa como elemento clave de la política estadounidense.La mañana del 8 de julio, el expresidente Donald Trump recurrió a Truth Social, la plataforma de redes sociales que fundó con gente cercana a él, para afirmar que había ganado las elecciones presidenciales del 2020 en el estado de Wisconsin, a pesar de todas las pruebas que evidenciaban lo contrario.Alrededor de 8000 personas compartieron esa misiva en Truth Social, cifra que distó mucho de los cientos de miles de respuestas que sus publicaciones en Facebook y Twitter solían generar antes de que esas plataformas le apagaran el micrófono tras los mortíferos disturbios en el Capitolio el 6 de enero de 2021.A pesar de ello, la afirmación infundada de Trump pululó en la conciencia pública. Saltó de su aplicación a otras plataformas de redes sociales, por no hablar de pódcast, la radio y la televisión.Al cabo de 48 horas de publicado su mensaje, más de un millón de personas lo habían visto en al menos una decena de otros lugares. Apareció en Facebook y Twitter, de donde fue eliminado, pero también en YouTube, Gab, Parler y Telegram, según un análisis de The New York Times.La difusión de la afirmación de Trump ilustra cómo la desinformación ha hecho metástasis desde que los expertos comenzaron a sonar la alarma sobre la amenaza que supone y todo esto ocurre justo antes de las elecciones de mitad de mandato de este año. A pesar de los años de esfuerzos de los medios de comunicación, de los académicos e incluso de las propias empresas de redes sociales para hacer frente al problema, se puede decir que hoy en día está más generalizado y extendido.“Para ser honesta, me parece que el problema está peor que nunca”, comentó Nina Jankowicz, experta en desinformación que condujo durante un periodo breve un consejo consultivo dentro del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional dedicado a combatir la desinformación. La creación del panel desató furor y provocó su renuncia y la disolución del consejo consultivo.No hace mucho, la lucha contra la desinformación se centraba en las principales plataformas de redes sociales, como Facebook y Twitter. Cuando se les presionaba, solían eliminar los contenidos problemáticos, incluida la información errónea y la desinformación intencionada sobre la pandemia de COVID-19.Sin embargo, ahora hay decenas de plataformas nuevas, incluidas algunas que se enorgullecen de no moderar —censurar, como lo denominan— las declaraciones falsas en nombre de la libertad de expresión.Otras personalidades siguieron los pasos de Trump y se cambiaron a estas nuevas plataformas tras ser “censuradas” por Facebook, YouTube o Twitter. Entre ellos, Michael Flynn, el general retirado que sirvió brevemente como principal asesor de Seguridad Nacional de Trump; L. Lin Wood, una abogada pro-Trump; Naomi Wolf, una autora feminista y escéptica de las vacunas, así como diversos seguidores de QAnon y los Oath Keepers, un grupo de militantes de extrema derecha.Al menos 69 millones de personas se han unido a plataformas como Parler, Gab, Truth Social, Gettr y Rumble, que se promueven como alternativas conservadoras a las grandes empresas tecnológicas, según declaraciones de las empresas mismas. Aunque muchos de esos usuarios ya no tienen cabida en las plataformas más grandes, siguen difundiendo sus opiniones, que a menudo aparecen en capturas de pantalla publicadas en los sitios que les prohibieron la entrada.“Nada en internet existe de manera aislada”, afirmó Jared Holt, gestor principal en la investigación sobre odio y extremismo del Instituto para el Diálogo Estratégico. “Lo que ocurre en plataformas alternas como Gab o Telegram o Truth tarde o temprano llega a Facebook, Twitter y otras”, agregó.Los usuarios han migrado a aplicaciones como Truth Social luego de haber sido “censuradas” por Facebook, YouTube o Twitter.Leon Neal/Getty ImagesEl discurso político se ha radicalizado por la difusión de las personas que propagan desinformación, indicó Nora Benavidez, abogada sénior en Free Press, un grupo de defensa de los derechos digitales y la transparencia.“Nuestro lenguaje y nuestros ecosistemas en línea se están volviendo cada vez más corrosivos”, dijo.Los cambios en el paisaje de la desinformación se están haciendo más evidentes con el ciclo electoral en Estados Unidos. En 2016, la campaña encubierta de Rusia para difundir mensajes falsos y divisorios parecía una aberración en el sistema político estadounidense. Hoy la desinformación, procedente de enemigos extranjeros y nacionales, se ha convertido en una característica del mismo.La idea infundada de que el presidente Joe Biden no fue electo de manera legítima se generalizó entre los miembros del Partido Republicano, e hizo que funcionarios de los estados y los condados impusieran nuevas restricciones para votar, a menudo solo con base en teorías de la conspiración que se cuelan en los medios de comunicación de derecha.Los votantes no solo deben filtrar