Voting misinformation flourishes on Facebook

https://www.propublica.org/article/outright-lies-voting-misinformation-flourishes-on-facebook

by hhs • 6 years ago

153 61 6 years ago

endtime• 6 years ago

These are all predictions about the future, so of course they don't have concrete evidence. Holding them to that standard so they can be declared "false" or "misinformation" is a rhetorical trick.

It's pretty hard for anyone to be objective about any political issue, but for what it's worth I vote third party, so my opinion about this is as non-partisan as I think it can be. That disclaimer made, from a purely engineering perspective, mail-in voting doesn't seem very secure. The 2016 election was pretty close; it wouldn't take that many mistakes or deliberate malicious acts to sway the outcome, especially with no clear chain of custody over people's ballots.

winkeltripel• 6 years ago

So, When compared to paper ballots, I believe that your statements are true.

Many states use electronic voting machines. These run unverified code, without verifiable paper receipts (IE a public database of all the votes + receipt numbers, against which individuals may check their votes, and from which the official tally is calculated). This also has no chain of custody. I would choose mail-in ballots over electronic vote systems every time.

BGZq7• 6 years ago

It's one thing to say that mail in voting could potentially have security issues. It's another to say that Democrats plan to light ballots on fire. In order to legitimately claim that with any certainty they would need actual proof of someone developing a plan or expressing an interest in doing so. They clearly don't have that. Maybe "false" or "misinformation" are not accurate enough terms but I think "unsubstantiated fear-mongering" is fair and would have the same effect.

mynameishere• 6 years ago

That is a metaphor. I guess people should not use colorful language when others might jump to any criticism.

Joeri• 6 years ago

The specific claim was that barack obama for certain would light ballots on fire. Accusing a specific individual in the public sphere of definitely intending to commit a crime sounds like it matches the legal definition of libel to me.

shuntress• 6 years ago

The concrete evidence comes from the past, not from the future.

From a purely engineering perspective, the fact is that it works and works well.

The simple solution of stating your name + address (or receiving a ballot addressed to you by mail) then having your name checked off the list when you return the ballot is friction-less, robust, and extremely difficult to attack at scale.

Over-engineering the system's security would most likely do more harm than good.

raxxorrax• 6 years ago

Not from the US, I think mail in voting can be secure, but I would not recommend starting this election for the reasons you mentioned and people need to believe voting isn't manipulated.

I know the US elections are pretty people centric, even though you are not allowed to vote the president directly. But if anyone could come up with an honest assessment of the problems the US is facing and offer some solutions or strategies, I think the chances to win are very high. You would have to beat building a wall towards Mexico.

Trumpers need to make peace with lefties and vice versa. Nobody will win otherwise anyway. I believe Biden will win the presidential election though. Not by merit perhaps, but because of demographic and inclination of voters.

If I recall the work of Democrats the last election cycle I see questionable FISA abuse and lying about Russia as the primary "achievements". I think there is room to do better.

What do I see when I look at Trump? I don't think he takes his presidency that seriously. He didn't kill minorities as some said he would.

triceratops8• 6 years ago

even though you are not allowed to vote the president directly

Yeah, you are.

He didn't kill minorities

Covid kills minorities at a far higher rate than the general population. His incompetence in handling the epidemic has killed minorities (it's killed a lot of people, but disproportionately minorities).[1]

1. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/05/30/8654130...

ipnon6• 6 years ago

A recent Washington Post analysis analyzed three states with all-mail elections — Colorado, Oregon and Washington — and found just 372 potential irregularities among 14.6 million votes, or 0.0025%.[0]

They seem insecure, but they are not insecure. That is the problem. The perception that public elections are vulnerable to massive voter fraud is what drives these conspiracy theories, not the reality.

[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/minuscule-number-of-...

ses19842• 6 years ago

Just because mail in ballots haven't been attacked doesn't mean they can't or won't.

I'm all for more mail in ballots, just saying.

