Social media

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      As Midterms Loom, Mark Zuckerberg Shifts Focus Away From Elections

      by

      Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, made securing the 2020 U.S. election a top priority. He met regularly with an election team, which included more than 300 people from across his company, to prevent misinformation from spreading on the social network. He asked civil rights leaders for advice on upholding voter rights.The core election team at Facebook, which was renamed Meta last year, has since been dispersed. Roughly 60 people are now focused primarily on elections, while others split their time on other projects. They meet with another executive, not Mr. Zuckerberg. And the chief executive has not talked recently with civil rights groups, even as some have asked him to pay more attention to the midterm elections in November.Safeguarding elections is no longer Mr. Zuckerberg’s top concern, said four Meta employees with knowledge of the situation. Instead, he is focused on transforming his company into a provider of the immersive world of the metaverse, which he sees as the next frontier of growth, said the people, who were not authorized to speak publicly.The shift in emphasis at Meta, which also owns Instagram and WhatsApp, could have far-reaching consequences as faith in the U.S. electoral system reaches a brittle point. The hearings on the Jan. 6 Capitol riots have underlined how precarious elections can be. And dozens of political candidates are running this November on the false premise that former President Donald J. Trump was robbed of the 2020 election, with social media platforms continuing to be a key way to reach American voters.Election misinformation remains rampant online. This month, “2000 Mules,” a film that falsely claims the 2020 election was stolen from Mr. Trump, was widely shared on Facebook and Instagram, garnering more than 430,000 interactions, according to an analysis by The New York Times. In posts about the film, commenters said they expected election fraud this year and warned against using mail-in voting and electronic voting machines.Voters casting their ballots in Portland, Maine, this month.Jodi Hilton for The New York TimesOther social media companies have also pulled back some of their focus on elections. Twitter, which stopped labeling and removing election misinformation in March 2021, has been preoccupied with its $44 billion sale to Elon Musk, three employees with knowledge of the situation said. Mr. Musk has suggested he wants fewer rules about what can and cannot be posted on the service.“Companies should be growing their efforts to get prepared to protect the integrity of elections for the next few years, not pulling back,” said Katie Harbath, chief executive of the consulting firm Anchor Change, who formerly managed election policy at Meta. “Many issues, including candidates pushing that the 2020 election was fraudulent, remain and we don’t know how they are handling those.”Meta, which along with Twitter barred Mr. Trump from its platforms after the riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, has worked over the years to limit political falsehoods on its sites. Tom Reynolds, a Meta spokesman, said the company had “taken a comprehensive approach to how elections play out on our platforms since before the U.S. 2020 elections and through the dozens of global elections since then.”Mr. Reynolds disputed that there were 60 people focused on the integrity of elections. He said Meta has hundreds of people across more than 40 teams focused on election work. With each election, he said, the company was “building teams and technologies and developing partnerships to take down manipulation campaigns, limit the spread of misinformation and maintain industry-leading transparency around political ads and pages.”Trenton Kennedy, a Twitter spokesman, said the company was continuing “our efforts to protect the integrity of election conversation and keep the public informed on our approach.” For the midterms, Twitter has labeled the accounts of political candidates and provided information boxes on how to vote in local elections.How Meta and Twitter treat elections has implications beyond the United States, given the global nature of their platforms. In Brazil, which is holding a general election in October, President Jair Bolsonaro has recently raised doubts about the country’s electoral process. Latvia, Bosnia and Slovenia are also holding elections in October.“People in the U.S. are almost certainly getting the Rolls-Royce treatment when it comes to any integrity on any platform, especially for U.S. elections,” said Sahar Massachi, the executive director of the think tank Integrity Institute and a former Facebook employee. “And so however bad it is here, think about how much worse it is everywhere else.”Facebook’s role in potentially distorting elections became evident after 2016, when Russian operatives used the site to spread inflammatory content and divide American voters in the U.S. presidential election. In 2018, Mr. Zuckerberg testified before Congress that election security was his top priority.“The most important thing I care about right now is making sure no one interferes in the various 2018 elections around the world,” he said.The social network has since become efficient at removing foreign efforts to spread disinformation in the United States, election experts said. But Facebook and Instagram still struggle with conspiracy theories and other political lies on their sites, they said.In November 2019, Mr. Zuckerberg hosted a dinner at his home for civil rights leaders and held phone and Zoom conference calls with them, promising to make election integrity a main focus.He also met regularly with an election team. More than 300 employees from various product and engineering teams were asked to build new systems to detect and remove misinformation. Facebook also moved aggressively to eliminate toxic content, banning QAnon conspiracy theory posts and groups in October 2020.Around the same time, Mr. Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, donated $400 million to local governments to fund poll workers, pay for rental fees for polling places, provide personal protective equipment and other administrative costs.The week before the November 2020 election, Meta also froze all political advertising to limit the spread of falsehoods.But while there were successes — the company kept foreign election interference off the platform — it struggled with how to handle Mr. Trump, who used his Facebook account to amplify false claims of voter fraud. After the Jan. 6 riot, Facebook barred Mr. Trump from posting. He is eligible for reinstatement in January 2023.Last year, Frances Haugen, a Facebook employee-turned-whistle-blower, filed complaints with the Securities and Exchange Commission accusing the company of removing election safety features too soon after the 2020 election. Facebook prioritized growth and engagement over security, she said.In October, Mr. Zuckerberg announced Facebook would focus on the metaverse. The company has restructured, with more resources devoted to developing the online world.The team working on elections now meets regularly with Nick Clegg, Meta’s president for global affairs.Christopher Furlong/Getty ImagesMeta also retooled its election team. Now the number of employees whose job is to focus solely on elections is approximately 60, down from over 300 in 2020, according to employees. Hundreds of others participate in meetings about elections and are part of cross-functional teams, where they work on other issues. Divisions that build virtual reality software, a key component of the metaverse, have expanded.What Is the Metaverse, and Why Does It Matter?Card 1 of 5The origins. More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      How Some States Are Combating Election Misinformation Ahead of Midterms