un torrente cada vez mayor de mentiras y falsedades sobre los candidatos y sus políticas, sino también información sobre cuándo y dónde votar. Los funcionarios nombrados o elegidos en nombre de la lucha contra el fraude electoral han adoptado una postura que implica que se negarán a certificar los resultados que no sean de su agrado.Los proveedores de desinformación también se han vuelto cada vez más sofisticados a la hora de eludir las normas de las principales plataformas, mientras que el uso del video para difundir afirmaciones falsas en YouTube, TikTok e Instagram ha hecho que los sistemas automatizados tengan más dificultades para identificarlos que los mensajes de texto.TikTok, propiedad del gigante chino de la tecnología ByteDance, se ha vuelto uno de los principales campos de batalla en la lucha actual contra la desinformación. Un informe del mes pasado de NewsGuard, una organización que da seguimiento al problema en línea, mostró que casi el 20 por ciento de los videos que aparecían como resultados de búsqueda en TikTok contenían información falsa o tendenciosa sobre temas como los tiroteos en las escuelas y la guerra de Rusia en Ucrania.Katie Harbath en el “sala de operaciones” de Facebook, donde se monitoreaba el contenido relacionado con las elecciones en la plataforma, en 2018Jeff Chiu/Associated Press“La gente que hace esto sabe cómo aprovechar los vacíos”, explicó Katie Harbath, exdirectora de políticas públicas de Facebook que ahora dirige Anchor Change, una consultora estratégica.A pocas semanas de las elecciones de mitad de mandato, las principales plataformas se han comprometido a bloquear, etiquetar o marginar todo lo que infrinja las políticas de la empresa, incluida la desinformación, la incitación al odio o los llamados a la violencia.Sin embargo, la industria artesanal de expertos dedicados a contrarrestar la desinformación —los grupos de expertos, las universidades y las organizaciones no gubernamentales— mencionan que la industria no está haciendo suficiente. El mes pasado, por ejemplo, el Centro Stern para los Negocios y los Derechos Humanos de la Universidad de Nueva York advirtió que las principales plataformas seguían amplificando el “negacionismo electoral” de maneras que debilitaban la confianza en el sistema democrático.Otro desafío es la proliferación de plataformas alternativas para esas falsedades y opiniones aún más extremas.Muchas de esas nuevas plataformas florecieron tras la derrota de Trump en 2020, aunque todavía no han alcanzado el tamaño o el alcance de Facebook y Twitter. Estas plataformas afirman que las grandes empresas tecnológicas están en deuda con el gobierno, el Estado profundo o la élite liberal.Parler, una red social fundada en 2018, era uno de los sitios que más crecía, hasta que las tiendas de aplicaciones de Apple y Google lo expulsaron tras los disturbios mortales del 6 de enero, alimentados por la desinformación y los llamados a la violencia en línea. Desde entonces ha vuelto a ambas tiendas y ha empezado a reconstruir su audiencia apelando a quienes sienten que sus voces han sido silenciadas.“En Parler creemos que el individuo es quien debe decidir lo que cree que es la verdad”, dijo en una entrevista, Amy Peikoff, la directora de políticas de la plataforma.Argumentó que el problema con la desinformación o las teorías de la conspiración se derivaba de los algoritmos que las plataformas usan para mantener a la gente pegada a internet y no del debate sin moderar que fomentan sitios como Parler.El lunes, Parler anunció que Kanye West había, en principio, accedido a comprar la plataforma en un acuerdo que el rapero y el diseñador de moda, ahora conocido como Ye, formuló en términos políticos.“En un mundo en que las opiniones conservadoras se consideran controversiales, debemos de asegurarnos de tener el derecho a expresarnos libremente”, dijo, según el comunicado de la compañía.Los competidores de Parler son ahora BitChute, Gab, Gettr, Rumble, Telegram y Truth Social, y cada uno de ellos se presenta como un santuario frente a las políticas de moderación de las principales plataformas en todo tipo de temas, desde la política hasta la salud.Una nueva encuesta del Centro de Investigaciones Pew descubrió que el 15 por ciento de las cuentas destacadas en esas siete plataformas habían sido desterradas previamente de otras como Twitter y Facebook.Las aplicaciones como Gettr se publicitan como alternativas a los gigantes tecnológicosElijah Nouvelage/Getty ImagesSegún la encuesta, casi dos terceras partes de los usuarios de esas plataformas dijeron que habían encontrado una comunidad de personas que compartían sus opiniones. La mayoría son republicanos o se inclinan por ese partido.Una consecuencia de esta atomización de las fuentes de las redes sociales es que se refuerzan las burbujas de información partidista en las que viven millones de estadounidenses.Según el Centro Pew, al menos el seis por ciento de los