How are election officials handling Elon Musk's social
media influence, especially when it spreads misleading
information? And why is it challenging for
states like Michigan and Arizona to Fact Check him directly on X?
Also, what strategy are these officials using to counter Elon
Musk's reach, and how is Musk himself responding to them?
Election officials in key battleground states, including
Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Arizona are expressing concerns
about Elon Musk's influence in spreading false information on
X, with some officials going to great lengths to reach Elon Musk
directly. Steven Richer, an election
official in Arizona's Maricopa County, shared that he even
tried getting messages hand delivered to Elon Musk urging
him to stop amplifying unsubstantiated claims.
Reichert, who's faced serious threats for defending the 2020
election results, says that despite persistent efforts to
correct the record, Elon Musk's massive online following makes
it nearly impossible to curb the spread of misinformation.
Now, the need to counter falsehoods around elections has
become a full second time job for many election officials, a
situation that arose in response to misinformation that spread
widely after Donald Trump's 2020 election loss.
However, Musk's ownership of X and his high profile support for
Trump have introduced new hurdles.
The X latforms influential reach means that any falsehood that
Musk shares can spread really quickly like wildfire over often
overwhelming a local election of if officials to provide
verification information. Now, Michigan's Secretary of
State Jocelyn Benson has been particularly vocal in countering
Musk's misinformation. Recently, she fact checked a
claim that Musk made about Michigan's registered voters
directly responding on X. Her post gained over 33 million
views, reflecting substantial interest.
But Musk maintained his position, accusing Benson of
blatantly lying to the public. Benson, frustrated with by
Musk's response, lamented the missing opportunity for Musk to
use his resources to help us restore and ensure people can
have rightly placed faith in our election outcomes, whatever they
may be. Now, Elon Musk's influence on
election decisions across X has left election officials 6 days
before Election Day scrambling to find a strategy to counter
the spread of misinformation. Efforts by officials in
Michigan, Arizona and Pennsylvania to set the record
straight are often overshadowed by Musk's massive online
following, with his post quickly gaining visibility.
And without effective controls on X's algorithm, which
frequently promotes high profile accounts, election authorities
say they face a structural disadvantage in ensuring
accurate election information is widely seen.
A social media platform known as X has provided minimal response
to Musk's election related posts, though a platform
spokesperson indicated that X enforces policies and election
interference and misleading content now.
This response, however, stops short of addressing Musk's own
posts, leaving election officials without direct
intervention to prevent the spread of unverified claims.
CN Ms. attempts to contact Musk and also the Washington Post and
all of the other major media outlets.
They can't get a hold of the guy.
They take it to X and they make comments on his posts and they
refute him. But most of the time it doesn't
work. Nade Di Resto, a disinformation,
said that election officials are simply unequipped to counter the
reach of high profile accounts like Musk.
Because of that, election officials have a very hard job.
Their job is to be election officials, not be tweeters.
That's what they said. She asked.
If prominent figures are allowed to amplify unverified claims
without equivalent promotion of accurate information, it creates
a structural disadvantage and that election authorities can
rarely overcome this. Now this week, Elon Musk
encouraged his followers on X to report supposed election
irregularities to an election integrity community on the
platform, which is administrator by his America Pack, an
organization supporting Trump's campaign.
And election officials quickly noticed that some of the claims
appearing on this community feed had already been debunked by
state authorities, further complicating their task of
promoting factual information. The CEO of American Sunlight
Project called the situation staggering with Musk's role at
the helm of XI. Don't know if anything can Fact
Check him now. Benson, who has faced security
threats in the past for responding to Musk, acknowledges
the personal risks associated with fact checking the tech
billionaire, they said. The first time he attacked our
election system, I had to take a beat and realize that if I were
to respond as I did, ultimately I'd have to check to make sure
my family was safe first. Benson says she now alerts her
security team whenever she respond to Musk's posts to
prepare for an uptick in threats.
Now, to mitigate these security risks, Benson has broadened her
approach to disseminate accurate election misinformation.
Her office has gathered leaders from business and labor sectors
to brief them on Michigan's election process and the state's
commitment to counting every legitimate vote.
And by empowering these local leaders as messengers, she hopes
to reach more residents with verified information before
misinformation can spread widely on platforms like X.
Now, officials in Pennsylvania are pursuing similar strategies
to Fact Check Musk's claims, though they acknowledge the
limitations. And one election official in the
state referred to Musk as a huge problem and said current fact
checking efforts are largely about establishing a paper trail
to document the accuracy of their statements.
And Musk's influence in Pennsylvania is not just limited
to his social media activity, though.
He's also involved in a legal matter regarding the $1 million
giveaway that his America PAC is conducting daily.