      by

      Ahead of the 2020 elections, Connecticut confronted a bevy of falsehoods about voting that swirled around online. One, widely viewed on Facebook, wrongly said that absentee ballots had been sent to dead people. On Twitter, users spread a false post that a tractor-trailer carrying ballots had crashed on Interstate 95, sending thousands of voter slips into the air and across the highway.Concerned about a similar deluge of unfounded rumors and lies around this year’s midterm elections, the state plans to spend nearly $2 million on marketing to share factual information about voting, and to create its first-ever position for an expert in combating misinformation. With a salary of $150,000, the person is expected to comb fringe sites like 4chan, far-right social networks like Gettr and Rumble and mainstream social media sites to root out early misinformation narratives about voting before they go viral, and then urge the companies to remove or flag the posts that contain false information.“We have to have situational awareness by looking into all the incoming threats to the integrity of elections,” said Scott Bates, Connecticut’s deputy secretary of the state. “Misinformation can erode people’s confidence in elections, and we view that as a critical threat to the democratic process.”’Connecticut joins a handful of states preparing to fight an onslaught of rumors and lies about this year’s elections.Oregon, Idaho and Arizona have education and ad campaigns on the internet, TV, radio and billboards meant to spread accurate information about polling times, voter eligibility and absentee voting. Colorado has hired three cybersecurity experts to monitor sites for misinformation. California’s office of the secretary of state is searching for misinformation and working with the Department of Homeland Security and academics to look for patterns of misinformation across the internet.The moves by these states, most of them under Democratic control, come as voter confidence in election integrity has plummeted. In an ABC/Ipsos poll from January, only 20 percent of respondents said they were “very confident” in the integrity of the election system and 39 percent said they felt “somewhat confident.” Numerous Republican candidates have embraced former President Donald J. Trump’s falsehoods about the 2020 election, campaigning — often successfully — on the untrue claim that it was stolen from him.Some conservatives and civil rights groups are almost certain to complain that the efforts to limit misinformation could restrict free speech. Florida, led by Republicans, has enacted legislation limiting the kind of social media moderation that sites like Facebook, YouTube and Twitter can do, with supporters saying that the sites constrict conservative voices. On the federal level, the Department of Homeland Security recently paused the work of an advisory board on disinformation after a barrage of criticism from conservative lawmakers and free speech advocates that the group could suppress speech.“State and local governments are well-situated to reduce harms from dis- and misinformation by providing timely, accurate and trustworthy information,” said Rachel Goodman, a lawyer at Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan advocacy group. “But in order to maintain that trust, they must make clear that they are not engaging in any kind of censorship or surveillance that would raise constitutional concerns.”Connecticut and Colorado officials said the problem of misinformation has only worsened since 2020 and without a more concerted push to counteract it, even more voters could lose faith in the integrity of elections. They also said that they fear for the safety of some election workers.“We are seeing a threat atmosphere unlike anything this country has seen before,” said Jena Griswold, the Democratic secretary of state of Colorado. Ms. Griswold, who is up for re-election this fall, has received threats for upholding 2020 election results and refuting Mr. Trump’s false claims of fraudulent voting in the state.“We have to have situational awareness by looking into all the incoming threats to the integrity of elections,” said Scott Bates, Connecticut’s deputy secretary of the state.Other secretaries of state, who head the office typically charged with overseeing elections, have received similar pushback. In Georgia, Brad Raffensperger, a Republican who certified President Biden’s win in the state, has faced fierce criticism laced with false claims about the 2020 election.In his primary race this year, Mr. Raffensperger batted down misinformation that there were 66,000 underage voters, 2,400 unregistered voters and more than 10,350 dead people who cast ballots in the presidential election. None of the claims are true. He won his primary last week.Colorado is redeploying a misinformation team that the state created for the 2020 election. The team is composed of three election security experts who monitor the internet for misinformation and then report it to federal law enforcement.Ms. Griswold will oversee the team, called the Rapid Response Election Security Cyber Unit. It looks only for election-related misinformation on issues like absentee voting, polling locations and eligibility, she said.“Facts still exist and lies are being used to chip away at our fundamental freedoms,” Ms. Griswold said. Connecticut officials said the state’s goal was to patrol the internet for election falsehoods. On May 7, the Connecticut legislature approved $2 million for internet, TV, mail and radio education campaigns on the election process, and to hire an election information security officer.Officials said they would prefer candidates fluent in both English and Spanish, to address the spread of misinformation in both languages. The officer would track down viral misinformation posts on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and YouTube, and look for emerging narratives and memes, especially on fringe social media platforms and the dark web.“We know we can’t boil the ocean, but we have to figure out where the threat is coming from, and before it metastasizes,” Mr. Bates said. More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Seen and Unseen review: George Floyd, Black Twitter and the fight for racial justice