estadounidenses se informa de manera habitual en al menos uno de estos sitios relativamente nuevos, que a menudo “ponen de relieve puntos de vista del mundo que no pertenecen a la corriente dominante y, a veces, utilizan un lenguaje ofensivo”. La encuesta encontró que una de cada 10 publicaciones en estas plataformas que mencionaban cuestiones relacionadas con la comunidad LGBTQ incluían alegatos peyorativos.Estos nuevos sitios siguen siendo marginales comparados con las plataformas más grandes; por ejemplo, Trump tiene 4 millones de seguidores en Truth Social, en comparación con los 88 millones que tenía cuando Twitter cerró su cuenta en 2021.Aun así, Trump ha retomado cada vez más sus publicaciones con el ímpetu que antes mostraba en Twitter. El allanamiento del FBI en Mar-a-Lago volvió a poner sus últimos pronunciamientos en el ojo del huracán político.Para las principales plataformas, el incentivo financiero para atraer usuarios, y sus clics, sigue siendo poderoso y podría hacer que den marcha atrás a las medidas que tomaron en 2021. También hay un componente ideológico. El llamado a la libertad individual, con tintes emocionales, impulsó en parte la oferta de Elon Musk para comprar Twitter, que parece haberse reactivado tras meses de maniobras legales.Nick Clegg, el presidente de asuntos globales de Meta, la empresa matriz de Facebook, incluso sugirió hace poco que la plataforma podría restablecer la cuenta de Trump en 2023, antes de la que podría ser otra carrera presidencial. Facebook había dicho previamente que solo lo haría “si el riesgo para la seguridad pública ha disminuido”.Nick Clegga, el presidente de asuntos globales de MetaPatrick T. Fallon/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesUn estudio de Truth Social realizado por Media Matters for America, un grupo de monitoreo de medios con tendencia de izquierda, examinó la forma en que la plataforma se ha convertido en hogar de algunas de las teorías de conspiración más marginales. Trump, que empezó a publicar en la plataforma en el mes de abril, ha amplificado cada vez más el contenido de QAnon, la teoría de conspiración en línea.Ha compartido publicaciones de QAnon más de 130 veces. Los seguidores de QAnon promueven una falsedad amplia y compleja centrada en Trump como líder que se enfrenta a una conspiración de una camarilla de pedófilos del Partido Demócrata. Dichas opiniones han hallado cabida durante las primarias de este año en las campañas electorales de los republicanos.Jankowicz, la experta en desinformación, mencionó que las divisiones sociales y políticas habían agitado las olas de la desinformación.Las controversias sobre la mejor manera de responder a la pandemia de COVID-19 profundizaron la desconfianza en el gobierno y los expertos médicos, sobre todo entre los conservadores. La negativa de Trump a aceptar el resultado de las elecciones de 2020 condujo a la violencia en el Capitolio, pero no terminó con ella.“Deberían habernos unido”, dijo Jankowicz, refiriéndose a la pandemia y a los disturbios. “Pensé que quizás podrían servir como una especie de poder de convocatoria, pero no lo fueron”Steven Lee Myers cubre desinformación para el Times. Ha trabajado en Washington, Moscú, Bagdad y Pekín, donde contribuyó a los artículos que ganaron el Premio Pulitzer al servicio público en 2021. También es el autor de The New Tsar: The Rise and Reign of Vladimir Putin. @stevenleemyers • FacebookSheera Frenkel es una reportera de tecnología premiada que tiene su sede en San Francisco. En 2021, ella y Cecilia Kang publicaron Manipulados. La batalla de Facebook por la dominación mundial. @sheeraf More

    • 213 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      En Brasil, un solo hombre puede decidir lo que se dice en internet para combatir las mentiras

      by

      Las autoridades brasileñas han otorgado al jefe de elecciones un amplio poder para ordenar la retirada de contenidos digitales en un intento de combatir la creciente desinformación antes de las elecciones de este mes.RÍO DE JANEIRO —Las autoridades brasileñas, que se enfrentan a un torrente de desinformación en línea antes de las elecciones presidenciales del país, concedieron al jefe de elecciones de la nación el poder unilateral para ordenar a las empresas tecnológicas que retiren muchos mensajes y videos de la red, una de las medidas más agresivas adoptadas por cualquier país para combatir la información falsa.En virtud de las normas aprobadas el jueves, el jefe de las elecciones puede ordenar la remoción inmediata de los contenidos que considere que han violado las órdenes de retirada anteriores. Las redes sociales deben cumplir esas exigencias en un plazo de dos horas o se enfrentan a la posible suspensión de sus servicios en Brasil.La medida es la culminación de una estrategia cada vez más enérgica por parte de las autoridades electorales de Brasil para reprimir los ataques divisivos, engañosos y falsos