In an attempt to tamp down on misinformation about the coronavirus, Newark’s Public Safety Director Anthony Ambrose released a statement on March 11th warning that any false reporting about the virus in Newark could result in criminal prosecution.
The Washington Post, in an effort to track President Donald Trump’s false or misleading claims, has created a Fact Checker’s database that analyzes and categorizes his false statements. To date, Trump has made more than 16,200 false or misleading claims.
The new policy will ban “misleading information about when and how to participate in the census and the consequences of participating." Despite previous resistance to regulate them, the new policy will apply to advertisements bought by politicians.
Twitter announced on Wednesday, October 30th that his company would no longer accept political advertising on its platform. While notably more positive than Facebook's reception, Twitter's wasn’t universally warm.
By invoking the United State’s unique commitment to protecting free expression, Zuckerberg sought to draw attention towards the positive aspects of social media.
After Facebook refused to take down a misleading ad by the Trump campaign about former Vice President Joseph Biden, Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren’s campaign ran an ad on Facebook falsely claiming that Mark Zuckerberg endorsed President Trump's reelection bid.
The Trump campaign released a new political advertisement that accused presidential candidate Joseph Biden of bribing the Ukranian government while he served as the Vice President under Barack Obama. When the Biden campaign asked Facebook to remove the ad, arguing that it spread demonstrably false information to voters, the social media company refused, citing free speech principles.
California passed a bill that would prohibit the use of “deepfake” technology to spread false information about a candidate within 60 days of an election. While some have touted the bill as a necessary step towards addressing the spread of disinformation, others, including many free speech advocates, argue that the law conflicts with First Amendment law.