Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

‘Structural disinformation’ poses threat to communities of color, according to new report

Shaye Moss, Ruby Freeman, election disinformation

Shaye Moss becomes emotional while testifying as her mother Ruby Freeman watches during a hearing held by the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday.

Michael Reynolds-Pool/Getty Images

On Tuesday, two Black women testified before Congress about the hateful, racist threats they received after Donald Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani accused them of committing election fraud in 2020.

Shaye Moss and Ruby Freeman had been election workers in Fulton County, Ga., until a disinformation campaign upended their lives. While their story is now public and broadcast around the country, it is far from the only example of election disinformation impacting communities of color.

A new report from Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan advocacy group that fights authoritarianism, found that structural, or systemic, disinformation has created “a generalized atmosphere of distrust and disengagement” in such communities.


The study, titled “Electoral Confusion: Contending with Structural Disinformation in Communities of Color,” is a qualitative analysis based on interviews with state- and local-level community leaders, journalists, researchers and activists who service those communities in Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin.

The study found that structural disinformation (which Protect Democracy defines as “the deceptive or misinformation-generating effects of laws, policies, institutional practices, and political norms”) has a far greater impact than specific disinformation campaigns.

“Structural disinformation creates information gaps that harm these groups directly and, further, are filled by false narratives. When those narratives are spread by community members who believe them to be true, structural disinformation can generate a vicious cycle of distrust and demoralization,” the report states. “Structural disinformation is a phenomenon of systemic neglect, where inequalities in access to resources such as civic education and local news lead directly to a disinformation-poisoned information ecosystem.”

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

The people interviewed cited a half-dozen concerns about the 2022 and future elections, related to structural disinformation:

  • Information such as voter registration requirements and where to vote is often unavailable or deliberately false.
  • Voting information is often not available in languages other than English.
  • Those who spread disinformation use both online and traditional media.
  • Voters are turned off from voting by concerns about the system and barriers to participating.
  • Voters, poll workers and other people of color face severe harassment spawned by disinformation.

“I’m not sure the broader apparatus was prepared for the number of death threats that would be sent to election workers, to campaign staff, to poll workers, the number of doxing incidents that we saw,” one person who specializes in disinformation research told Protect Democracy.

The researchers, in their interviews, found four themes around fighting structural disinformation:

  • Outreach campaigns focus on voting information.
  • Making those campaigns multiplatform.
  • Tailored outreach to communities that speak languages other than English.
  • Messaging that fends off “friendly fire” from people who have accepted and pass along disinformation.

“There’s discouraging information about feelings around democracy and elections, particularly among younger people in the United States — a sort of sense that democracy doesn’t work, so why bother,” one Atlanta-based interviewee told the researchers.

Protect Democracy chose to conduct its research in three states that are targets for disinformation but have also taken steps to fight it.

“We chose to focus on the states of Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin because, as electoral battleground states, they are attractive targets for manipulation by propagandists; however, communities and organizations in these states have also developed countermeasures to these threats,” they wrote.

Each of the states offers a different demographic profile that provided some diversity to the report. For example, Hispanic people make up 42 percent of the population in Arizona (but only a quarter of registered voters). And the state has a significant Native American population. In Georgia, the most populous of the three states, Black people account for one-third of the population – and growing. Wisconsin doesn’t have as large a share of a minority population, but is home to large cloisters, like the Hmong community.

Read More

majority vs minority
Sanga Park/Getty Images

Make a choice: majoritarian democracy or minority tyranny?

Nelson is a retired attorney and served as an associate justice of the Montana Supreme Court from 1993 through 2012.

What is more American than majority rule — the principle that 50.1 percent carries the day when decisions affecting all of us are made? The majority wins, and the minority has to accept, even if not graciously, the decision of the greater number. That’s how decisions are made in this country. Right?

Not necessarily!

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump

Former President Donald Trump

Jabin Botsford/Getty Images

Scholars unmask Trump election lawyers’ use of falsified evidence

Rosenfeld is the editor and chief correspondent of Voting Booth, a project of the Independent Media Institute.

After 2022’s midterm election, I had an email exchange with Robert Beadles, a combative northern Nevada businessman and Donald Trump devotee. His post-2020 hounding of Reno’s top election official had pushed her to resign. Beadles didn’t trust the midterm results either and offered a $50,000 reward to anyone who’d prove that it was not stolen.

Easy money, right? Beadles’ distrust was tribal. But his reward hinged on refuting a statistical analysis that he waved like the flag. His statistician, Edward Solomon, who lived halfway across the country, found mathematical aberrations in the results that he didn’t like. The men claimed that was proof enough that the announced election results were dishonest.

I, and several experienced analysts — a math PhD, a computer scientist, and an election auditor who had spent years studying election systems, voting data, and procedures — tried to explain why the statistics, alone, did not prove anything. We politely told him what records to obtain, why they mattered, what methodologies to use. Beadles didn’t care and soon lashed out.

Keep ReadingShow less
D.C. Police Officer Daniel Hodges shakes hands with Rep. Liz Cheney at a hearing

Officer Daniel Hodges of the D.C. police force shakes hands with then-Rep. Liz Cheney at a July 21, 2022, House committee hearing investigating the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol.

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Remembering Jan. 6 with an officer injured in the line of duty

To mark the third anniversary of the attacks on the Capitol, the hosts of the “Politics Is Everything” podcast talked with D.C. Metropolitan Police Officer Daniel Hodges, who was beaten by rioters that day.

Keep ReadingShow less
Election challengers in Detroit in 2020

Election challengers demand to observe the counting of absentee ballots in Detroirt in 2020. The room had reached capacity.

Salwan Georges/The Washington Post via Getty Images

It's 2024 and the battle for democracy in the U.S. continues

Merloe provides strategic advice on democracy and elections to U.S. and international organizations. He is a former director of election integrity programs at the nonpartisan National Democratic Institute for International Affairs.

The U.S. political environment is suffering from toxic polarization, with election deniers constantly spewing noxious vapors to negate belief in the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election, the integrity of election administration, and the honorableness of their political opponents. The constant pollution has blinded many from seeing the real state of things and is causing others to close their eyes to avoid the irritation. The resulting diminished public confidence and perhaps participation in elections creates more precarious conditions in 2024 than it faced in 2020 and 2022.

I’ve learned an important lesson from observing elections in more than 50 countries: Even when elections are credible, if a large segment of the population is made to believe otherwise their outcome and the fate of democracy can easily be placed in jeopardy. Unfortunately, that is a central feature of the present electoral circumstance, and concerted action is needed to mitigate that damage and prevent it from worsening.

Keep ReadingShow less