que han inundado la carrera presidencial del país en los últimos días, incluidas las afirmaciones de que los candidatos son satanistas, caníbales y pedófilos.Pero al permitir que una sola persona decida lo que se puede decir en internet en el período previo a las elecciones, que se celebrarán el 30 de octubre, Brasil se ha convertido en un caso de prueba en un debate mundial cada vez más intenso sobre los límites de la lucha contra las “noticias falsas”.La decisión provocó indignación entre los partidarios del presidente de derecha Jair Bolsonaro, así como la preocupación de muchos expertos en derecho digital y derechos civiles, que dijeron que representaba una expansión de poder potencialmente peligrosa y autoritaria que podría ser abusada a fin de censurar puntos de vista legítimos e influir en la contienda presidencial.El presidente Jair Bolsonaro en un acto de campaña en São Paulo el jueves.Fernando Bizerra/EPA, vía ShutterstockEl jefe de las elecciones, Alexandre de Moraes, también es juez del Tribunal Supremo de Brasil, lo que lo ha colocado en el centro de otra lucha sobre la creciente autoridad del tribunal.Como juez de la corte, ha ordenado investigaciones sobre Bolsonaro y ha encarcelado a algunos de los partidarios del presidente, acusados de lo que Moraes dijo que eran ataques a las instituciones democráticas de la nación.Moraes ha sido quizás el contrapeso más eficaz a Bolsonaro, que durante años ha atacado a la prensa, los tribunales y los sistemas electorales del país. Pero en el proceso, el juez ha suscitado la preocupación de que sus esfuerzos por proteger la democracia del país la hayan erosionado.“Es un acto de malabarismo muy complicado”, dijo Philip Friedrich, analista de elecciones y tecnología en Freedom House, un grupo estadounidense que promueve la expansión de la democracia. “Se trata de proteger la integridad de las instituciones democráticas de Brasil y el derecho de la gente a la libertad de expresión, y al mismo tiempo mantener a la gente segura en línea”.Carlos Affonso Souza, profesor de derecho de la Universidad Estatal de Río de Janeiro, dijo que el fallo del jueves “podría ir demasiado lejos, dependiendo de cómo” Moraes ejerza su poder.Aun así, la medida fue aplaudida por muchos en Brasil, que la consideran como una herramienta necesaria para combatir una avalancha de denuncias falsas de los partidarios de Bolsonaro que no ha hecho más que ganar velocidad en los últimos días.Las nuevas reglas fueron aprobadas por unanimidad por los siete jueces federales que integran el tribunal electoral de Brasil. Cuando propuso las reglas en una sesión del tribunal el jueves, Moraes dijo que las denuncias por desinformación habían aumentado casi 17 veces en comparación con las elecciones pasadas.“Ha habido una proliferación no solamente de noticias falsas, sino de la agresividad de estas noticias, de este discurso de odio, que todos sabemos que no conduce a nada más que a una erosión de la democracia”, dijo. “Por eso precisamente necesitamos una vía más rápida”.Otra jueza, Cármen Lúcia, dijo durante la audiencia que estaba preocupada por las implicaciones de las medidas recientes del tribunal electoral para combatir la desinformación. “El regreso de la censura no puede permitirse bajo ningún argumento en Brasil”, dijo.En una entrevista con un pódcast el jueves, Bolsonaro dijo que las autoridades electorales estaban moviendo a Brasil hacia un “estado dictatorial” y que “después de las elecciones, dependiendo de quién gane, vamos a poner fin a esto”.El año pasado, Bolsonaro pidió al Senado de Brasil que llevara a juicio político y destituyera a Moraes, pero fue rechazado.Bolsonaro se enfrenta el 30 de octubre al expresidente de izquierda Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva en una votación que se considera la más importante de Brasil en décadas y una prueba clave para una de las mayores democracias del mundo.Según las nuevas normas de internet, los poderes ampliados del jefe de las elecciones están en vigor durante las campañas electorales. Los poderes caducarán después de la votación presidencial, pero volverán a entrar en vigor en campañas futuras.El expresidente Lula da Silva hacía campaña en Río de Janeiro el jueves.Ricardo Moraes/ReutersEl tribunal electoral ya ha prohibido las publicaciones que han calificado a Bolsonaro de pedófilo, una afirmación que se aceleró en los últimos días tras la aparición de un vídeo en el que el presidente dice que hubo “una atraccion mutua” entre él y dos adolescentes. El tribunal también ha ordenado retirar contenidos que digan que Da Silva es corrupto. Da Silva cumplió condena en prisión por cargos de corrupción, que posteriormente fueron anulados.Los partidarios de ambos bandos han difundido mentiras, pero el volumen de información engañosa de la derecha ha superado con creces al de la izquierda, dijo Tai Nalon, directora de Aos Fatos, una organización brasileña de verificación que