How are election officials handling Elon Musk's social media influence, especially when it spreads misleading information? And why is it challenging for states like Michigan and Arizona to Fact Check him directly on X? Also, what strategy are these officials using to counter Elon Musk's reach, and how is Musk himself responding to them?
Election officials in key battleground states, including Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Arizona are expressing concerns about Elon Musk's influence in spreading false information on X, with some officials going to great lengths to reach Elon Musk directly. Steven Richer, an election official in Arizona's Maricopa County, shared that he even tried getting messages hand delivered to Elon Musk urging him to stop amplifying unsubstantiated claims.
Reichert, who's faced serious threats for defending the 2020 election results, says that despite persistent efforts to correct the record, Elon Musk's massive online following makes it nearly impossible to curb the spread of misinformation. Now, the need to counter falsehoods around elections has become a full second time job for many election officials, a situation that arose in response to misinformation that spread widely after Donald Trump's 2020 election loss.
However, Musk's ownership of X and his high profile support for Trump have introduced new hurdles. The X latforms influential reach means that any falsehood that Musk shares can spread really quickly like wildfire over often overwhelming a local election of if officials to provide verification information. Now, Michigan's Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson has been particularly vocal in countering
Musk's misinformation. Recently, she fact checked a claim that Musk made about Michigan's registered voters directly responding on X. Her post gained over 33 million views, reflecting substantial interest. But Musk maintained his position, accusing Benson of
blatantly lying to the public. Benson, frustrated with by Musk's response, lamented the missing opportunity for Musk to use his resources to help us restore and ensure people can have rightly placed faith in our election outcomes, whatever they may be. Now, Elon Musk's influence on election decisions across X has left election officials 6 days before Election Day scrambling to find a strategy to counter
the spread of misinformation. Efforts by officials in Michigan, Arizona and Pennsylvania to set the record straight are often overshadowed by Musk's massive online following, with his post quickly gaining visibility. And without effective controls on X's algorithm, which frequently promotes high profile accounts, election authorities say they face a structural disadvantage in ensuring accurate election information is widely seen.
A social media platform known as X has provided minimal response to Musk's election related posts, though a platform spokesperson indicated that X enforces policies and election interference and misleading content now. This response, however, stops short of addressing Musk's own posts, leaving election officials without direct intervention to prevent the spread of unverified claims. CN Ms. attempts to contact Musk and also the Washington Post and all of the other major media outlets.
They can't get a hold of the guy. They take it to X and they make comments on his posts and they refute him. But most of the time it doesn't work. Nade Di Resto, a disinformation, said that election officials are simply unequipped to counter the reach of high profile accounts like Musk. Because of that, election officials have a very hard job. Their job is to be election officials, not be tweeters. That's what they said. She asked.
If prominent figures are allowed to amplify unverified claims without equivalent promotion of accurate information, it creates a structural disadvantage and that election authorities can rarely overcome this. Now this week, Elon Musk encouraged his followers on X to report supposed election irregularities to an election integrity community on the platform, which is administrator by his America Pack, an organization supporting Trump's campaign.
And election officials quickly noticed that some of the claims appearing on this community feed had already been debunked by state authorities, further complicating their task of promoting factual information. The CEO of American Sunlight Project called the situation staggering with Musk's role at the helm of XI. Don't know if anything can Fact
Check him now. Benson, who has faced security threats in the past for responding to Musk, acknowledges the personal risks associated with fact checking the tech billionaire, they said. The first time he attacked our election system, I had to take a beat and realize that if I were to respond as I did, ultimately I'd have to check to make sure my family was safe first. Benson says she now alerts her security team whenever she respond to Musk's posts to prepare for an uptick in threats.
Now, to mitigate these security risks, Benson has broadened her approach to disseminate accurate election misinformation. Her office has gathered leaders from business and labor sectors to brief them on Michigan's election process and the state's commitment to counting every legitimate vote.
And by empowering these local leaders as messengers, she hopes to reach more residents with verified information before misinformation can spread widely on platforms like X. Now, officials in Pennsylvania are pursuing similar strategies to Fact Check Musk's claims, though they acknowledge the
limitations. And one election official in the state referred to Musk as a huge problem and said current fact checking efforts are largely about establishing a paper trail to document the accuracy of their statements. And Musk's influence in Pennsylvania is not just limited to his social media activity, though. He's also involved in a legal matter regarding the $1 million giveaway that his America PAC is conducting daily.
