Remove Your Tinfoil Hats, Everyone; Social Media Mishaps Aren’t Always Billionaire Election Stealing Plots

from the take-a-deeeeeeeeeep-breath dept

Please. I beg of people: stop it. Stop it with the conspiracy theories. Stop it with the nonsense. If you can’t find something you want on social media, it’s not because a billionaire is trying to influence an election. It might just be because some antifraud system went haywire or something.

Last week we wrote about totally overreacting to the Kamala Harris campaign account on ExTwitter triggering some rate limiting efforts. It appeared to be fairly typical (if poorly implemented) tools to prevent spam accounts and such. But people insisted that it must be Elon putting his finger on the scale, with some even suggesting it must be “election interference.” It was not.

Of course, perhaps it’s no wonder that people thought this, because lots of people seem to want to believe that any anomalous thing they see that looks negative for the candidate they support must be “election interference.”

Even Elon.

You might think, being the super genius he supposedly is, that just days after he was falsely accused of engaging in election interference for just poorly implemented algorithmic stuff, he might be more prone to taking a breath before screaming the same thing about others. But nope. Not Elon “Confirmation Bias is my Middle Name” Musk.

Here’s Elon insisting that it must be election interference because on his personal Google search, he typed in “President Donald” and it didn’t show a search result for Donald Trump:

Image

First of all, multiple people responded noting that they’re not getting those results. I checked the same search and did, in fact, see Trump recommended (actually, it recommended Trump as soon as I typed “President”):

Image

But, more to the point, assuming Elon is actually seeing that, it’s almost certainly some weird temporary glitch, just like Elon’s site making it briefly harder to follow the Harris campaign. These things happen. You would think that Elon would recognize how unlikely and improbable it is that Google would be removing Donald Trump from Google’s autocomplete “predictions” system. And, even if they did, who in their right mind would think that would be a useful way to influence an election?

I mean, how stupid would that be? Who is not going to vote for Trump because autocomplete doesn’t name him that one time you did a search?

And you’d think that Elon would be even more thoughtful on this, given that not a day goes by without people overreacting and freaking out over things that they falsely believe he’s doing.

For example, this weekend, people flipped out claiming that former White House photographer Pete Souza had been banned by Elon for posting a recent AP photo and calling out that Trump’s ear no longer looked injured (which seems like a non-story in its own right; it was grazed, and grazes heal).

Image

People were sending this to me and saying I should write it up. But it seemed pretty clear that Souza had shut down his own account, because it says “Something went wrong.” When an account is suspended, it says that the account had been suspended. And, sure enough, on Monday, Souza went to Instagram to note that he’d just gotten tired of harassment and had chosen to shut down the account.

And, then, of course, on Monday night, ExTwitter actually did suspend the “official” account for the “White Dudes for Harris” campaign, around the same time that group completed a fundraising Zoom that raised about $4 million for the campaign. Unlike the Souza account, you’ll notice it actually does say account suspended:

Image

The account itself posted that the account was “locked” due to “unusual activity.”

Image

And, uh, yeah? That’s not that surprising. Shouldn’t an account suddenly amassing a ton of followers with no clear official connection to the campaign and pushing people to donate maybe ring some internal alarm bells on any trust and safety team? It wouldn’t be a surprise if it tripped some guardwires and was locked and/or suspended briefly while the account was reviewed.

That’s how this stuff works.

Someone associated with the account separately shared that it was suspended for “violating our rules against evading suspension.”

Image

Many people immediately cried foul and again insisted that Elon was deliberately trying to tip the scales. But again, there remains no evidence that that is the case. The message is a bit confusing, but that rule violation message shows up semi-frequently, often when multiple people are registering similar accounts. There were reports of other similarly named accounts being registered at the same time. And that could certainly lead to triggering some internal trust & safety alerts of either attempted fraud or setting up backup accounts, knowing that some accounts were planning to violate rules.

And, of course, soon after everyone lost their minds and insisted that this was Elon freaking out, the account came back online. Also, of course, it wasn’t the ExTwitter account that was raising the money. It was the Zoom call.

So, please, would everyone just chill out. These all seem like pretty typical things that happen all the time. No, these systems don’t always work perfectly, or the way that you want them to work. But stop with the conspiracy theories or the idea that there are evil billionaires behind everything not working exactly the way you want it to.

And no, none of this is “election interference.” Even when Elon Musk infringes on a photographer’s copyright to show a hashmoji of Donald Trump with a raised fist any time someone posted the #Trump2024 hashtag.

Nor is it election interference when Elon Musk shares a doctored video of Kamala Harris on his widely followed ExTwitter account. It’s in poor taste and an almost certain violation of Elon’s own rules for the platform, but he’s allowed to break those rules because he gets to make them.