ha seguido de cerca las afirmaciones falsas de la campaña.Los partidarios de Bolsonaro han difundido la mentira de que Da Silva planea cerrar las iglesias si es elegido, lo que llevó al expresidente a lanzar una carta pública insistiendo en que no lo haría. El viernes, muchos miembros de la derecha comenzaron a publicar imágenes en las que se afirmaba falsamente que estaban siendo censurados directamente por los funcionarios electorales.Bolsonaro también ha atacado las máquinas de votación electrónica de Brasil al afirmar que están plagadas de fraude, a pesar de la falta de pruebas, y sus partidarios han difundido teorías de la conspiración infundadas que afirman que la izquierda está planeando robar las elecciones.Da Silva aventajaba a Bolsonaro en cinco puntos porcentuales tras la primera vuelta, pero en los últimos días los sondeos sugieren que la diferencia se está reduciendo.La desinformación también empañó las elecciones presidenciales de 2018 que ganó Bolsonaro, lo que llevó a los funcionarios electorales a adoptar una postura más agresiva durante esta campaña.Esta semana, el tribunal electoral restringió a uno de los mayores medios de Brasil para que no describiera a Da Silva como corrupto, y bloqueó a un destacado canal de YouTube de derecha por publicar un documental sobre un intento de asesinato contra Bolsonaro en 2018. Bolsonaro y sus partidarios han acusado al tribunal de tratar de favorecer a Da Silva.Preparando las máquinas de votación electrónica en Brasilia el miércoles.Evaristo Sa/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesA pesar de los esfuerzos del tribunal electoral por intervenir, han proliferado los contenidos falsos y engañosos, lo que ilustra la lucha a la que se enfrentan los funcionarios y las empresas tecnológicas para frenar la desinformación que se propaga más rápido de lo que pueden actuar y que se comparte cada vez más fuera de su alcance.Por ejemplo, gran parte de la desinformación en Brasil se comparte en WhatsApp, la aplicación más popular del país. Como WhatsApp encripta los mensajes, la empresa y los funcionarios no pueden ver los mensajes que los usuarios comparten entre sí, lo que complica su capacidad para combatir la información falsa.WhatsApp ha modificado su aplicación para frenar la propagación, por ejemplo, al poner límites al tamaño de los grupos y al número de veces que se puede reenviar un mensaje, pero la desinformación sigue siendo un problema, según los investigadores.Google y Meta, propietaria de WhatsApp, Facebook e Instagram, declinaron comentar. La campaña de Da Silva no respondió a las solicitudes de comentarios.Según las nuevas normas, si una empresa tecnológica se niega repetidamente a cumplir las órdenes de Moraes, este puede “suspender el acceso a los servicios” de la plataforma en Brasil por hasta 24 horas.A principios de este año, De Moraes dijo que planeaba bloquear Telegram, el servicio de mensajería con millones de usuarios en Brasil, después de que la empresa no siguiera sus órdenes de eliminar la cuenta de un destacado partidario de Bolsonaro acusado de difundir desinformación. (Moraes actuaba entonces en calidad de juez del Supremo Tribunal). Moraes revocó esa prohibición varios días después, después de que Telegram aceptara cambios.Affonso Souza, el profesor de derecho en Río de Janeiro, dijo que dado el plazo de dos horas para cumplir con las órdenes de Moraes —y solo una hora en la víspera de las elecciones— Moraes podría intentar bloquear una plataforma en los últimos días de la campaña. “Eso definitivamente agregaría combustible al fuego para los partidarios de Bolsonaro”, dijo.André Spigariol More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Brazilian Official Granted Power to Order Removal of Misinformation Online

      by

      Brazilian authorities granted the country’s elections chief broad power to order the takedown of online content in a bid to combat soaring misinformation ahead of this month’s election.RIO DE JANEIRO — Brazilian authorities, grappling with a torrent of online misinformation ahead of the country’s presidential election, granted the nation’s elections chief unilateral power to order tech companies to remove many online posts and videos — one of the most aggressive actions taken by any country to combat false information.Under the rules passed on Thursday, the elections chief can order the immediate removal of content that he believes has violated previous orders. Social networks must comply with the election chief’s takedown orders within two hours or face potential suspension of their services in Brazil.The move culminates an increasingly assertive strategy by election officials in Brazil to crack down on the misinformation that has flooded the country’s presidential race in recent days, including claims that candidates are Satanists, cannibals and pedophiles.But by allowing a single person to decide what can be said online in the run-up