      by

      Seen and Unseen review: George Floyd, Black Twitter and the fight for racial justiceMarc Lamont Hill and Todd Brewster’s brilliant book considers the history of communications technology in a racist society Nearly all the books I have read about the internet have deepened my fears about the net effect of social media on the health of our body politic. For example, I thought three facts from the congressman Ro Khanna’s recent book, Dignity in a Digital Age, were enough to scare anyone concerned about the future of democracy.Dignity in a Digital Age review: a congressman takes big tech to taskRead moreKhanna reported that an internal discussion at Facebook revealed that “64% of all extremist group joins are due to our recommendations”; he revealed that before 2020, “QAnon groups developed millions of followers as Facebook’s algorithm encouraged people to join based on their profiles”; and he pointed to a United Nations report that Facebook played a “determining role” in events in Myanmar that led to the murder of at least 25,000 Rohingya Muslims and the displacement of 700,000 others.Seen and Unseen, a brilliant new book by Marc Lamont Hill, a Black professor, and Todd Brewster, a white journalist, certainly doesn’t ignore those dangers. But the authors’ focus is overwhelmingly on the positive effects of Twitter and Black Twitter, which they argue have democratized access to information, and the power of the smartphone to provide the incontrovertible video evidence needed to prosecute the murderers of men like George Floyd and Ahmaud Arbery.The book is a brisk, smart, short history of the effects of new communication technologies, from the photographs of the 19th century to the movies and television of the 20th and the internet of our own time.It includes terrific mini-portraits of many of the heroes and several of the villains of the Black-and-white battle which has dominated so much of American history, including the great Black abolitionist, Frederick Douglass, who turns out to be the most photographed American of the 19th century, and the white supremacist Thomas Dixon Jr, whose novel The Clansman was the basis for the 1915 film The Birth of a Nation.There is a great section about the impact of The Birth of the Nation, which single-handedly revived the Ku Klux Klan and did more to rewrite the history of Reconstruction than any other book or movie. Its director, DW Griffith, was frank about wanting to give white southerners “a way of striking back”.“One could not find the sufferings of our family and our friends – the dreadful poverty and hardships during the war and for many years after – in the Yankee-written histories we read in school,” Griffith wrote. “From all this was born a burning determination to tell … our side of the story to the world.”As the authors note: “His movie did that spectacularly.”The book also reminds us that this was the first movie shown in the White House and the host, Woodrow Wilson, was a friend and Johns Hopkins classmate of Thomas Dixon Jr. Wilson, of course, was also the president who allowed the segregation of the federal government.But what makes this volume especially valuable is the authors’ capacity to see the good and the bad in almost everything.WEB Du Bois said The Birth of the Nation represented “the Negro” either “as an ignorant fool, a vicious rapist, a venal or unscrupulous politician, or a faithful but doddering idiot”. James Baldwin called it “an elaborate justification of mass murder”.And yet the film was so egregious it also had a tremendous positive effect – it “did more to advance the NAACP”, which had been founded six years earlier, “than anything else to that date. In essence it jump-started the movement for civil rights.” At that time, that term did not yet have any meaning.Du Bois and the NAACP hoped to hit back “in kind” with a movie called Lincoln’s Dream but were stymied by “the lack of enthusiasm” of white capital.In our own time, Hill and Brewster identify the unique power of the video of the murder of George Floyd, which “resonated with whites because the cruelty inflicted on him was so undeniable, so elemental … and so protracted (nine minutes 29 seconds) that it could be neither ignored nor dismissed”.For Black people of course it was much more personal: as they watched “the last breaths being squeezed from Floyd’s body, they could see themselves in his suffering; or an uncle, or a sister, or even a long-departed ancestor”.A beautiful mini-biography of James Baldwin includes many of his most pungent observations, including, “Not everything that is faced can be changed; but nothing can be changed until it is faced.” And, “To be a Negro in this country, and to be relatively conscious, is to be in a rage almost all the time”.A Lynching at Port Jervis review: timely history of New York race hateRead moreIt turns out that “one of the most frequently cited BLM counterpublic voices is Baldwin’s”. He is “the movement’s literary touchstone, conscience, and pinup” as well as its “most tweeted literary authority”.That is the most positive contribution of Twitter – and particularly Black Twitter – I have ever heard of.The authors write that Baldwin “was impatient with America because he saw it as trapped in its own history”, and wanted America to admit “that it owed its very existence to an ideology of white supremacy”.There was a time in my life when I considered that an exaggeration. But once you have acknowledged that ours is a nation that was literally founded on genocide and slavery, Baldwin’s judgment becomes an indisputable truth.
      Seen and Unseen: Technology, Social Media, and the Fight for Racial Justice is published in the US by Atria Books
      TopicsBooksRacePolitics booksHistory booksUS politicsGeorge FloydAhmaud ArberyreviewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Meta Will Give Researchers More Information on Political Ad Targeting

