Listen to the article
The 2024 U.S. election has revealed a disturbing transformation in how social media shapes political discourse, with platform owners wielding unprecedented power to influence public opinion while gaining direct access to the highest levels of government, according to media manipulation experts.
As Election Day approached, social media was flooded with increasingly outrageous claims aimed at undermining election integrity. These included conspiracy theories about immigrants plotting to undermine conservatives, allegations of excess ballots in California, and rumors about corrupted voting machines.
While these narratives proved unnecessary given Donald Trump’s decisive victory, they exposed how disinformation has evolved since 2016. No longer limited to anonymous accounts amplified by bots, today’s falsehoods spread faster and wider across platforms that have become battlegrounds for narrative control.
“Social media platforms now warp public opinion by deciding what is seen and when users see it, as algorithms double as newsfeed and timeline editors,” explains Joan Donovan, a media manipulation researcher and assistant professor of journalism at Boston University. “When tech CEOs encode their political beliefs into platform design, it becomes a form of technofascism, where technology is used for political suppression of speech and to repress organization of resistance.”
The political viewpoints of tech executives like Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg are increasingly embedded in their algorithms, directly influencing what content users encounter. Meta, for example, has reportedly limited discussions about political power and even downranked posts using the word “vote” on Instagram. The company’s Twitter competitor, Threads, suspended journalists for reporting on Trump’s former chief of staff’s comments about Trump’s admiration of Hitler.
This represents a dramatic shift from Meta’s previous approach. In 2016, Facebook embedded employees directly in political campaigns, providing guidance on branding and audience expansion. By 2019, Zuckerberg positioned himself as a free speech advocate, claiming Facebook was inspired by his desire to give students a voice during the Iraq War – despite the platform’s origins as a site rating Harvard women’s appearances.
Today, Zuckerberg appears to have abandoned this stance, instead disincentivizing political discussion altogether. His recent letter to Republican Jim Jordan expressing regret over pandemic-era content moderation decisions was widely viewed as an attempt to curry favor with the incoming Trump administration.
Meanwhile, X (formerly Twitter) has embraced what critics call “disinformation chaos,” with owner Elon Musk becoming a significant purveyor of anti-immigrant conspiracy theories. The platform has been criticized for relentlessly promoting both Musk’s and Trump’s accounts through its “For You” algorithm, while simultaneously working with the Trump campaign to ban accounts and suppress links to leaked documents that portrayed vice presidential candidate JD Vance negatively.
“The design of platforms is now inextricable from the politics of the owner,” Donovan notes.
Musk’s political alignment with Trump has been clear. He supported the president-elect through controversial methods, including a political action committee that gave cash to petition signers, and personally spent millions on canvassers while campaigning in Pennsylvania. Following Trump’s victory, Musk is positioned to join the proposed “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE), where he has stated plans to cut $2 trillion from the national budget.
This evolution wasn’t inevitable. After 2016, when social media was recognized as being weaponized by both foreign and domestic actors to spread disinformation, hundreds of studies documented how platforms amplified conspiracy theories and misinformation. By 2020, disinformation had evolved into its own industry, culminating in the January 6 Capitol riot.
The subsequent unprecedented banning of sitting President Trump by major social media companies demonstrated their power as political actors – a move that ultimately prompted Musk to purchase Twitter, lay off staff, and release internal communications.
The impact on public discourse has been profound. A recent Ipsos poll indicates Trump voters believed disinformation on several key issues, perceiving immigration, crime, and economic conditions as worse than data suggests.
Addressing this challenge requires a multifaceted approach, Donovan argues. This includes state legislation to fund local journalism, institutional commitment to truth despite potential retaliation, and individual action through supporting community organizations focused on issues like women’s rights and immigration.
“Even subscribing to a local news outlet is a profound political act these days,” Donovan concludes. “Let that sink in.”
Verify This Yourself
Use these professional tools to fact-check and investigate claims independently
Reverse Image Search
Check if this image has been used elsewhere or in different contexts
Ask Our AI About This Claim
Get instant answers with web-powered AI analysis
Related Fact-Checks
See what other fact-checkers have said about similar claims
Want More Verification Tools?
Access our full suite of professional disinformation monitoring and investigation tools
16 Comments
The increasing power of social media platforms to control the narrative is a troubling trend. While the platforms have become crucial tools for communication and information sharing, their potential for misuse by bad actors is a serious concern that needs to be addressed.
Absolutely. The threat of disinformation and manipulation on these platforms is a complex challenge that requires a multifaceted approach, involving regulation, transparency, and a shift in the business models that currently incentivize the spread of misinformation.
The idea of tech CEOs wielding such direct power over public opinion through their platforms is deeply troubling. This underscores the urgent need for comprehensive reforms to address the systemic issues that enable the spread of disinformation and the manipulation of political discourse.
Agreed. We need a multi-stakeholder approach involving policymakers, tech companies, and civil society to find solutions that protect the integrity of our information ecosystem while preserving the benefits of social media platforms.
The evolution of disinformation from bots to corporate influence is a concerning trend that highlights the growing power of tech companies in shaping the political landscape. This article serves as a wake-up call for the need to rethink the regulation and governance of social media platforms.
Fascinating how disinformation has evolved from bots to corporate influence. It’s concerning to see how social media platforms can shape public opinion through algorithm-driven content curation. This certainly highlights the need for greater transparency and accountability around these systems.
I agree, the ability of tech CEOs to directly influence political discourse through their platforms is a worrying development. We need stronger guardrails and oversight to ensure a healthy, balanced information ecosystem.
The article’s exploration of the growing influence of tech CEOs and corporations in shaping political discourse through social media platforms is deeply concerning. This underscores the critical need for robust regulation, transparency, and accountability measures to protect the integrity of our information ecosystem.
The shift from bot-driven disinformation to corporate-led influence campaigns is a troubling development that underscores the need for a comprehensive rethinking of social media regulation and governance. This article raises important questions about the role of tech CEOs in shaping political discourse.
The transformation of disinformation tactics from bots to corporate-driven influence campaigns is a troubling development that demands urgent attention. This article highlights the need for comprehensive reforms to address the systemic vulnerabilities that enable the spread of falsehoods and the manipulation of public opinion.
Absolutely. Preserving the benefits of social media while mitigating the risks of disinformation will require a multi-stakeholder approach involving policymakers, tech companies, and civil society. Finding the right balance between innovation and accountability is crucial for the health of our democratic institutions.
This article highlights the evolving nature of disinformation and the growing influence of corporate actors in shaping political discourse. It’s a sobering reminder of the need for greater vigilance and oversight when it comes to social media and its impact on our democratic processes.
This article provides a sobering analysis of the rise of corporate-driven disinformation on social media. The ability of tech CEOs to directly influence public opinion through their platforms is a threat to the integrity of our democratic processes that must be urgently addressed.
Absolutely. Strengthening transparency, accountability, and oversight mechanisms around social media platforms is crucial to mitigating the risks of disinformation and preserving a healthy, balanced information ecosystem.
This article highlights the alarming evolution of disinformation, from the earlier bot-driven tactics to the more sophisticated and far-reaching corporate influence campaigns. It’s a stark reminder of the urgent need to address the systemic vulnerabilities in our information ecosystem.
Agreed. The unchecked power of tech platforms to shape public opinion is a threat to the integrity of our democratic processes. Policymakers, tech companies, and civil society must work together to find solutions that preserve the benefits of social media while mitigating the risks of disinformation.