to the high-stakes election, which will be held on Oct. 30, Brazil has made itself a test case in a swelling debate over how far to go in fighting “fake news.”The decision drew outcry from supporters of right-wing President Jair Bolsonaro, as well as concern from many internet-law and civil-rights experts, who said it represented a potentially dangerous, authoritarian expansion of power, one that could be abused to censor legitimate viewpoints and swing the presidential contest.The elections chief, Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, is already at the center of a separate fight over the increasing authority of Brazil’s highest court. He has ordered investigations into Mr. Bolsonaro and jailed some of his supporters for what Mr. Moraes said were attacks on the nation’s democratic institutions.“It’s a risky move,” Carlos Affonso Souza, a professor at Rio de Janeiro State University, said of Thursday’s decision. “I think it could go too far depending on how he exercises these rights.”Still, the move was cheered by others in Brazil, including many on the left, who see it as a necessary tool to fight an avalanche of false claims from Mr. Bolsonaro’s supporters that has only accelerated in recent days.During Thursday’s vote on the rules, Mr. Moraes said complaints about misinformation had increased nearly 17-fold compared with past elections.“There has been proliferation of not only false news, but of the aggressiveness of this news, this hate speech, which we all know leads to nothing but an erosion of democracy,” he said. “This is precisely why we need a faster way.”Mr. Bolsonaro faces off on Oct. 30 against the leftist former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in a vote that is widely regarded as Brazil’s most important in decades.Under the new rules, which were passed unanimously by the seven federal judges who make up Brazil’s electoral court, the elections chief’s expanded powers are effective during election campaigns. The powers will lapse after the presidential vote, but will take effect again in future campaigns.The rules allow Mr. Moraes to order social networks to immediately take down content that he determines has violated previous decisions by the broader electoral court.The electoral court has already banned posts that call Mr. Bolsonaro a pedophile, a claim that accelerated in recent days after video emerged of the president saying “there was a spark” between him and two teenage girls. The court has also ordered the takedown of content that says Mr. da Silva is corrupt. Mr. da Silva served time in prison on corruption charges, which were later nullified.André Spigariol contributed reporting from Brasília. More

    • 100 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Ahead of Midterms, Disinformation Is Even More Intractable

      by

      On the morning of July 8, former President Donald J. Trump took to Truth Social, a social media platform he founded with people close to him, to claim that he had in fact won the 2020 presidential vote in Wisconsin, despite all evidence to the contrary.Barely 8,000 people shared that missive on Truth Social, a far cry from the hundreds of thousands of responses his posts on Facebook and Twitter had regularly generated before those services suspended his megaphones after the deadly riot on Capitol Hill on Jan. 6, 2021.And yet Mr. Trump’s baseless claim pulsed through the public consciousness anyway. It jumped from his app to other social media platforms — not to mention podcasts, talk radio or television.Within 48 hours of Mr. Trump’s post, more than one million people saw his claim on at least dozen other sites. It appeared on Facebook and Twitter, from which he has been banished, but also YouTube, Gab, Parler and Telegram, according to an analysis by The New York Times.The spread of Mr. Trump’s claim illustrates how, ahead of this year’s midterm elections, disinformation has metastasized since experts began raising alarms about the threat. Despite years of efforts by the media, by academics and even by social media companies themselves to address the problem, it is arguably more pervasive and widespread today.“I think the problem is worse than it’s ever been, frankly,” said Nina Jankowicz, an expert on disinformation who briefly led an advisory board within the Department of Homeland Security dedicated to combating misinformation. The creation of the panel set off a furor, prompting her to resign and the group to be dismantled.Not long ago, the fight against disinformation focused on the major social media platforms, like Facebook and Twitter. When pressed, they often removed troubling content, including misinformation and intentional disinformation about the Covid-19 pandemic.Today, however, there are dozens of new platforms, including some that pride themselves on not moderating — censoring, as they put it — untrue statements in the name of free speech.Other figures