      by

      Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, said that it planned to give outside researchers more detailed information on how political ads are targeted across its platform, providing insight into the ways that politicians, campaign operatives and political strategists buy and use ads ahead of the midterm elections.Starting on Monday, academics and researchers who are registered with an initiative called the Facebook Open Research and Transparency project will be allowed to see data on how each political or social ad was used to target people. The information includes which interest categories — such as “people who like dogs” or “people who enjoy the outdoors” — were chosen to aim an ad at someone.In addition, Meta said it planned to include summaries of targeting information for some of its ads in its publicly viewable Ad Library starting in July. The company created the Ad Library in 2019 so that journalists, academics and others could obtain information and help safeguard elections against the misuse of digital advertising.While Meta has given outsiders some access into how its political ads were used in the past, it has restricted the amount of information that could be seen, citing privacy reasons. Critics have claimed that the company’s system has been flawed and sometimes buggy, and have frequently asked for more data.That has led to conflicts. Meta previously clashed with a group of New York University academics who tried ingesting large amounts of self-reported data on Facebook users to learn more about the platform. The company cut off access to the group last year, citing violations of its platform rules.The new data that is being added to the Facebook Open Research Transparency project and the Ad Library is a way to share information on political ad targeting while trying to keep data on its users private, the company said.“By making advertiser targeting criteria available for analysis and reporting on ads run about social issues, elections and politics, we hope to help people better understand the practices used to reach potential voters on our technologies,” the company said in a statement.With the new data, for example, researchers browsing the Ad Library could see that over the course of a month, a Facebook page ran 2,000 political ads and that 40 percent of the ad budget was targeted to “people who live in Pennsylvania” or “people who are interested in politics.”Meta said it had been bound by privacy rules and regulations on what types of data it could share with outsiders. In an interview, Jeff King, a vice president in Meta’s business integrity unit, said the company had hired thousands of workers over the past few years to review those privacy issues.“Every single thing we release goes through a privacy review now,” he said. “We want to make sure we give people the right amount of data, but still remain privacy conscious while we do it.”The new data on political ads will cover the period from August 2020, three months before the last U.S. presidential election, to the present day. More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      San Francisco judge rejects Trump lawsuit challenging Twitter suspension

      by

      San Francisco judge rejects Trump lawsuit challenging Twitter suspensionThe former president was banned from from the social media platform after the deadly US Capitol attack A US judge on Friday dismissed Donald Trump’s lawsuit against Twitter that challenged his suspension from the platform.In a written ruling, US district judge James Donato in San Francisco rejected Trump’s argument that Twitter violated his right to freedom of speech guaranteed by the first amendment of the US constitution.Florida pension fund sues Elon Musk and Twitter to stop buyoutRead moreTwitter and other social media platforms banned Trump from their services after a mob of his supporters attacked the US Capitol in a deadly riot on 6 January2021 .That assault came after a speech by Trump in which he reiterated false claims that his election loss in November was because of widespread fraud, an assertion rejected by multiple courts and state election officials.Trump’s lawyers alleged in a court filing last year that Twitter “exercises a degree of power and control over political discourse in this country that is immeasurable, historically unprecedented, and profoundly dangerous to open democratic debate”.At the time of removing Trump’s account permanently, Twitter said his tweets had violated the platform’s policy barring “glorification of violence”. The company said then that Trump’s tweets that led to his removal were “highly likely” to encourage people to replicate what happened in the Capitol riots.Before he was blocked, Trump had more than 88 million followers on Twitter and used it as his social media megaphone.TopicsDonald TrumpTwitterUS Capitol attackSocial medianewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Eu segui alguns grupos brasileiros de direita no Telegram. Encontrei uma maré de insanidade.