The key point here is that some of this stuff just happens. It’s part of how algorithms work. Sometimes they make mistakes. Sometimes you disagree with why they do things. And people need to stop overreacting to it all. Most of the examples discussed in this article were just normal things that happen all the time, but which got a ton of extra attention because everyone’s on edge and amped up.

That doesn’t mean people shouldn’t be on the lookout for stuff, but don’t immediately jump to conclusions and assume malfeasance.

And that goes both ways for Elon: dude, you should fucking know better. And for everyone rushing to blame Musk, focus on the shit he actually does do, not the stuff you’re sure he must be doing without proof.

Filed Under: , , , , , , ,
Companies: google, twitter, x

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Remove Your Tinfoil Hats, Everyone; Social Media Mishaps Aren’t Always Billionaire Election Stealing Plots”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
55 Comments
This comment has been deemed funny by the community.
tanj says:

Just because something went wrong doesn’t mean there’s a conspiracy

That’s what they want you to believe.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Nathan F (profile) says:

Does X even still have people in its trust and safety department? I think it would be pretty demoralizing to set up all these rules only to have Musk go, “nah, they ok. Unblock them” on some of the worst offenders.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

Can you imagine being the new hire on Trust & Safety?

“Yeah, all the people who knew things quit or were fired. Here are the notes they left. No guarantee how relevant they still are. Bit-rot, don’t ya know.”

Really, it’s a bit of “Goodnight, Wesley. Probably fire you in the morning.”

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Elon is feeding these narratives as much as anything. The Right Wing is feeding these narratives as much as anything.

They spent years screaming that everything they don’t like on the internet is a conspiracy against conservatives. Congrats. Technical glitches being portrayed as evidence of conspiracies is now part of the zeitgeist.

They spent decades training us to immediately move on and accept it when some nutjob shoots up a classroom on a weekly basis. Congrats. Ignoring shootings as background noise is now part of the zeitgeist.

This is just the right wing’s own low-information, post-truth social landscape being applied to themselves. The genie isn’t going back in the bottle. They may be engaging in bad logic and/or reasoning. But much like those who shrugged off the attempt on Trump’s life, those attacking Elmo are at least consistently applying the zeitgeist.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

With verification so fundamentally broken — when the campaigns spin up one of these donation accounts — how do we know which one is real? Which is a troll?

Twitter trying (and failing) at some backend rudimentary verification in the face on Musk curb stomping the last regime’s plans for no reason should be a real fear for our future. Because I imagine at some point we will get a troll farm setup some pro-Harris stage level campaign accounts to generate misinformation and Twitter will be too slow to react because all of the safeguards are off.

TKnarr (profile) says:

In general when any sort of problem occurs, don’t panic. The Web is built on the assumption that things fail and depends on retries to let working stuff pick the request back up. So just hit refresh and see if anything changes. If not, wait a bit and try again and see if it’s recovered. Account suspensions and such are the same, but since it’s humans involved in the glitch it may take a bit longer to fix it. Only start to wonder if it stays broken for a significant time.

Although feel free to mock the service mercilessly if the glitch triggers nonsensical or misleading error messages.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

“They start forming off the coast of Africa, as they’re moving across the Atlantic, we drop a bomb inside the eye of the hurricane and it disrupts it. Why can’t we do that?”

“I never said this. Just more FAKE NEWS!”

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

I’ve tried to read some of the transcripts from some of Trump’s speeches at rallies and it’s like reading something produced by a bad LLM with ADHD or a poorly made Markov-chain were the probability is random so I’m not at all surprised Trump denying that said some things because no one including him can keep track of all the spurious words he vomits out.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4

I’m talking about the character. As much as I don’t condone eating human flesh or any central nervous tissue whatsoever, I do not believe a connoisseur of human brains would want Trump for dinner or conversation.

Then again, I don’t know what dementia plaque tastes like. I wish I didn’t know what it sounds like.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4

Well, Anthony Hopkins is autistic, and therefore has more empathy for others than an individual with neurotypical spectrum disorder like Trump.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

Democrats and readers of this site are some of the leading spreaders of mis- and disinformation.

Not how I would spell ‘Republicans’ and ‘Fox News’, but you do you, I guess.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
That One Guy (profile) says:

Hoist by your own petard as the saying goes

And this is why even though I was inclined to believe that the Harris account thing was a legitimate mistake due to it honestly triggering one of the remaining working anti-bot/scam filters I also had no problem with people accusing him of doing it deliberately: Because he has no problem making those accusations in the other direction.

If you encourage the mindset that anything that negatively impacts your preferred (convicted felon) candidate must be deliberate election interference you don’t get to suddenly claim foul when people accuse you of election interference should a democrat candidate be negatively impacted on your platform.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Arianity says:

So, please, would everyone just chill out. These all seem like pretty typical things that happen all the time. No, these systems don’t always work perfectly, or the way that you want them to work. But stop with the conspiracy theories or the idea that there are evil billionaires behind everything not working exactly the way you want it to.

