This Week in Misinformation: 'Mules' Debunked, Big Tech Sueable Again, Trump Reinstated (Maybe), QAnon Mexico Border Vigilantes
12 May 2022
This Prism newsletter strives to be the paper of record for all that’s happening in misinformation. For any citizen whose life is impacted by misinformation, it helps you see how storylines evolve from multiple, sourced angles on important stories in one place. For amateur and professional misinformation watchers, it is your go-to resource for updates on peers, platforms, propagandists, and politicians. Learn more about Prism and our other products on our Substack page, follow us on Twitter, or like us on Facebook!
________________________________
Misinformation is the best lens through which to understand news about the world. Remove the garbage cluttering your view, and you can see things clearly for what they are.
Thank you for reading and letting others know what we’re up to here. It makes a big difference every time.
Sharing is easy and fun! And here’s the signup:
Reliability scores for media outlets cited in the summary are in parentheses for each, courtesy of the terrific folks at Ad Fontes Media.
We did a fun thing this week, hosting expert fact-checkers in an audio chat on Twitter to talk about a range of issues in the business of debunking! Check it out.
Now, on to our top stories.
Fans of Donald Trump’s 2020 lie thrilled this week to a new election truther film that was touted as the ironclad proof that would wake everyone up to the truth (it was not, and didn’t).
“2,000 Mules” is, on the whole, a slick rehash of tired, already debunked false claims that the election was stolen from Donald Trump (Agence France-Presse, 48.05). The film was produced by conservative historian Dinesh D’Souza, a Trump ally who, for what it’s worth, has had firsthand experience breaking election laws (CNBC, 46.28). The price to own this instant classic is $29.99.
D’Souza has been upset that top Fox personalities and Newsmax aren’t hyping “2,000 Mules” to their audiences (Newsweek, 38.36), and some on the right-wing fringe like former member of Congress Trey Gowdy have distanced themselves from it (Associated Press, 48.82). Trump-friendly One America News (25.82), possibly not wanting to again be liable for defaming election machine manufacturers, seems to have altogether stopped talking about the imaginary “widespread voter fraud” that D’Souza and others are still hawking (Wall Street Journal, 45.38).
A few places to check out what the film got wrong, for anyone who has been hearing from friends and loved ones about it: Atlanta Journal-Constitution (45.69), Denver Post (45.99), this thread on Twitter (@mattsheffield), and this analysis in The Washington Post (41.71), among many others. Be advised, however, that fact checks probably won’t convince anyone who believes in the film so much they put its title in their social media handle this week (@AntifaRioter via Twitter).
Remember that social media law passed in Texas last year? It’s back, at least for now.
Republicans in the state house in Austin passed the bill to make it possible for citizens to sue Big Tech for censoring their expression of political beliefs, including at times harmful misinformation (Wall Street Journal, 45.38). The law has not been enforceable since December, however, because a federal judge ruled that social media companies have a right to moderate content on their privately owned platforms.
This week the appeals court, without commenting on the merits of the original decision, handed down a reversal that brought the law back into effect (New York Times, 43.98). A group funded by Google, Meta, Twitter, and other companies have said they will immediately appeal the appeal.
The new ruling could make large waves for platforms that have several million or more users, according to legal experts who see a lot of potential for overbroad interpretation as to the kinds of interventions platforms will not be allowed to engage in (@Popehat via Twitter). Either they will need to change how they take down misinformation at scale, or they may incur substantial liability exposure.
The most billionaire of billionaires said he thought Twitter should bring back the least billionaire of billionaires, and that he would do so when he took control of the company.
Twitter’s would-be owner Elon Musk answered a question on many people’s minds since he made his offer last month: he would restore Donald Trump's beloved Twitter account if his ownership of the platform is finalized (Wall Street Journal, 45.38). In Musk’s full explanation for this (Snopes, -), he asserted that permanent bans are morally wrong in general, and also that kicking Trump off was particularly problematic because it didn’t succeed in silencing his voice from the Internet. If this reasoning doesn’t make sense to you, I invite you to join the club.
So, who’s excited about this? Among others, you have followers of the Q conspiracy theory (@coolfacejane via Twitter) and the ACLU! Presumably Trump is himself amped, considering the resources he has expended trying to sue Twitter to reverse his ban (CBS News, 46.08).
Some others, including most who remember the actual reasons he was deplatformed, are not enthused (The Guardian, 43.84). It might even be against the law soon in Europe, and Uncle Elon has done his best to assure authorities there that he very much agrees with the ways they are mandating restrictions on speech in the name of public welfare (Reuters, 47.99). Who even knows what to think at this point?
So, so much grab bag: Americans have always been into conspiracy theories; pregnant couples are targets of health disinformation; nobody is changing their mind about the COVID shot; roughly one out of three Americans believes in the racist Replacement Theory; some Q people are teaming up with Mexico border vigilantes; YouTube has an outsized influence on the Philippines election; election truther and county clerk Tina Peters cannot run for her job again, a judge orders; Kathy Barnette rode election trutherism to unlikely front-runner status in Pennsylvania Senate race; Mike Lindell feels that the SCOTUS leak was about him, actually; the January 6th Committee subpoenas its first members of Congress; convoys have become a way of life, and that way is headed back to DC; Donald Trump believed China might have a "hurricane gun" when he was in office; payment company Bolt was the latest unicorn busted for unsubstantiated hype; people are losing confidence in crypto; misleading videos of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard are all over YouTube; Putin delivered a truth-challenged "victory day" speech and has literally been stealing people's faces to sell his war on Ukraine; and a judge has ruled Elizabeth Warren doesn't have to retract a letter about Robert Kennedy, Jr's COVID book.
That, and a lot more, below. This is This Week in Misinformation.
-- Kevin