      by

      SÃO PAULO, Brasil — Quando Elon Musk fechou um acordo para comprar o Twitter, os grupos brasileiros de direita no Telegram foram à loucura. Ali estava, enfim, um poderoso defensor da liberdade de expressão. Mais que isso, ali estava alguém que – como os usuários se apressaram a confirmar – queria Carlos Bolsonaro, filho do presidente da República, como presidente do Twitter no Brasil.É claro que isso não era verdade. Mas não fiquei nem um pouco surpresa. Tenho seguido esses grupos no aplicativo de mensagens há semanas, a fim de entender como a desinformação é disseminada em tempo real. No Brasil, as fake news parecem ser algo que atinge a população em geral – o Telegram apenas oferece um tipo de buraco de coelho dos mais profundos onde se pode cair. De modo que eu sabia – a partir de uma experiência horrível e capaz de derreter as retinas – que, para muitos ativistas de direita, as fake news se tornaram um artigo de fé, uma arma de guerra, a forma mais certeira de turvar o debate público.“Fake news faz parte da nossa vida”, disse o presidente Jair Bolsonaro no ano passado, ao receber um prêmio de comunicações oferecido por seu próprio Ministério das Comunicações. (Não dá pra ser mais orwelliano do que isso, certo?) “A internet é um sucesso”, ele prosseguiu. “Não precisamos de regular isso aí. Deixemos o povo à vontade.”Dá para entender a lógica. Afinal, as fake news produziram uma suposta manchete do The Washington Post que dizia: “Bolsonaro é o melhor presidente de todos os tempos” – e alegaram que uma recente motociata em apoio ao presidente entrou para o Guinness World Records. Contudo, meu mergulho nos grupos de Telegram do país revelou algo mais sinistro do que notícias adulteradas. Desregulados, extremos e delirantes, esses grupos servem para difamar os inimigos do presidente e conduzir uma operação oculta de propaganda. Não é de admirar que Bolsonaro esteja tão ávido para manter uma atmosfera de vale-tudo.O grande alvo é o principal adversário de Bolsonaro nas eleições de outubro, o ex-presidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Em grupos bolsonaristas de tamanho médio, como “Os Patriotas Br” (11.782 membros) e “Bolsonaro 2022 – Grupo de Apoio!” (25.737 membros), o foco é implacável. Usuários disseminaram à exaustão uma foto digitalmente alterada de um Lula sem camisa de mãos dadas com o presidente da Venezuela Nicolás Maduro, como se eles tivessem sido um casal homossexual nos anos 1980. (Preciso dizer que é falsa?)As alegações são infindáveis e excêntricas: Lula é patrocinado pelo narcotráfico; ele irá perseguir Igrejas; ele é contra as pessoas de classe média terem mais de uma televisão em casa. As pessoas usam tudo o que podem. Um vídeo obviamente satírico – que mostra um ator como se fosse um dos advogados do Partido dos Trabalhadores, confessando praticar fraude eleitoral – é ostentado como prova absoluta e irrefutável. O nome do advogado, “Avacalho Ellhys”, ou seja, “eu avacalho eles”, deveria ter sido suficiente para entregar o jogo. Mas em seu afã de demonização, os seguidores de Bolsonaro não são exatamente dados a uma leitura atenta.Por trás dessa atividade frenética está um desespero mal disfarçado. Segundo a pesquisa eleitoral mais recente, Lula está em primeiro lugar com 41% das intenções de voto, contra 36% de Bolsonaro. A realidade da popularidade de Lula é claramente muito dolorosa de se suportar, de modo que os usuários de Telegram buscam refúgio na fantasia. “Até que enfim uma pesquisa de verdade”, disse um usuário, alegando que um instituto imaginário de pesquisa colocou Bolsonaro em primeiro lugar com 65% das intenções de voto, contra 16% de seu adversário. Quando inventar pesquisas não é suficiente, sempre se pode suspender a corrida. “Com medo de prisão internacional, Lula vai desistir da disputa”, alegou outro. O anseio é quase tocante.Os apoiadores de Bolsonaro têm outro bicho-papão: o Supremo Tribunal Federal, que abriu inúmeras investigações contra o presidente, seus filhos e aliados. No Telegram, esse escrutínio não foi bem recebido. As pessoas acusam os ministros do STF de defender publicamente o estupro, a pedofilia, o homicídio, o narcotráfico e o tráfico de órgãos. Eles disseminam uma foto manipulada de um ministro posando ao lado de Fidel Castro. Eles espalham um vídeo editado no qual outro ministro confessa estar sofrendo chantagem do PT por participar de uma orgia em Cuba. (O ministro realmente disse isso – mas ele estava dando um exemplo bizarro de fake news contra ele, um rumor que o próprio Bolsonaro ajudou a criar no Twitter.)Uns poucos passos foram tomados para conter esse dilúvio de fake news. Algumas plataformas de mídia social removeram vídeos do presidente que propagavam desinformação sobre a Covid-19 e o sistema de urnas eletrônicas. O WhatsApp decidiu não lançar no Brasil uma nova ferramenta chamada Comunidades, que agrega vários grupos menores, até o fim das eleições presidenciais. Em março, o STF baniu o Telegram por dois dias porque a empresa estava ignorando as ordens da Corte de remover um post enganoso sobre o sistema eleitoral brasileiro publicado na conta oficial do presidente (1.34 milhão de membros). A empresa então concordou em adotar algumas medidas contra a desinformação, incluindo o monitoramento diário manual dos 100 canais mais populares do Brasil e uma parceria futura com organizações de checagem. Um problemático projeto de lei contra as fake news está sendo considerado pelo Congresso.Não é nem de longe o suficiente. Uma recente investigação da Polícia Federal identificou um sistema orquestrado – o chamado “gabinete do ódio” – formado por aliados próximos a Bolsonaro, e provavelmente também seus filhos e assessores. O objetivo do grupo é supostamente identificar alvos como políticos, cientistas, ativistas e jornalistas, e então criar e propagar desinformação para “ganhos ideológicos, político-partidários e financeiros”. (Todos eles negam as acusações.) O problema é muito maior do que alguns poucos e dispersos posts de lunáticos.No fim das contas, não sabemos o que pode ser feito para conter de forma efetiva as campanhas massivas de desinformação nas plataformas de mídia social, sobretudo às vésperas de importantes eleições nacionais. Como é possível argumentar com pessoas que acreditam que “os esquerdistas permitem que bebês sejam mortos 28 dias após o nascimento” ou que “a vacina possui parasita que pode ser controlado por impulsos eletromagnéticos”? Alguns especialistas defendem incluir rótulos de checagem, tornar mais difícil o compartilhamento de mensagens ou implementar a verificação dos usuários. Nenhuma dessas medidas, acredito, seria suficiente para refrear a maré de insanidade que encontrei no Telegram.Pelo menos há uma solução à qual sempre podemos recorrer: votar para demover do cargo os políticos que defendem as fake news.Vanessa Barbara é a editora do sítio literário A Hortaliça, autora de dois romances e dois livros de não-ficção em português, e escritora de opinião do The New York Times. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Telegram, la desinformación y la derecha en Brasil

