Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Twitter joins new push to curb election chaos online, by Trump and regular folk

Donald Trump on Twitter

Twitter is taking further steps to stop the spread of disinformation, taking on its most powerful user.

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Twitter is taking on its No. 1 agitator in the name of protecting electoral democracy by combating both domestic and foreign disinformation.

But the changes announced Friday will also contain the sort of robust and rapid-fire political discourse at the heart of Twitter's identity, not only by politicians but by millions of everyday users.

New warnings will be attached to the lies of candidates, at least through Election Day. The site will reject any posts calling for voter intimidation or violence connected to the presidential or congressional elections. And no one will be permitted to declare victory before races have been called by major news organizations — a mirror of what Facebook announced a day earlier.


The curbs suggest both companies are working to assure they get back on the right side of social media history, four years after they were a significant if secondary part of the Russian campaign to meddle in the election. Misinformation and false reports spread virtually unchecked across the major platforms. Now that those disinformation efforts have supplanted hacking as the foreign interference method of choice, U.S national security agencies say, the companies are making unprecedented moves to limit their roles as unwitting or passive accomplices.

A consequence of joining Facebook, however, is that Twitter has now taken on its most prominent and also most powerful influencer.

President Trump has long made tweets his principal form of communicating with the world, from unveiling fundamental federal policy shifts to working out personal grudges. And this year Twitter had been his main venue for an unprecedented assault by a sitting president on the bedrock institution of democracy: unspooling dozens of baseless claims about fraud and mail-in voting, designed to sow doubt about the integrity of an election he might lose.

"Twitter has a critical role to play in protecting the integrity of the election conversation," company officials said in a blog post published at noon. "We encourage candidates, campaigns, news outlets and voters to use Twitter respectfully and to recognize our collective responsibility to the electorate to guarantee a safe, fair and legitimate democratic process this November,"

Until the election and any subsequent disputes are over, the company said, all of its millions of users will be slowed down before hitting the retweet button: They will need to take an extra step, designed to make people pause, of at least considering whether to provide comment above the tweet they're about to share.

Recommendations and trends will get new curbs intended to prevent abuse.

Twitter's announcement puts additional curbs on candidates with more than 100,000 followers, which covers not only Trump (with 87 million) and former Vice President Joe Biden (11 million) but virtually every candidate in a competitive Senate race and plenty of House candidates, too.

Their premature claims of victory, made before officials or credible news sources have called the election, will get called out with a warning label and users will be directed to Twitter's election page.

And they will be subject to "additional warnings and restrictions" if they spread falsehoods. This expands on the Twitter policy imposed in May that has resulted in more than a dozen Trump tweets, mainly jeremiads against voting by mail, being veiled with a warning screen and subject to retweet curbs.

Trump and many fellow Republicans maintain Twitter is out to squelch political speech and ideas only on the right. Democrats and good-government groups generally endorse more social media regulation as a way to block patently wrong propaganda and maybe even improve the tenor of civic discourse.


Read More

Trump’s Anti-Latino Racism is a Major Liability for Democracy

Close-up of sign reading 'Immigrants Make America Great' at a Baltimore rally.

Trump’s Anti-Latino Racism is a Major Liability for Democracy

Donald Trump’s second administration has fully clarified Latinos’ racial position in America: our ethnic group’s labor, culture, and aspirations are too much for his supporters to stomach. The Latino presence in America triggers too many uneasy questions (are they White?), too many doubts (are they really American?), and too much resentment (why are they doing better than me?).

Trump’s targeted deportations of undocumented Latinos, unwarranted arrests of Latino citizens, and heightened ICE presence in Latino neighborhoods address these worries by lumping Latinos with Black people. Simply put, we have become yet another visible population that America socially stigmatizes, economically exploits, and politically terrorizes because aggrieved White adults want to preserve their rank as our nation’s premier racial group. The cumulative impacts are serious: just yesterday, an international panel of investigators on human rights and racism, backed by the U.N., found that such actions have resulted in “grave human rights violations.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules
A close up of a window with a sticker on it
Photo by Zach Wear on Unsplash

Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules

Last week, I wrote a column in the Fulcrum entitled “Just the Facts: Voter ID, States’ Powers, and Federal Limits.” The facts presented in that writing made it clear that the U.S. Constitution does not require voter ID and left almost all election administration—including voter qualifications—to the states. However, over time, constitutional amendments and federal statutes have restricted states’ ability to impose discriminatory voting rules, but they have never mandated voter ID.

The SAVE America Act

The national debate over voter ID has entered a new phase with the introduction of the SAVE America Act, the most sweeping federal voter‑identification and citizenship‑documentation proposal in modern history. For more than two centuries, voter eligibility rules—ID included—have been primarily a matter of state authority, bounded by constitutional protections against discrimination. The SAVE America Act would shift that balance by imposing federal requirements for both photo identification and documentary proof of citizenship in federal elections.

Keep ReadingShow less
Posters are displayed next to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) as he speaks at a news conference to unveil the Take It Down Act to protect victims against non-consensual intimate image abuse, on Capitol Hill on June 18, 2024 in Washington, DC.

A lawsuit against xAI over AI-generated deepfakes targeting teenage girls exposes a growing crisis in schools. As laws struggle to keep up, this story explores AI accountability, teen safety, and what educators and parents must do now.

Getty Images, Andrew Harnik

Deepfakes: The New Face of Cyberbullying and Why Parents, Schools, and Lawmakers Must Act

As a former teacher who worked in a high school when Snapchat was born, I witnessed the birth of sexting and its impact on teens. I recall asking a parent whether he was checking his daughter’s phone for inappropriate messages. His response was, “sometimes you just don’t want to know.” But the federal lawsuit filed last week against Elon Musk's xAI has put a national spotlight on AI-generated deepfakes and the teenage girls they target. Parents and teachers can’t ignore the crisis inside our schools.

AI Companies Built the Tool. The Grok Lawsuit Says They Own the Damage.

Whether the theory of French prosecutors–that Elon Musk deliberately allowed the sexualized image controversy to grow so that it would drive up activity on the platform and boost the company’s valuation–is true or not, when a company makes the decision to build a tool and knows that it can be weaponized but chooses to release it anyway, they are making a risk-based decision believing that they can act without consequence. The Grok lawsuit could make these types of business decisions much more costly.

Keep ReadingShow less