followed Mr. Trump in migrating to these new platforms after being “censored” by Facebook, YouTube or Twitter. They included Michael Flynn, the retired general who served briefly as Mr. Trump’s first national security adviser; L. Lin Wood, a pro-Trump lawyer; Naomi Wolf, a feminist author and vaccine skeptic; and assorted adherents of QAnon and the Oath Keepers, the far-right militia.At least 69 million people have joined platforms, like Parler, Gab, Truth Social, Gettr and Rumble, that advertise themselves as conservative alternatives to Big Tech, according to statements by the companies. Though many of those users are ostracized from larger platforms, they continue to spread their views, which often appear in screen shots posted on the sites that barred them.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsBoth parties are making their final pitches ahead of the Nov. 8 election.Where the Election Stands: As Republicans appear to be gaining an edge with swing voters in the final weeks of the contest for control of Congress, here’s a look at the state of the races for the House and Senate.Biden’s Low Profile: President Biden’s decision not to attend big campaign rallies reflects a low approval rating that makes him unwelcome in some congressional districts and states.What Young Voters Think: Twelve Americans under 30, all living in swing states, told The Times about their political priorities, ranging from the highly personal to the universal.Debates Dwindle: Direct political engagement with voters is waning as candidates surround themselves with their supporters. Nowhere is the trend clearer than on the shrinking debate stage.“Nothing on the internet exists in a silo,” said Jared Holt, a senior manager on hate and extremism research at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue. “Whatever happens in alt platforms like Gab or Telegram or Truth makes its way back to Facebook and Twitter and others.”Users have migrated to apps like Truth Social after being “censored” by Facebook, YouTube or Twitter.Leon Neal/Getty ImagesThe diffusion of the people who spread disinformation has radicalized political discourse, said Nora Benavidez, senior counsel at Free Press, an advocacy group for digital rights and accountability.“Our language and our ecosystems are becoming more caustic online,” she said. The shifts in the disinformation landscape are becoming clear with the new cycle of American elections. In 2016, Russia’s covert campaign to spread false and divisive posts seemed like an aberration in the American political system. Today disinformation, from enemies, foreign and domestic, has become a feature of it.The baseless idea that President Biden was not legitimately elected has gone mainstream among Republican Party members, driving state and county officials to impose new restrictions on casting ballots, often based on mere conspiracy theories percolating in right-wing media.Voters must now sift through not only an ever-growing torrent of lies and falsehoods about candidates and their policies, but also information on when and where to vote. Officials appointed or elected in the name of fighting voter fraud have put themselves in the position to refuse to certify outcomes that are not to their liking.The purveyors of disinformation have also become increasingly sophisticated at sidestepping the major platforms’ rules, while the use of video to spread false claims on YouTube, TikTok and Instagram has made them harder for automated systems to track than text.TikTok, which is owned by the Chinese tech giant ByteDance, has become a primary battleground in today’s fight against disinformation. A report last month by NewsGuard, an organization that tracks the problem online, showed that nearly 20 percent of videos presented as search results on TikTok contained false or misleading information on topics such as school shootings and Russia’s war in Ukraine.Katie Harbath in Facebook’s “war room,” where election-related content was monitored on the platform, in 2018.Jeff Chiu/Associated Press“People who do this know how to exploit the loopholes,” said Katie Harbath, a former director of public policy at Facebook who now leads Anchor Change, a strategic consultancy.With the midterm elections only weeks away, the major platforms have all pledged to block, label or marginalize anything that violates company policies, including disinformation, hate speech or calls to violence.Still, the cottage industry of experts dedicated to countering disinformation — think tanks, universities and nongovernment organizations — say the industry is not doing enough. The Stern Center for Business and Human Rights at New York University warned last month, for example, that the major platforms continued to amplify “election denialism” in ways that undermined trust in the democratic system.Another challenge is the proliferation of alternative platforms for those falsehoods and even more extreme views.Many of those new platforms have flourished in the wake of Mr. Trump’s defeat in 2020, though they have not yet reached the size or reach of Facebook and Twitter. They portray Big Tech as beholden to the government, the deep state or the liberal elite.Parler, a social network founded in 2018, was one of the fastest-growing sites — until Apple’s and Google’s app stores kicked it off after the deadly riot on Jan. 6, which was fueled by disinformation and calls for violence online. It has since returned to both stores and begun to rebuild its audience by appealing to those who feel their voices have been silenced.