      by

      SÃO PAULO, Brasil — Cuando Elon Musk llegó a un acuerdo para comprar Twitter, los grupos de derecha en Telegram se volvieron locos. Por fin había un sólido defensor de la libertad de expresión. Además, se trataba de alguien que —los usuarios se apresuraron a confirmar— quería que Carlos Bolsonaro, hijo del presidente, fuera el director general de Twitter en Brasil.Eso, por supuesto, no era cierto. Pero no me sorprendió. Llevaba semanas siguiendo a esos grupos en la aplicación de mensajería para ver cómo se difundía la desinformación en tiempo real. En Brasil, las noticias falsas parecen ser algo de lo que la población en general aparentemente es víctima; Telegram simplemente ofrece el tipo de agujero negro más profundo en el que se puede caer. Así que supe —por una experiencia horrible, que me dejó boquiabierta— que para muchos activistas de derecha, las noticias falsas se han convertido en un artículo de fe, un arma de guerra, la forma más segura de opacar el debate público.“Las noticias falsas son parte de nuestras vidas”, dijo el presidente Jair Bolsonaro el año pasado, mientras recibía un premio de comunicación de su propio Ministerio de Comunicaciones. (No se puede ser más orwelliano, ¿verdad?). “Internet es un éxito”, continuó. “No necesitamos regularlo. Dejemos que la gente se sienta libre”.Se puede entender su punto de vista. Después de todo, las noticias falsas produjeron un titular supuestamente en The Washington Post que decía: “Bolsonaro es el mejor presidente brasileño de todos los tiempos”, y afirmaba que un mitin reciente de la caravana pro-Bolsonaro entró en el Guinness World Records. Sin embargo, mi incursión en los grupos de Telegram del país reveló algo más siniestro que unos artículos manipulados. Estos grupos —que no están regulados, son extremos y desquiciados— sirven para calumniar a los enemigos del presidente y llevar a cabo una operación de propaganda en la sombra. No es de extrañar que Bolsonaro esté tan interesado en mantener una atmósfera en la que todo se vale.El objetivo primordial es el principal oponente de Bolsonaro en las elecciones de octubre, el expresidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. En grupos medianos pro-Bolsonaro, como “Los Patriotas” (11.782 suscriptores) y “Grupo de apoyo a Bolsonaro 2022” (25.737 suscriptores), el enfoque es implacable. Los usuarios compartieron exhaustivamente una imagen alterada digitalmente de un Da Silva sin camisa tomado de la mano con el presidente de Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro, como si hubieran sido una pareja homosexual en la década de 1980. (¿Es necesario decir que es falsa?).Las afirmaciones son interminables y extravagantes: Da Silva está patrocinado por narcotraficantes; perseguirá a las iglesias; está en contra de que los brasileños de clase media tengan más de un televisor en casa. La gente utiliza lo que pueda conseguir. Un video evidentemente satírico —que muestra a un actor, disfrazado de abogado del Partido de los Trabajadores de Da Silva, confesando el fraude electoral— se presenta como una prueba fehaciente. El nombre del abogado, que se traduce en algo así como “Me Burlo de Ellos”, debería haber dado una pista. Pero en su prisa por satanizar, los seguidores de Bolsonaro no leen las cosas con detenimiento.Detrás de esa frenética actividad hay una desesperación apenas disimulada. Da Silva supera actualmente a Bolsonaro en la encuesta más reciente con un 41 por ciento frente al 36 por ciento. La realidad de la popularidad de Da Silva es claramente demasiado dolorosa de soportar, por lo que los usuarios de Telegram se refugian en la fantasía. “Por fin una encuesta real”, dijo un usuario, asegurando que una encuestadora imaginaria ponía a Bolsonaro en