Eh, this is why reputation matters. Elon has built a reputation for doing things like banning journalists. I don’t see any reason to give him the benefit of the doubt when something goes wrong. This is the consequences of his own actions.

That doesn’t mean people shouldn’t be on the lookout for stuff, but don’t immediately jump to conclusions and assume malfeasance.

When it involves someone with a record of malfeasance, it’s absolutely fine to assume that. You shouldn’t take it too far, and pretend it’s ironclad fact, but as an initial assumption consistent with his past behavior? That’s appropriate.

Nor is it election interference when Elon Musk shares a doctored video of Kamala Harris on his widely followed ExTwitter account. It’s in poor taste and an almost certain violation of Elon’s own rules for the platform, but he’s allowed to break those rules because he gets to make them.

The phrase “election interference” isn’t synonymous with illegal. He’s legally allowed to do it, that doesn’t mean people can’t criticize it.

People aren’t ok with billionaires using their influence/platforms to sway elections, and that’s ok to point out.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

Yeah, seems like giving Musk the benefit of the doubt is pretty silly at this point. He could make a good faith show of proving that he’s not attempting to influence the election by opening up access to a few journalists to investigate the inner workings of the company like he did when he first bought twitter. But nobody really believes he’ll do something like that now that he is central to the story. So given he won’t do that, I don’t think anyone should think twice about assuming he has an agenda, even if it’s automated failures leading to short term suspensions. I don’t doubt that if this was happening to conservative accounts he would be sending 1 AM emails to wake up staff to solve it asap.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

Yeah, but the phrase “election interference” has meaning. But you can make it mean whatever you want, even contingent on circumstances. Many people do it now, it’s cool.

brianary (profile) says:

Tfg's ear

For once, his misrepresentation and exaggeration is right there for all to see. That absurdly oversized gauze bandage, adopted as a rallying symbol by supporters, now seems as legitimate as the sharpie mark added to a hurricane map.

Yes, people lose perspective in hyperbolic speculation, but to say this is a non-story is overcorrection.

Will it change a single mind? Who knows? Let’s not presumptively assume the answer is no.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

After the assassination attempt, a lot of people got tattoos of Trump with the wound on his ear. I want such a tattoo with text beneath saying, “Shame the sniper missed.”

dickeyrat says:

Simple: Elon by origin has NO concept of our rapidly-fading propensity to allow opposing points of view. He wants his fat trump to rule as dictator-for-life. Elon’sfat trump will bless Elon with endless, permanent tax cuts. You and I pay the bill! Elementary, my dear Amerikan.

Bodger says:

Consider

Consider that just because EVERY instance isn’t part of a conspiracy SOME of them just might be and probably are. You have to consider how janky the source is.

Anonymous Coward says:

Doesn't always have to be a conspiracy

ExTwitter’s infrastructure was always a shitshow. Recently I witnessed public Tweets that load fine on one side of the pond, completely fail to load when accessed from an internet connection on the other side. Tested with different browsers on both ends as well. My guess is some CDN fuckery at work. 🙂

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Definitely agree that it’s not election interference, but…

almost certain violation of Elon’s own rules for the platform, but he’s allowed to break those rules because he gets to make them.

I think you’re letting him off easy here. Yeah, it’s his house and he gets to make the rules, but he should also be following the rules he makes. It’s a hallmark of authoritarianism for the leaders to break their own rules, and Elon doing it in his little fiefdom of ExTwitter should be called out for it on every occasion.

PaulT (profile) says:

“Nor is it election interference when Elon Musk shares a doctored video of Kamala Harris on his widely followed ExTwitter account”

I was with you until then. A person pushing a false video to an audience he knows might believe it and use it to influence their election decisions definitely counts as election interference.

Which should also put the rest of us on guard for the future in many ways. If people believe the sillier “deep fakes” and ML generated photos, and they’re getting offended about autocomplete not typing for them, what’s going to happen when the tech gets good enough that the rest of us can’t tell the difference?

Now, whether it’s a crime, can be prosecution, in incompatible with the First Amendment, etc… I’m not so sure. But, colloquially at least, I think it counts as an attempt to interfere with the election.

Right now, it’s not necessarily anything other than surge protection when Twitter blocks a hugely successful campaign or direct interference when Musk chooses to amplify obvious fake video, but I fear that the only thing protecting us from certain outcomes is the fact that Musk cratered his audience and we might not be so lucky once the tech improves to where we can’t tell the difference (and, sadly, I fear it will before 2028)

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

All hail the wisdom of PaulT! He’s not Stephen T Stone, but we can always hold out hope that eventually he’ll walk in Samuel Abram’s footsteps and come out as trans.

You fuck one goat…

— Anonymous

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the Techdirt Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...