Sweepstakes they offer to registered voters in battleground states has led to a lawsuit that Musk is attempting to move to federal court now. His lawyers filed a motion of removal late Wednesday night, a procedural move that would pause the case in state court and shift the decision to a federal judge. Now down in Georgia, election officials have decided the direct engagement with Musk on X is unlikely to yield any results.
Instead, they're relying on press conferences, a method they successfully used in 2020 to dispel misinformation. By presenting officials who openly refute the latest election related falsehoods and by using scheduled public updates, they hope to present clear and consistent information without engaging with Elon Musk directly.
Now, the backlash against social media monitoring for election misinformation has affected platforms beyond X, making it increasingly difficult for election officials to counteract falsehoods. One official from the battleground states noted that the unlike other companies such as Meta, X lacks a clear line of communication complicating attempts to address misinformation directly on a
platform. Jankowicz, a disinformation expert who has been a target of criticism from some conservative lawmakers, pointed to the contrasting silence surrounding Musk's influence on X. They said what Elon Musk is doing, the campaigning that he's doing, the donation that he's making, the way he has engineered Twitter to be a maelstrom of conservative disinformation is far closer to election interference than any of the allegations that
conservatives have made against social media platforms from 2016 to 2022. Now, Democratic lawmakers are raising concerns about social media companies preparedness to manage election related misinformation.
Senator Mark Warner, chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, expressed frustration about the platform's lack of transparency on their plans to address misleading content before and after Election Day. Warner noted that he's still wanting on a full answer or of what they're going to do to surge capabilities. Now that's of course, it's a a huge concern. An X's absence at a recent Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on foreign influence and social media has also intensified.
Lawmaker Warner mentioned that Nick Pickles, X's head of global affairs, had been invited but resigned on September 6th and the company did not send a replacement. An X spokesperson confirmed that Pickles departure, but did not explain the decision to forgo representation at the hearing. Now, Elon Musk's America PAC has received judicial permission to proceed with cash giveaways to registered voters, at least temporarily, following a ruling from a Pennsylvania State judge.
And Musk's PAC has been offering daily $1 million prizes to voters in key swing states contingent upon their signing a petition. Now, the petition reportedly includes a pledge to support the US Constitution, though some officials are concerned that the cash for petition format may conflict with US electoral laws. Philadelphia District Attorney Lawrence Krasner filed a lawsuit against Musk earlier this week, calling on the courts to halt the giveaways.
Krasner's suit urges that Musk must be stopped immediately before the upcoming presidential election. Determined that Krasner's case would be paused while a federal court decides if it will hear the case, a delay that makes it unlikely any financial decision will be reached before the
November 7th election. The court hearing featured remarks from John Summers, an attorney working with District Attorney Krasner, who told reporters they would push to have the matter returned to state court. That the federal court declines to take it up. Summers argued the case centers on state laws, adding after all, this is a case that involves state law issues.
Musk, who was required to attend the Philadelphia court hearing, did not appear this month, offering daily $1 million awards for registered voters in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan and North Carolina until November 5th. And these 7 battleground states are considered crucial in the 2024 election, with polls indicating a tight race between President Donald Trump, who Musk supports, and Democratic candidate Kamala Harris.
Eligibility for Musk's $1,000,000 giveaway requires participants to provide personal information, including phone numbers and addresses, and to sign a statement affirming their commitment to the Constitution. Krasner's lawsuit describes this structure as a lottery and alleges that it constitutes an
unlawful lottery. And according to Krasner, the sweepstakes Lowell's Philadelphia citizens to give up their personal identification information and make a political pledge in exchange for the chance to win $1,000,000. The lawsuit also accuses Musk and his pack of using deceptive, vague or misleading statements that could mislead voters. Under consumer protection laws. This warning could qualify as false advertising, which Musk's attorney has strongly refuted.
In a federal court filing, Musk's lawyers argued the lawsuit's actual purpose was to curb Musk's influence on the election. They said the complaint, in truth, has little to do with state law claims of nuisance and consumer protection. Now Musk's legal team stated, adding that it aims to prevent any supposed interference by Musk's PAC in the upcoming election. Now, Musk's PAC received prior warning from the Department of Justice, which noted that the cash giveaways could breach
federal election regulations. Musk has, however, assured potential participants they do not need to identify as Republican or even vote to qualify for the prize. As Musk continues to press forward with his past campaign, the legal proceedings and official scrutiny reflect ongoing concerns about the potential influence of his platform on the 2024 election.