距离下届总统大选不到一年，前总统唐纳德·特朗普和一些共和党盟友继续错误地否认前一个的结果。
十分之三的成年人认为乔·拜登总统赢得2020年大选只是因为选举舞弊蒙茅斯公爵六月份的民意调查发现。调查显示，超过三分之二的共和党人支持这一被揭穿的说法。
尽管这种谎言持续存在，但在Instagram和脸书上，以2020年大选中广泛存在的选民欺诈的不正确断言为特色的政治广告将被允许，这是一项元内容政策演出.
控制这些平台的母公司Meta改变了政策，允许政治广告商称过去的选举是欺诈性的，但禁止质疑未来或正在进行的选举有效性的广告。华尔街日报第一据报告的政策变了。
一些研究错误信息和虚假信息的研究人员告诉美国广播公司新闻，此举引发了人们对Instagram和脸书上虚假否认选举广告传播的担忧，这些广告可能会侵蚀公众对美国民主的信任，并指出否认选举广告也可能有助于推波助澜暴力极端主义就像2021年1月6日那样。
“我真的担心这是一个关键的触发因素，将使我们的选举更加分裂，导致更多的阴谋和虚假信息活动，”亚利桑那州立大学教授黑兹尔·权(Hazel Kwon)告诉美国广播公司新闻。
“最大的担忧是这会直接影响对民主制度的信任，”Kwon补充道。
然而，研究人员警告说，研究表明在线政治广告对选民情绪的影响有限，这表明政策变化对选民的影响可能小于平台庞大的用户基础可能导致一些人认为的那样。
一些专家指出，社交媒体上否认选举的广告可能有助于形成更广泛的公共对话，即使它们不会改变很大一部分个人选民的想法。
“我相信会有坏人试图操纵选举，”圣克拉拉大学法学院研究技术平台的教授埃里克·戈德曼告诉美国广播公司新闻。"目前还不清楚这种错误信息的效果如何。"
该公司在一份声明中表示，Meta的政策专注于即将到来或正在进行的选举，这些选举仍可能受到政治广告的影响，而不是已经成为历史记录的以往选举。
在回应ABC新闻的评论请求时，该公司提到了2022年8月的一篇博客文章，详细介绍了Meta对当年中期选举的方法。
“我们将拒绝鼓励人们不投票或质疑即将到来的选举合法性的广告，”书写Nick Clegg，Meta全球事务总裁。
据报道，Meta此举恰逢其他主要技术平台放松选举相关内容限制。谷歌旗下的YouTube宣布的6月，它将停止删除声称在2020年和其他过去的选举中广泛存在选民欺诈的内容。
2023年9月27日，在加利福尼亚州门洛帕克举行的Meta Connect活动期间，Meta Platforms Inc .的首席执行官马克·扎克伯格(Mark Zuckerberg)。
大卫·保罗·莫里斯/彭博
公民诚信政策更新8月，前身为Twitter的X并没有解决选民欺诈的指控。
Twitter前公民诚信产品总监爱德华·佩雷斯(Edward Perez)告诉美国广播公司新闻(ABC News)，在竞争激烈的2024年选举周期中，社交媒体上拒绝选举的内容可能会增加极端主义暴力的可能性。公民诚信包括其选举政策。佩雷斯现在是OSET研究所的董事会成员，这是一个致力于选举安全和诚信的无党派非营利组织。
“有一个非常令人不安的领域，我们有一些人采取极端主义行为，因为他们在社交媒体上读到的东西变得激进，”佩雷斯说，他指的是1月6日的叛乱分子以及极右翼阴谋论者大卫·德帕普证明…有罪周四，他因试图绑架和袭击前众议院议长南希·佩洛西的丈夫而被捕。
一些专家说，针对否认选举广告的政策变化也可能有助于形成一种政治环境，在这种环境下，更广泛的人会接受2020年大选中广泛欺诈的被揭穿的说法。
一些研究将科技平台上的新闻消费与对错误信息的信仰联系起来。A研究西北大学研究人员在2020年9月发布的一项研究发现，从社交媒体上获得消息的个人更容易相信关于冠状病毒阴谋和风险因素的错误信息。
尽管如此，一些专家淡化了网上政治广告的影响，指出研究显示对选民情绪或选举结果几乎没有影响。
纽约大学社交媒体和政治中心的执行主任泽夫·桑德森告诉美国广播公司新闻，“政治广告没有很大的明显效果，只是在一般情况下。”。桑德森补充说，名人的直接帖子比广告更有可能动摇用户。
A研究由耶鲁大学的一名研究人员领导的一项研究发现，在2020年大选前，在五个摇摆州的社交媒体上进行的近900万美元、为期八个月的广告活动发现，“没有证据”表明该计划增加或减少了平均投票率。
单独的研究在2016年总统选举期间，对近60个选民群体进行了测试，对几十个不同政治广告的结果进行了研究，发现对候选人的受欢迎程度和选民选择的平均影响很小。
Kwon说，虽然社交媒体广告可能对选民没有什么直接影响，但在2024年大选之前，拒绝选举的消息仍可能在更广泛的全国对话中提升虚假主张。
“如果我们只考虑脸书的政治广告，可能不会有明显的效果，”Kwon说。“然而，问题是一旦它被分享，信息就可以被其他人获取和传播。”
“这给了极端思考者更多的理由来谈论和分享他们的观点，”她补充道。"这可能会影响公众对选举过程的信任，这是一个令人不安的想法。"
'Really worried': Meta decision allowing 2020 election-denial ads risks distrust, extremism, experts say
Less than a year out from the next presidential election, former President Donald Trump and some Republican allies continue to falselydenythe results of the previous one.
