Facebook’s Role in the 2024 Election: Misinformation and the Struggle for Accurate Information

With the 2024 presidential election looming, concerns are rising about the spread of misinformation on social media platforms, particularly Facebook. Election officials across the US are grappling with the challenge of combating false narratives that threaten to disrupt the voting process and undermine public trust. While Facebook has taken steps to address misinformation, their efforts are proving insufficient, leaving local election officials scrambling to counteract false claims with limited resources and platform support. The situation highlights a critical need for greater collaboration between social media companies and government agencies to ensure a fair and informed election.

Key Takeaways:

• False narratives about ballot handling and other voting procedures are spreading virally on Facebook, confusing voters and undermining election integrity.
• Election officials are struggling to combat this misinformation due to limited reach on the platform and a lack of effective support from Facebook.
• Meta (Facebook’s parent company) claims to have extensive safety and security measures, but local officials report difficulties in connecting with them and receiving timely, adequate assistance.
• Reduced engagement on Facebook posts from official government accounts necessitates the use of sponsored ads, adding further financial burdens for already strained resources.
• The decreasing prioritization of political content in Facebook’s algorithm makes it harder for accurate information to reach voters, leaving a vacuum for misinformation to spread.

The Resurgence of Old Misinformation

The problem is not entirely new. In Durham County, North Carolina, Director of Elections Derek Bowens recently encountered a viral Facebook post claiming that any markings on a ballot by a poll worker invalidate it. This is false. The same misinformation circulated in 2020, but then Facebook flagged it. Now, the post resurfaced without fact-checking labels, necessitating a press release from the North Carolina State Board of Elections. Bowens highlights the frustration of watching misinformation spread unchecked until intervention from the state board. “It was spreading and there wasn’t anything happening to stop it until our state put out a press release and we started engaging with our constituency on it,” Bowens stated.

Challenges in Combating Misinformation

The inadequate response from Facebook isn’t an isolated incident. Multiple instances of similar misinformation are spreading across several states. While CNBC flagged these posts to Meta, their response was simply to send them to third-party fact-checkers for “further review,” leaving the misinformation active in the meantime.

Meta’s Shifting Strategies and Diminishing Resources

In 2021, Meta altered its algorithms, de-prioritizing political and civic content, leading to a significant decrease in news traffic. Further, they announced in 2024 that they would deprioritize the recommendation of political content on Instagram and Threads. While Meta claims this change aligns with user preferences, it has created a space for misinformation to thrive, as accurate information struggles to compete for visibility.

Reduced Trust and Safety Teams

Adding to the challenge, Meta’s cost-cutting measures including 21,000 job cuts, significantly impacted their trust and safety teams. The company also dissolved a fact-checking tool that allowed news agencies to directly address questionable content. While Meta continues to partner with fact-checking organizations, the reduced resources and altered relationship with news agencies indicate a potential weakening of their ability to effectively combat misinformation.

Local Officials Bear the Brunt

The impact of Meta’s changing strategies and reduced responsiveness is heavily felt by local election officials. In Maricopa County, Arizona – a key swing state – Communications Director Taylor Kinnerup detailed the difficulties her office faces in using Facebook and Instagram. They are constantly battling the spread of old conspiracy theories—like the false claim that Sharpie pens invalidate ballots—while simultaneously working to build trust and transparency in the face of persistent doubt. The lack of responsiveness from Meta, extended account issues, limited organic engagement, and overall decreased platform support leaves Kinnerup and her team scrambling to disseminate accurate information amid a constant barrage of misinformation. The significant time wasted on troubleshooting Facebook account issues represents lost opportunities for proactive outreach and voter education.

The Frustration of Limited Reach

The problem extends beyond prominent counties. Dane County Clerk Scott McDonell in Wisconsin reports minimal engagement with his office’s official Facebook page, even when sharing vital information related to election security. “If I link to a story about election security, three people will see it,” he remarked, highlighting the frustrating reality of decreased reach and engagement. This challenges the ability of officials to effectively communicate with constituents, leading to a potential gap in citizen participation and trust.

A Call for Action

Election officials interviewed voiced a shared sense of urgency and concern. They acknowledge the challenges of navigating the complexities of social media regulation alongside the protections of free speech, but demand greater support and responsiveness from tech companies. While Meta boasts extensive safety and security teams, its direct impact on the ground level seems limited according to reported accounts from election officials, leaving the agencies responsible for ensuring fair elections disproportionately burdened and short of resources. The testimony before Congress underscores a recognition of this issue at the national level. Sen. Susan Collins’ concerns about attacks on local and regional elections further emphasizes the need for increased collaboration between tech companies and smaller, less resourced election officials.

Collaboration and Transparency are Key

Improving communication and building a more proactive partnership between social media companies and election officials is critical. This needs to include better access to support channels and more effective tools to combat harmful information, particularly during election seasons. Greater transparency regarding algorithm changes and platform decisions is likewise crucial. The absence of quick responsiveness from Meta leaves local election officials feeling abandoned in their efforts to ensure accuracy and fairness in a rapidly evolving media landscape.

Ultimately, the responsibility to ensure free and fair elections rests on all stakeholders. Social media platforms have a significant role to play, but only through a more cooperative and comprehensive approach will the digital environment be conducive to an informed electorate capable of making wise decisions.