Sweepstakes they offer to registered voters in
battleground states has led to a lawsuit that Musk is attempting
to move to federal court now. His lawyers filed a motion of
removal late Wednesday night, a procedural move that would pause
the case in state court and shift the decision to a federal
judge. Now down in Georgia, election
officials have decided the direct engagement with Musk on X
is unlikely to yield any results.
Instead, they're relying on press conferences, a method they
successfully used in 2020 to dispel misinformation.
By presenting officials who openly refute the latest
election related falsehoods and by using scheduled public
updates, they hope to present clear and consistent information
without engaging with Elon Musk directly.
Now, the backlash against social media monitoring for election
misinformation has affected platforms beyond X, making it
increasingly difficult for election officials to counteract
falsehoods. One official from the
battleground states noted that the unlike other companies such
as Meta, X lacks a clear line of communication complicating
attempts to address misinformation directly on a
platform. Jankowicz, a disinformation
expert who has been a target of criticism from some conservative
lawmakers, pointed to the contrasting silence surrounding
Musk's influence on X. They said what Elon Musk is
doing, the campaigning that he's doing, the donation that he's
making, the way he has engineered Twitter to be a
maelstrom of conservative disinformation is far closer to
election interference than any of the allegations that
conservatives have made against social media platforms from 2016
to 2022. Now, Democratic lawmakers are
raising concerns about social media companies preparedness to
manage election related misinformation.
Senator Mark Warner, chair of the Senate Intelligence
Committee, expressed frustration about the platform's lack of
transparency on their plans to address misleading content
before and after Election Day. Warner noted that he's still
wanting on a full answer or of what they're going to do to
surge capabilities. Now that's of course, it's a a
huge concern. An X's absence at a recent
Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on foreign influence and
social media has also intensified.
Lawmaker Warner mentioned that Nick Pickles, X's head of global
affairs, had been invited but resigned on September 6th and
the company did not send a replacement.
An X spokesperson confirmed that Pickles departure, but did not
explain the decision to forgo representation at the hearing.
Now, Elon Musk's America PAC has received judicial permission to
proceed with cash giveaways to registered voters, at least
temporarily, following a ruling from a Pennsylvania State judge.
And Musk's PAC has been offering daily $1 million prizes to
voters in key swing states contingent upon their signing a
petition. Now, the petition reportedly
includes a pledge to support the US Constitution, though some
officials are concerned that the cash for petition format may
conflict with US electoral laws. Philadelphia District Attorney
Lawrence Krasner filed a lawsuit against Musk earlier this week,
calling on the courts to halt the giveaways.
Krasner's suit urges that Musk must be stopped immediately
before the upcoming presidential election.
Determined that Krasner's case would be paused while a federal
court decides if it will hear the case, a delay that makes it
unlikely any financial decision will be reached before the
November 7th election. The court hearing featured
remarks from John Summers, an attorney working with District
Attorney Krasner, who told reporters they would push to
have the matter returned to state court.
That the federal court declines to take it up.
Summers argued the case centers on state laws, adding after all,
this is a case that involves state law issues.
Musk, who was required to attend the Philadelphia court hearing,
did not appear this month, offering daily $1 million awards
for registered voters in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada,
Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan and North Carolina until November
5th. And these 7 battleground states
are considered crucial in the 2024 election, with polls
indicating a tight race between President Donald Trump, who Musk
supports, and Democratic candidate Kamala Harris.
Eligibility for Musk's $1,000,000 giveaway requires
participants to provide personal information, including phone
numbers and addresses, and to sign a statement affirming their
commitment to the Constitution. Krasner's lawsuit describes this
structure as a lottery and alleges that it constitutes an
unlawful lottery. And according to Krasner, the
sweepstakes Lowell's Philadelphia citizens to give up
their personal identification information and make a political
pledge in exchange for the chance to win $1,000,000.
The lawsuit also accuses Musk and his pack of using deceptive,
vague or misleading statements that could mislead voters.
Under consumer protection laws. This warning could qualify as
false advertising, which Musk's attorney has strongly refuted.
In a federal court filing, Musk's lawyers argued the
lawsuit's actual purpose was to curb Musk's influence on the
election. They said the complaint, in
truth, has little to do with state law claims of nuisance and
consumer protection. Now Musk's legal team stated,
adding that it aims to prevent any supposed interference by
Musk's PAC in the upcoming election.
Now, Musk's PAC received prior warning from the Department of
Justice, which noted that the cash giveaways could breach
federal election regulations. Musk has, however, assured
potential participants they do not need to identify as
Republican or even vote to qualify for the prize.
As Musk continues to press forward with his past campaign,
the legal proceedings and official scrutiny reflect
ongoing concerns about the potential influence of his
platform on the 2024 election.