primer lugar con el 65 por ciento de las intenciones de voto, frente al dieciséis por ciento de su oponente. Cuando no sirve inventar encuestas, siempre se puede suspender la carrera presidencial. “Temeroso de una detención internacional, Lula va a renunciar a su candidatura”, afirmaba otro. El deseo es casi conmovedor.Los partidarios de Bolsonaro tienen otro gran miedo: el Supremo Tribunal Federal, que ha abierto varias investigaciones sobre el presidente, sus hijos y sus aliados. En Telegram, ese escrutinio no ha sido bien recibido. La gente acusa a los magistrados de defender públicamente la violación, la pederastia, el homicidio, el narcotráfico y el tráfico de órganos. Comparten una fotografía manipulada de un magistrado posando con Fidel Castro. Comparten un video editado en el que otro juez confiesa que el Partido de los Trabajadores lo chantajea por haber participado en una orgía en Cuba. (El juez sí dijo eso, pero en realidad estaba dando un ejemplo extraño de noticias falsas en su contra, un rumor que Bolsonaro ayudó a propagar en Twitter).Se han tomado algunas medidas para frenar este diluvio de noticias falsas. Algunas plataformas de redes sociales han eliminado videos del presidente que difundían información errónea sobre la COVID-19 y el sistema de votación electrónico del país. WhatsApp decidió no introducir en Brasil una nueva herramienta llamada Comunidades, que reúne varios grupos de chats, hasta que no hayan pasado las elecciones presidenciales. En marzo, el Supremo Tribunal prohibió el uso de Telegram durante dos días porque la empresa había ignorado la petición del tribunal de eliminar una publicación engañosa sobre el sistema electoral del país en la cuenta oficial del presidente (1,34 millones de suscriptores). La empresa aceptó entonces adoptar algunas medidas contra la desinformación, entre ellas un control manual diario de los cien canales más populares de Brasil y una futura asociación con organizaciones de verificación de hechos. En el Congreso se está estudiando un imperfecto proyecto de ley sobre las noticias falsas.No es suficiente. Una investigación de la policía federal identificó hace poco un esquema orquestado —el llamado gabinete del odio— formado por los aliados más cercanos de Bolsonaro, y probablemente también sus hijos y ayudantes. El propósito del grupo es, supuestamente, identificar blancos como políticos, científicos, activistas y periodistas, y luego crear y difundir desinformación para obtener “beneficios ideológicos, partidistas y financieros”. (Todos ellos niegan las acusaciones). El problema es mucho mayor que unas cuantas publicaciones dispersas de lunáticos.Al final, no sabemos qué se puede hacer para contener de manera eficaz las enormes campañas de desinformación en las plataformas de las redes sociales, sobre todo antes de unas elecciones nacionales tan importantes. ¿Cómo podemos razonar con personas que creen que “los izquierdistas permiten matar a los bebés a los 28 días de nacer” o que “las vacunas implantan parásitos que se pueden controlar con impulsos electromagnéticos”? Algunos especialistas abogan por añadir etiquetas de comprobación de hechos, dificultar el reenvío de mensajes o introducir la verificación del usuario. Ninguna de esas medidas, supongo, haría mucho para frenar la marea de locura que encontré en Telegram.Al menos hay una solución a la que podemos recurrir: votar para que dejen su puesto los políticos de las noticias falsas.Vanessa Barbara es editora del sitio web literario A Hortaliça, autora de dos novelas y dos libros de no ficción en portugués y colaboradora de la sección de Opinión del Times. More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Bolsonaro-Supporting Brazilian Telegram Channels Are Wild and Sinister