_2d302• 6 years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_North_Carolina%27s_9th_co...

mtgp10007• 6 years ago

Wait, so an outlet which is openly at odds with the current administration performed an investigation into claims made by the current administration, found the claims to be false, and we're just going to take the conclusion at face value? Nevermind the fact that this was conducted by journalists (i.e. non specialists who have a propensity for misreporting technical information).

Conspiracy theory...what a convenient dismissal of a potentially genuine problem. All of our institutions are rife with abuse but we're supposed to believe voter fraud doesn't exist because WAPO says it doesn't and, more importantly, because Trump said it does...

Edit: and they apparently looked at 3 states. Unqualified journalists should stay away from statistics or "fact checking" - at this point they are actively harming society with their piss poor, agenda driven "analyses".

RcouF1uZ4gsC• 6 years ago

Did the study document what type of irregularities they could have missed? It is like claiming I have never been hacked because my logs never showed anything.

If you really want to look at the issue, you need to approach it like a security audit. What is your threat model? What are the failure modes? What are the ways that there can be fraud without setting off red flags.

Right off the bat, an issue with all-mail elections is coercion, and suppression. If the ballots all arrive in the mail at the house, someone can use coercion to make sure all the ballots are filled out as they wish. This is much harder to do in person.

And that vulnerability popped up with less than a minute of thought. If approached from a security perspective, I am sure others would pop up.

Now, after serious analysis, it may be concluded that the benefits outweigh the risks, but a serious analysis needs to be done.

baddox• 6 years ago

There’s nothing special about “predictions about the future” that means they are incapable of being false or misleading. In fact, our legal system already handles cases like this. For example, fraudulent investment schemes are little more than predictions of what will happen in the future, yet those predictions are prosecuted as being fraudulent.

50ckpuppet• 6 years ago

So what. This isn't a Facebook problem. It's an education and gullibility problem. There should be a class in the every high schools history department the explains propaganda and gossip.

HumblyTossed• 6 years ago

There should be a class in the every high schools history department the explains propaganda and gossip.

It wouldn't help. Facebook and other social media outlets are geared to giving you more of what you click. Happen to click a few far Z-Wing posts? You'll get more. Once a pattern develops they feed you what you click most so that you'll stay engaged. No amount of high schooling will prepare people for that. The _only_ way to fight it is to actively disengage.

goatinaboat• 6 years ago

The insidious thing is: if you post a rebuttal to some assertion, all Facebook sees is that you engaged with that content. So it will show you more and more. You will become exhausted with the arguments and when your guard is down: ads

fluffernutter2• 6 years ago

This isn't a Facebook problem

This is most certainly a problem Facebook created, however. Blaming the public for "not knowing how to use nukes better" while still building and cramming nukes in their inboxes is just ridiculous and it's time for this charade to end.

triceratops8• 6 years ago

Obviously, because students pay full and complete attention in high school history class. And remember what they learned for the rest of their lives. /s

Also this doesn't help the majority of the population that is older than high school age.

Propaganda is done because it works.

drapery• 6 years ago

Why is it that people default to a class in highschool as the solution to our societal problems?

Poor financial literacy = HS tax class

Misinformation on social media = HS propaganda class

Teens can't deal with their emotions = HS yoga class

Also we read Animal Farm and we talked about propaganda in history classes. Another class just for Facebook is not the solution.

salimmadjd2• 6 years ago

I’m becoming weary of all these Facebook scare tactics. This types of misinformation has been on Fox and the rest of cable networks. Not to mention radio talk shows of the past 20-30 years.

IMHO, additionally this kind of data investigation needs someone with a good data science background. Otherwise all we're doing is using very limited observable dataset to make bold statements, which ironically what is happening with scaring public about voting by mail.