Three in 10 adults believe that President Joe Biden only won the 2020 contest because of election fraud, aMonmouthpoll in June found. More than two-thirds of Republicans espouse the debunked claim, the survey showed.
Despite the persistence of such falsehoods, political advertisements featuring incorrect assertions about widespread voter fraud in the 2020 contest will be permitted on Instagram and Facebook, a Meta content policyshows.
Meta, the parent company that controls the platforms, made a policy change allowing political advertisers to say past elections were fraudulently conducted but prohibiting ads that question the validity of future or ongoing elections, the policy says. The Wall Street Journal firstreportedthe policy change.
The move raises concerns about the spread of false election-denial ads on Instagram and Facebook that could erode the public's trust in U.S. democracy, some researchers who examine misinformation and disinformation told ABC News, noting that election-denial ads could also help fuelviolent extremismlike that on Jan. 6, 2021.
"I'm really worried that this is one crucial trigger that will make our election even more divisive, causing more conspiracy and disinformation activity," Hazel Kwon, a professor at Arizona State University who leads its Media, Information, Data and Society Lab, told ABC News.
"The big concern is that this directly affects trust in democratic institutions," Kwon added.
The researchers cautioned, however, that studies indicate limited influence of online political advertisements on voter sentiment, suggesting that the policy change could impact the electorate less than the immense user base of the platforms may lead some to think.
Some of the experts noted that the circulation of election-denial ads on social media could help shape the wider public conversation even if they do not change the minds of a large share of individual voters.
"I'm confident that there will be malefactors attempting to game the election," Eric Goldman, a professor at Santa Clara University School of Law who studies tech platforms, told ABC News. "It's less clear how well this misinformation will work."
The policy at Meta focuses on upcoming or ongoing elections that can still be impacted by political ads, rather than previous elections that have already become a matter of historical record, the company said in a statement.
In response to ABC News' request for comment, the company pointed to a blog post in August 2022 detailing the Meta's approach to that year's midterm elections.
"We will reject ads encouraging people not to vote or calling into question the legitimacy of the upcoming election,"wroteNick Clegg, president of global affairs at Meta.
The reported move by Meta coincides with the loosening of election-related content restrictions at other major tech platforms. Google-owned YouTubeannouncedin June that it would halt the removal of content claiming widespread voter fraud in 2020 and other past elections.
A civic integrity policyupdatedin August by X, formerly known as Twitter, does not address claims of voter fraud.
A potential rise in election-denial content on social media during a hotly contested 2024 election cycle could increase the likelihood of extremist violence, Edward Perez, Twitter's former product director for civic integrity, which includes its election policies, told ABC News. Perez is now a board member at the OSET Institute, a nonpartisan nonprofit devoted to election security and integrity.
"There's a very troubling area where we have people who take extremist behavior because they've been radicalized by what they've read on social media," Perez said, pointing to the Jan. 6 insurrectionists as well as David DePape, a far-right conspiracy theorist who wasconvictedon Thursday for attempted kidnapping and assault of the husband of former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
The change in policy toward election-denial ads could also contribute to a political environment in which a wider swathe of people adopt the debunked claim of widespread fraud in the 2020 election, some experts said.
Some research has linked news consumption on tech platforms and belief in misinformation. Astudyby researchers at Northwestern University, released in September 2020, found that individuals who received their news from social media were more likely to believe in misinformation about coronavirus conspiracies and risk factors.
Still, some experts downplayed the influence of political advertising online, pointing to studies that show little effect on voter sentiment or election outcomes.
"Political ads don't have large observable effects, just in general," Zeve Sanderson, the executive director at New York University's Center for Social Media and Politics, told ABC News. Direct posts from prominent people are more likely to sway users than ads, Sanderson added.
Astudyled by a researcher at Yale University, published last year, found that a nearly $9 million, eight-month ad campaign on social media across five swing states ahead of the 2020 election found "no evidence" that the program increased or decreased average voter turnout.
A separatestudyexamining results from dozens of different political advertisements tested across nearly 60 groups of voters during the 2016 presidential election found small average effects on candidate favorability and voter choices.
While social media ads may hold little direct effect on voters, Kwon said, the election-denial messages could still elevate the false claims within the wider national conversation ahead of the 2024 election.
"If we just consider political ads on Facebook, it may not have a significant effect," Kwon said. "However, the problem is that once it's shared, the message can be picked up and propagated by others."
"It gives more reason for extreme thinkers to talk about and share their opinions," she added. "It's a disturbing idea that this could influence public trust in the election process."
