Efforts against lies lose steam
In the wake of the riot on Capitol Hill on Jan. 6, 2021, a groundswell built in Washington to rein in the onslaught of lies that had fueled the assault on the peaceful transfer of power.
Social media companies suspended Donald Trump, then the president, and many of his allies from the platforms they had used to spread misinformation about his defeat and whip up the attempt to overturn it. President Joe Biden’s administration, Democrats in Congress and even some Republicans sought to do more to hold the companies accountable. Academic researchers wrestled with how to strengthen efforts to monitor false posts.
Trump and his allies embarked instead on a counteroffensive, a coordinated effort to block what they viewed as a dangerous effort to censor conservatives.
They have unquestionably prevailed.
Waged in the courts, in Congress and in the seething precincts of the internet, that effort has eviscerated attempts to shield elections from disinformation in the social media era. It tapped into — and then, critics say, twisted — the debate over free speech and the government’s role in policing content.
Projects that were once bipartisan, including one started by the Trump administration, have been recast as deep-state conspiracies to rig elections. Facing legal and political blowback, the Biden administration has largely abandoned moves that might be construed as stifling political speech.
While little noticed by most Americans, the effort has helped cut a path for Trump’s attempt to recapture the presidency. Disinformation about elections is once again coursing through news feeds, aiding Trump as he fuels his comeback with falsehoods about the 2020 election.
The counteroffensive was led by former Trump aides and allies who had also pushed to overturn the 2020 election. They include Stephen Miller, the White House policy adviser; the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, both Republicans; and lawmakers in Congress like Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, who since last year has led a House subcommittee to investigate what it calls “the weaponization of government.”
Those involved draw financial support from conservative donors who have backed groups that promoted lies about voting in 2020.
“The people that benefit from the spread of disinformation have effectively silenced many of the people that would try to call them out,” said Kate Starbird, a professor at the University of Washington whose research on disinformation made her a target of the effort.
The efforts took aim at a patchwork of systems, started during the Trump administration, that were intended to protect U.S. democracy from foreign interference.
As those systems evolved to address domestic sources of misinformation, federal officials and private researchers began urging social media companies to do more to enforce their policies against harmful content.
That work has led to some of the most important First Amendment cases of the internet age, including one to be argued Monday at the Supreme Court.
That lawsuit, filed by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, accuses federal officials of colluding with or coercing the platforms to censor content critical of the government.
Even before the court rules, Trump’s allies have succeeded in paralyzing the Biden administration and the network of researchers who monitor disinformation.
Officials at the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department continue to monitor foreign disinformation, but the government has suspended virtually all cooperation with the social media platforms to address posts that originate in the United States.