      by

      SÃO PAULO, Brazil — When Elon Musk reached a deal to acquire Twitter, right-wing Telegram groups in Brazil went wild. Here at last was a muscular champion of free speech. Even more, here was someone who — users rushed to confirm — wanted Carlos Bolsonaro, son of the president, to be Twitter’s managing director in Brazil.That was, of course, not true. But I wasn’t surprised. I had been following these groups on the messaging app for weeks, to watch how misinformation was spread in real time. In Brazil, fake news seems to be something that the population at large seems to fall victim to — Telegram just offers the sort of deepest rabbit hole you can go down. So I knew — from horrible, eye-sapping experience — that for many right-wing activists, fake news has become an article of faith, a weapon of war, the surest way of muddling the public discussion.“Fake news is part of our lives,” President Jair Bolsonaro said last year, while receiving a communication award from his own Ministry of Communications. (It doesn’t get more Orwellian, does it?) “The internet is a success,” he went on. “We don’t need to regulate it. Let the people feel free.”You can see his point. After all, fake news produced a headline supposedly in The Washington Post that read, “Bolsonaro is the best Brazilian president of all times” — and claimed that a recent pro-Bolsonaro motorcade rally made the Guinness World Records. But my plunge into the country’s Telegram groups revealed something more sinister than doctored articles. Unregulated, extreme and unhinged, these groups serve to slander the president’s enemies and conduct a shadow propaganda operation. No wonder Mr. Bolsonaro is so keen to maintain a free-for-all atmosphere.The chief target is Mr. Bolsonaro’s main opponent in October’s elections, the former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. In medium-size pro-Bolsonaro groups, such as “The Patriots” (11,782 subscribers) and “Bolsonaro 2022 support group” (25,737 subscribers), the focus is unrelenting. Users exhaustively shared a digitally altered picture of a shirtless Mr. da Silva holding hands with President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela as if they had been a homosexual couple in the 1980s. (Do I need to say it’s false?)The claims are endless, and outlandish: Mr. da Silva is sponsored by drug traffickers; he will persecute churches; he is against middle-class Brazilians having more than one television at home. People use what they can get. An obviously satirical video — which shows an actor, in the guise of an attorney for Mr. da Silva’s Workers’ Party, confessing to electoral fraud — is paraded as cold hard proof. The name of the attorney, which translates as something like “I Mock Them,” should have given the game away. But in their rush to demonize, Mr. Bolsonaro’s followers aren’t exactly given to close reading.Underlying this frenetic activity is barely disguised desperation. Mr. da Silva currently leads Mr. Bolsonaro in the latest poll, 41 percent to 36 percent. The reality of Mr. da Silva’s popularity is clearly too painful to bear, so Telegram users take refuge in fantasy. “Finally a real poll,” one user said, asserting that an imaginary pollster put Mr. Bolsonaro in first place with 65 percent of voting intentions, against 16 percent for his opponent. When inventing polls won’t do, you can always call off the race. “Afraid of an international arrest, Lula is going to give up his candidacy,” another claimed. The wishfulness is almost touching.Mr. Bolsonaro’s supporters have another great boogeyman: the Supreme Court, which has opened several investigations of the president, his sons and his allies. On Telegram, this scrutiny has not been well received. People accuse the justices of publicly defending rape, pedophilia, homicide, drug trafficking and organ trafficking. They share a manipulated picture of one justice posing with Fidel Castro. They share an edited video in which another justice confesses that the Workers’ Party is blackmailing him for participating in an orgy in Cuba. (The justice did say that — but was actually giving a bizarre example of fake news against him, a rumor that Mr. Bolsonaro himself helped to create on Twitter.)A few steps have been taken to curb this deluge of fake news. Some social media platforms have been removing videos from the president that spread misinformation about Covid-19 and the country’s electronic voting system. WhatsApp decided not to introduce in Brazil a new tool called Communities, which gathers several groups chats, until the presidential election is over. In March, the Supreme Court banned Telegram for two days because the company had been ignoring the court’s request to remove a misleading post on the country’s electoral system from the president’s official account (1.34 million subscribers). The company then agreed to adopt a few anti-misinformation measures, including a daily manual monitoring of the 100 most popular channels in Brazil and a future partnership with fact-checking organizations. A flawed “fake news bill” is being considered by Congress.It’s not nearly enough. A federal police investigation recently identified an orchestrated scheme — the so-called cabinet of hate — formed by Mr. Bolsonaro’s closest allies, and probably also his sons and aides. The group’s alleged aim is to identify targets such as politicians, scientists, activists and journalists, and then to create and spread disinformation for “ideological, party-political and financial gains.” (They all deny the accusations.) The problem is much bigger than a few scattered posts by lunatics.In the end, we don’t know what can be done to effectively contain enormous misinformation campaigns on social media platforms, especially before important national elections. How can we reason with people who believe that “leftists allow babies to be killed 28 days after being born” or that “vaccines implant parasites that can be controlled with electromagnetic impulses”? Some specialists advocate adding fact-check labels, making it harder to forward messages or bringing in user verification. None, I’d guess, would do much to hold back the tide of madness I found on Telegram.There is one solution we can fall back on, at least: voting the fake-news politicians out of office.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More