As the US elections continue to heat up, a disturbing trend has emerged on X, formerly known as Twitter. There are claims about spreading misinformation regarding the voting process and receiving hefty payouts, sometimes “in the thousands of dollars.” This has sparked red-flag concerns about the quality of the information circulating during such a pertinent time in American politics.
Reports from the BBC say that different stations in X are coordinating themselves to fuel false rumors about the upcoming elections, especially about Republican members such as Donald Trump and Democratic member Kamala Harris. They seem to share content with one another through group chats and forums, saying it’s a “way of trying to help each other out.” It is unbelievable that people may perceive the act of spreading false information as an activity in community service.
These users aren’t only divided in supporting Trump or Harris but are also supportive of the independent candidates. Some of these profiles, who declare not to be part of an official campaign, have also received a call from politicians-cum-congressional candidates soliciting support in any way: endorsement or posts showing solidarity. It speaks about how effective social media can turn opinion, even when they report and spread wrong information and, in many cases, absolute lies.
More Read
Earlier this month, X altered its payment structure to base it more on user engagements through premium accounts. This means that now, their emphasis is on likes shares, and comments instead of merely viewing advertisements. It had made the platform a kind of hotbed of all political discussions, especially at the approach of the election-November 5. Although X’s user base is smaller than that of Facebook or TikTok, the political rhetoric is growing in provocativeness over there, and people are starting to fear that X incentivizes users to create their misleading content to financially benefit from them.
These kinds of misinformation types are rather appalling. In this case, election fraud, which was even dismissed by the US authorities, has been disseminated throughout by some users. Among these claims, a photoshopped picture of Kamala Harris, apparently depicting her at work as a teenager at McDonald’s, can be highlighted as such. Misinformation such as this led to even greater circulation and the amplification of more unsubstantiated claims regarding the tampering of pictures by the Democratic Party regarding their candidates.
Interestingly, it is not just the anonymous users who have been doing this. Even the high-profile individuals are not immune to spreading the false information. In August, Trump himself posted an AI-generated image of pop star Taylor Swift, suggesting that she wanted her fans to vote for him. Swift later refuted the claim by endorsing his opponent, Kamala Harris.
Speaking with the BBC under the condition of anonymity, a user said he spends about 16 hours a day uploading content on X and since he started focusing on elections, he has garnered around 11 million views. He termed himself an independent but said he prefers Trump over Harris, and it is shocking as he claimed to earn a monthly amount of “low thousands” from the same platform. He commented, “I feel like it’s gotten quite easy for people to amass money,” with several acquaintances raking in five figures from such endeavors. For him, the money is just a business; it’s nothing but a side hustle.
This is a very disquieting perspective on misinformation. The user was not bothered that the posts would sway the elections; instead, he thought the government posts more misinformation than any other individual online. He told me how local politicians always ask users like him for support and demonstrates where social media overlaps with politics.
Reflecting on the power that such deceptive posts might be able to have, he told this reporter, “I think you’re seeing that currently. I think that a lot of the Trump support comes from that.” The message reflects a larger problem at work: misinformation finds ways into political discourse and influences voting sentiments and even electoral results.
It seems to me that social media has the potential to engage its users in important conversations, but the risks from misinformation cannot be ignored. When sites like X tend to gain attention during election times, it is very important for the users to critically evaluate what they see. It is this fine line between freedom of expression and ensuring that truth does not get drowned out by falsehoods. We have to be careful, given the elections are near; seeking the truth and questioning those platforms that allow them to disseminate.
Minutes by M31GlobalNews
