Read on Twitter
I've been tracking disinformation from the political and media establishment. Two examples:
1. Calling elections with varying standards. The most notable example is Arizona.
2. Claiming that there's no basis for suspecting fraud.
1. Calling elections with varying standards. The most notable example is Arizona.
2. Claiming that there's no basis for suspecting fraud.
There's also been concerted denial that a nexus of NGOs, national security, & DNC-aligned forces have been using a spectrum tactics to unseat Trump. We can debate whether "Color Revolution" is the appropriate term, but denying this is simply untrue.
We also saw claims that "declaring the winner" is the role of news media, though this was later deleted and corrected (so we can call it misinfo vs disinfo) https://twitter.com/jeffgiesea/status/1323757456334475265?s=20
The fact that polls were so wrong — again — could be called misinformation, at the very least. Specific pollsters who are perpetually wrong in the same direction and are boosted by media could be viewed as nodes of disinformation. https://news.northeastern.edu/2020/11/04/the-polls-were-still-way-off-in-the-2020-election-even-after-accounting-for-2016s-errors/
This one is subtle, but the call to "count every vote" muddies waters around legal and nonlegal votes and provides air cover for fraud. It should be: Count every LEGAL vote, just once. https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/celebrities-joe-biden-every-vote-counts-message-true-democracy
If we want to discuss delegitimizing narratives, recall Hillary Clinton urging Biden not to concede "under any circumstances" in the election
The lack of coverage of Biden family corruption — increasingly substantiated & corroborated — can be seen as disinfo by omission. There were reasonable concerns around hack-and-leaks but there was no evidence or neutral standard. @nypost was deplatformed over it.