“We believe at Parler that it is up to the individual to decide what he or she thinks is the truth,” Amy Peikoff, the platform’s chief policy officer, said in an interview.She argued that the problem with disinformation or conspiracy theories stemmed from the algorithms that platforms use to keep people glued online — not from the unfettered debate that sites like Parler foster.On Monday, Parler announced that Kanye West had agreed in principle to purchase the platform, a deal that the rapper and fashion designer, now known as Ye, cast in political terms.“In a world where conservative opinions are considered to be controversial, we have to make sure we have the right to freely express ourselves,” he said, according to the company’s statement.Parler’s competitors now are BitChute, Gab, Gettr, Rumble, Telegram and Truth Social, with each offering itself as sanctuary from the moderating policies of the major platforms on everything from politics to health policy.A new survey by the Pew Research Center found that 15 percent of prominent accounts on those seven platforms had previously been banished from others like Twitter and Facebook.Apps like Gettr market themselves as alternatives to Big Tech.Elijah Nouvelage/Getty ImagesNearly two-thirds of the users of those platforms said they had found a community of people who share their views, according to the survey. A majority are Republicans or lean Republican.A result of this atomization of social media sources is to reinforce the partisan information bubbles within which millions of Americans live.At least 6 percent of Americans now regularly get news from at least one of these relatively new sites, which often “highlight non-mainstream world views and sometimes offensive language,” according to Pew. One in 10 posts on these platforms that mentioned L.G.B.T.Q. issues involved derisive allegations, the survey found.These new sites are still marginal compared with the bigger platforms; Mr. Trump, for example, has four million followers on Truth Social, compared with 88 million when Twitter kicked him off in 2021.Even so, Mr. Trump has increasingly resumed posting with the vigor he once showed on Twitter. The F.B.I. raid on Mar-a-Lago thrust his latest pronouncements into the eye of the political storm once again.For the major platforms, the financial incentive to attract users — and their clicks — remains powerful and could undo the steps they took in 2021. There is also an ideological component. The emotionally laced appeal to individual liberty in part drove Elon Musk’s bid to buy Twitter, which appears to have been revived after months of legal maneuvering.Nick Clegg, the president of global affairs at Meta, Facebook’s parent company, even suggested recently that the platform might reinstate Mr. Trump’s account in 2023 — ahead of what could be another presidential run. Facebook had previously said it would do so only “if the risk to public safety has receded.”Nick Clegg, Meta’s president for global affairs.Patrick T. Fallon/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesA study of Truth Social by Media Matters for America, a left-leaning media monitoring group, examined how the platform had become a home for some of the most fringe conspiracy theories. Mr. Trump, who began posting on the platform in April, has increasingly amplified content from QAnon, the online conspiracy theory.He has shared posts from QAnon accounts more than 130 times. QAnon believers promote a vast and complex falsehood that centers on Mr. Trump as a leader battling a cabal of Democratic Party pedophiles. Echoes of such views reverberated through Republican election campaigns across the country during this year’s primaries.Ms. Jankowicz, the disinformation expert, said the nation’s social and political divisions had churned the waves of disinformation.The controversies over how best to respond to the Covid-19 pandemic deepened distrust of government and medical experts, especially among conservatives. Mr. Trump’s refusal to accept the outcome of the 2020 election led to, but did not end with, the Capitol Hill violence.“They should have brought us together,” Ms. Jankowicz said, referring to the pandemic and the riots. “I thought perhaps they could be kind of this convening power, but they were not.” More