Why are we trying to ban TikTok again?
And: Trump makes false claims about AI manipulation, Gillespie County counts its ballots by hand
The Civic Listening Corps was formed in January 2022 to give communities across the country the tools and training needed to identify and fight the misinformation we see online every day. Our goal is to use the knowledge we gather together to prevent further attempts to undermine our civic discourse.
By subscribing to our reports, sharing this post, or directing your friends and family to civiclistening.org, YOU can make a difference against the spread of online misinformation.
Misleading claim: Legislators will ban TikTok to suppress political speech
On Wednesday, March 13, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 252 to 65 in favor of a bill that could pave the way for a potential ban on TikTok. The bill, currently being debated in the Senate, allows TikTok six months to separate from ByteDance, a Chinese company, or risk a ban throughout the United States. Lawmakers supporting the bill allege that TikTok poses a national security threat, claiming “the Chinese government could use its intelligence laws against ByteDance, forcing it to hand over the data of US app users.”
Several conservative voices, such as Majorie Taylor Green, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and Tucker Carlson, announced their disapproval of the ban, arguing that it could result in censorship and represent an overreach of government power.
Individuals who have previously posted election conspiracy theories argue that the ban on TikTok is a ploy to censor their opinions as well as hinder voters' ability to report election fraud. Some contend that TikTok, known for harboring numerous conspiracy theories, is being targeted to suppress information deemed confidential by certain "elites." Others claim that the ban on TikTok will extend to banning all social media platforms to censor public discourse leading up to the election. Currently, there is no evidence supporting these claims.
Where can I learn more?
Why the U.S. is Weighing Whether to Ban TikTok, from the New York Times
A podcast episode explaining the motivations to ban TikTok, from Vox’s Today Explained
House TikTok bill gives ByteDance 6 months to sell. That’s unlikely, from The Washington Post
False claim: Clips depicting Trump in a negative light were AI-generated
On Tuesday, former special counsel Robert Hur, the investigator tasked with looking into Joe Biden’s upkeep of confidential documents, testified before the House Judiciary Committee. Hur was probed by both Democrats, who claimed his takeaways from a five-hour interview with Biden unfairly classified the president as elderly and incapable, and Republicans, who disagreed with Hur’s conclusion not to recommend charges against Biden.
During the hearing, Rep. Jerry Nadler, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, played decontextualized clips of former President Donald Trump fumbling his words, slurring his speech, or otherwise sounding old and infirm – including when Trump called Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán “the great leader of Turkey” in October 2023 and when Trump confused Nikki Hayley with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The clips were presented out of context and cherry-picked to showcase that Trump, too, has memory lapses and emphasize that the former president is not much younger than Biden.
Trump, following the circulation of the video showing his gaffes, took to Truth Social, writing: “Artificial Intelligence was used by them in their videos against me. Can’t do that Joe!” There is no evidence that AI was used to fabricate the footage in the video – the clips can be traced to actual speeches and events that Trump spoke at.
Where can I learn more?
8 best practices for state election officials on AI, from the Brookings Institution
What You Need to Know About Generative AI's Emerging Role in Political Campaigns, from Tech Policy Press
2024 candidates are using AI in their campaigns- Here’s how to spot it, from Forbes
The AI election podcast episode, from Vox’s The Weeds
Misleading claim: Gillespie County, Texas proved that hand-counting ballots is feasible
Last week, the Republican Party of Gillespie County, located in central Texas, chose to hand-count the results of the district's primary elections, a process that, from start to finish, took almost 24 consecutive hours and involved 200 people counting nearly 8,000 primary ballots. Despite “Texas Secretary of State and other election experts warn[ing] Gillespie County Republicans the process would be expensive, time-consuming and less reliable,” some constituents of the county insisted the method was more reliable, stating, “we love hand counting…I believe it’s a foolproof system.”
Despite multiple complications involving hand-counting – such as longer wait for results, more manual labor, and less accurate results – those who previously spread fictitious election integrity claims believe that these difficulties are greatly exaggerated. In the case of Gillespie County, those favoring hand-counting asserted the media fabricated the amount of time it took to tally the results, and in reality, the process was more efficient than machine tabulation. However, Gillespie County (with a population of 27,000) was the second-to-last county to report its results in the state (ahead of Harris County, population 4.8 million) It remains to be seen if any candidates will challenge the results.
Where can I learn more?
Republicans in a Texas county ditched technology and counted votes by hand. Here’s what happened, from Texas Tribune
Explainer on the risks of hand-counting ballots, from the Brennan Center for Justice
Hand-counting ballots may sound nice. It's actually less accurate and more expensive, from NPR