The author of this article is some former pentagon and possibly a military spook and not a data scientist https://projects.propublica.org/trump-town/staffers/ryan-mcc...

fluffernutter2• 6 years ago

The author of this article is some former pentagon and possibly a military spook

This is literally a strawman argument.

this kind of data investigation needs someone with a good data science background. Otherwise all we're doing is using very limited observable dataset to make bold statements

Some of the research mentioned was funded by:

The Newton and Rochelle Becker Charitable Trust
Craig Newmark Philanthropies
Democracy Fund
Facebook Journalism Project
Ford Foundation
Google News Initiative
John S. and James L. Knight Foundation
Open Society Foundations
Bernard and Anne Spitzer Charitable Trust

rfrey• 6 years ago

Do you mean literally an ad hominem argument? /pedant

hedora• 6 years ago

Do you know of a news agency with a better record with data science?

Propublica is the gold standard in this space as far as I know. (538 is a close second in my book, but they’re narrowly focused on politics and sports).

I suggest browsing their homepage to see what I mean. Well over fifty percent of the stories are backed by datasets they gathered themselves, and a good chunk of the remaining ones are about problems with lack of government transparency that directly impacted them:

https://www.propublica.org/

If you are a data scientist, you might be interested in other data sets they curate. These are mostly useful for social scientists, journalists and policy makers:

https://www.propublica.org/datastore/

Disclaimer: I’ve donated to them in the past.

salimmadjd2• 6 years ago

Propublica has done some of the best reporting I've read recently. Example the story with the USS Fitzgerald [0]. I don't remember anything as good in recent memory.

However, that doesn't mean everything they do has the same standard nor all their journalists approach their work with the same type of journalistic rigor. I think we need to judge every article on its own merit and not just based on some brand value alone.

[0] https://features.propublica.org/navy-accidents/uss-fitzgeral...

zackees• 6 years ago

1 in 5 Ballots Rejected as Fraud Is Charged in N.J. Mail-In Election:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/06/26/1_in_5...

Many other stories like this.

What's alarming is that the democrats tried to push through a bill that eliminated the state laws for voter integrity for all mail in ballots across states: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/may/12/democrats-c...

So if this has become law, what would have stopped China from printing a bunch of ballots and sending in them?

Nothing.

The media told us that mail in ballot fraud was non existent. Then when the cases started to reveal this was a false narrative, the media moved the goal posts and said "oh it happens, but only happens by republicans."

It's just an ever changing set of goal posts. It's very clear for those of us paying attention that mail in ballot fraud is the MAIN vector of voter fraud now. Those that proclaim this doesn't exist are naive or willfully deceptive.

The idea that you can vote without an ID is really unprecedented in the whole world. The united states is special in that it allows it at all. But this is quickly changing.

Tick Tock.

DarkWiiPlayer• 6 years ago

I just hope digital voting becomes a thing soon enough. Yes there are still some unsolved problems, but I don't think they're unsolvable. Cryptography is a thing.

EarthMephit• 6 years ago

We recently had a successful voluntary postal ballot on gay marriage here in Australia

No reports of fraud that I know of - A handful of people trying to steal ballots, but they were just invalidated and sent out again

coolgeek5• 6 years ago

So here's the thing - thousands of Republicans and conservatives have made claims of widespread vote/voter fraud.

I'm not aware of a single claim that withstood scrutiny or that was even attempted to prosecute, let alone done so successfully.

I'm not talking about isolated instances. That certainly has happened. I'm talking enough fraud to actually change an election. And I'm going to restrict you to the state or federal level, as I wouldn't be surprised that it happens at the local/county level in some hick outposts.

So what do ya got? Show me an election that was actually affected by widespread fraud.

manigandham5• 6 years ago

This isn’t a right-wing situation but a real valid concern given plenty of reports between gerrymandering, polling center availability and security, chain of custody, paper processing, electronic machine hacks, suspect company backgrounds, etc.

The major problem is you can’t measure it in the first place because there is no truth set. Unless you can follow up with every single individual and confirm their vote, you dont have the data.

Voting misinformation flourishes on Facebook

Related Stories