In the spring of 2020, when President Donald J. Trump wrote messages on Twitter warning that increased reliance on mail-in ballots would lead to a “rigged election,” the platform ran a corrective, debunking his claims.

“Get the facts about mail-in voting,” a content label read. “Experts say mail-in ballots are very rarely linked to voter fraud,” the hyperlinked article declared.

This month, Elon Musk, who has since bought Twitter and rebranded it X, echoed several of Mr. Trump’s claims about the American voting system, putting forth distorted and false notions that American elections were wide open for fraud and illegal voting by noncitizens.

This time, there were no fact checks. And the X algorithm — under Mr. Musk’s direct control — helped the posts reach large audiences, in some cases drawing many millions of views.

Since taking control of the site, Mr. Musk has dismantled the platform’s system for flagging false election content, arguing it amounted to election interference.

Archive

  • @JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    1410 months ago

    That is technically true, but practically not so much. The way our elections are currently run, there are 2 candidates (again this is the practical truth not the technical truth). When turnout is high democrats win, and voting 3rd party for president is essentially the same as not voting at all. That’s what people mean, that unless it’s a vote for Biden, then it’s automatically a vote for Trump.

    To be clear, I don’t like this, it’s incredibly stupid and I want to be able to vote for actually good candidates. But that is not the current reality in the states. Vote 3rd party in your local elections and campaign for them too. That’s where it’s still possible to make that happen and lay the ground work for better choices in the future.

    • @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -1010 months ago

      unless it’s a vote for Biden, then it’s automatically a vote for Trump.

      but that’s not true, in reality, at all.

      saying it or implying it is misinformation

      • @JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        510 months ago

        Is that the only part you read? There was a bit of explanation before that conclusion. You’re going to have to address the substance of my argument if you’re going to make a real counter argument. The reply you just gave me is ‘nuh uh’

        • @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -710 months ago

          I’m not making a counter argument: I’m pointing out your argument is not true. I don’t need an argument: you need to be truthful.