National

Axios Login

Right-wing politicians were among those most excited by Elon Musk's purchase of Twitter, while those expressing the most worry were groups representing women, people of color and the LGBTQ+ community.

Why it matters: While it is far too early to fully understand how Elon Musk's ownership will end up changing Twitter, it's worth noting who is most excited and who most fearful of the shift. 

Inside Twitter, vocal skeptics of the deal included people working on everything from the core technology to those responsible for building equitable AI systems. Notably, it's also top of mind for both those doing the hiring and the people Twitter is recruiting.

"If you're wondering what Twitter employees think, I can only speak for myself: It's a time of genuine discomfort & uncertainty," Twitter's Edward Perez wrote. "Most of us believe deeply that Twitter is much more than a tech platform; we have a deep responsibility to society. I hope our new owner gets that."

Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey said he doesn't think any person or company should own Twitter, but praised the sale to Elon Musk as the best strategy for the company. "Taking it back from Wall Street is the correct first step."

Outside its walls, Musk's purchase won plaudits from Sen. Josh Hawley and Marsha Blackburn, while statements of concern came from the NAACP, GLAAD and the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Many focused on the pros and cons of Musk's promise to promote free speech above all, while others worried about the impact of any one man being in charge of such a vital voice in the internet.

Still others questioned how Musk's own business interests, including those in China, could impact Twitter policy. That group included Amazon's Jeff Bezos, who noted Musk's China business and quipped: "Did the Chinese government just gain a bit of leverage over the town square?"

American Civil Liberties Union: "While Elon Musk is a card-carrying member and one of our most significant supporters, there's a lot of danger having so much power in the hands of any one individual."

Electronic Frontier Foundation: "Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter highlights the risks to human rights and personal safety when any single person has complete control over policies affecting almost 400 million users. And in this case, that person has repeatedly demonstrated that they do not understand the realities of platform policy at scale."

Sen. Marsha Blackburn tweeted that yesterda was "a great day to be conservative on Twitter" while Sen. Josh Hawley quoted comments from Musk, adding, "Imagine: a major social media company that actually believes in free speech."

GLAAD: "Twitter should hold to its principles and the industry standard of prohibiting speech that endangers people, spreads misinformation, and incites harassment and abuse," CEO Sarah Kate Ellis said. 

Be smart: Some of the biggest changes may come not from policy dictates, but rather the employee turnover as those who disapprove of Musk's approach leave and others join. 

Go deeper: Everything Elon Musk wants to change about Twitter

Who is cheering, jeering Musk's Twitter deal

Republican politicians were quick to offer praise, while civil rights groups expressed concern.

Photo illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios. Photo: Britta Pedersen-Pool/Getty Images

Twitter

Misinformation

Big Tech

From the Valley to D.C., Big Tech players like Facebook, Google and Amazon are under more scrutiny than ever as new technology develops and privacy and antitrust concerns grow in lockstep with companies’ ambitions.

Technology

Axios Media Trends

False narratives surrounding Russia's invasion of Ukraine are increasing and extend far beyond the bounds of Russia-controlled state media, according to new research from NewsGuard first shared with Axios. 

Why it matters: Though Russian state-media has faced widespread de-platforming, many shady think tanks, anonymous websites and other outlets can easily continue to spread misinformation about the war.

OneWorld.press, for example, is a website that bills itself as a “Global Think Tank,” but doesn't disclose ownership, funding or control. It continues to regularly publish falsehoods supporting Russian disinformation and NewsGuard notes that the site's internet domain was registered in Moscow. 

By the numbers: Misinformation about the invasion is on the rise, both in terms of the number of false claims being spread and the amount of outlets actively posting misinformation. 

NewsGuard has identified 172 distinct sites that continuously spread disinformation about the war, including a number of anonymous websites, foundations and research websites with uncertain funding. That's 48% more than the organization had tracked as of March 3.

The number of specific myths being tracked by NewsGuard has also risen. It more than doubled to 23 false claims, the organization said.

Among the sites, English is the most common language. It's used by 61 sites, followed by 33 sites in French, 20 in German and 16 in Italian.

Spanish-language misinformation related to the conflict has also been surging, AP reported, noting that RT en Español is among the most tweeted Spanish-language sites for Russia-Ukraine news. (Spanish-language misinformation has been on the rise overall.)

Be smart: While most of the misinformation has been pro-Russia, there has also been false information that aims to show Ukrainian armed forces as more successful than they have been, or to make unverified claims about Russian actions.

Those claims, per NewsGuard, have been occasionally shared by Ukrainian authorities. 

One example includes videos of a Ukrainian fighter pilot alleged to have shot down six Russia military jets. The pilot, nicknamed "The Ghost of Kiev" has been referenced by former Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko and other Ukrainian public figures on Twitter. 

The big picture: The findings show that Russia's misinformation apparatus extends far beyond its state-backed media to anonymous websites and research bodies that may skirt scrutiny and censorship more easily. 

To that end, 55 of the websites that NewsGuard has so far identified as actively promoting Russian disinformation continue to earn advertising from blue-chip brands through programmatic advertising. 

Ukraine misinformation is spreading — and not just from Russia

A growing number of online sites are spreading myths about the invasion.

Russian invasion of Ukraine

Politics & Policy

Global Twitter conversation around<br> mis- and dis-information

Public awareness around misinformation and disinformation has soared over the past two years, bringing information warfare and content moderation issues to the center of public conversation.

Why it matters: "Whether they like it or not," everyday people have become "co-creators of today’s infosphere, which comes with responsibilities," said Tami Kim, assistant professor at the University of Virginia's Darden School of Business.  

"They have to be proactive in not just seeking out the truth, but also in gathering as many perspectives as possible before forming and sharing their own.”

Details: New data from Zignal Labs, a social media analysis firm, found that conversations surrounding the topics of misinformation and disinformation began to grow significantly in 2020 and have only become more frequent. 

In total, there have been more than 53 million mentions of misinformation and disinformation on Twitter since the start of 2019. Those mentions increased by 221% in 2020, compared to 2019. 

The topic of mis- and disinformation started to become mainstream around the beginning of the pandemic, said Jennifer Granston, head of insights at Zignal Labs. The vaccine debate, in particular, helped fuel a new level of conversation around the impact of false information. 

Today, the topic is a large part of all public conversations around any major news event, from COVID to elections to racial justice issues, and now Russia's invasion of Ukraine. 

Driving the news: The monthly volume of mis- and disinformation discussion on Twitter has recently spiked around the war in Ukraine to its second-highest level since the 2020 election.

Joey Schafer, a researcher at the University of Washington Center for an Informed Public, noted that world leaders have become more publicly engaged in the topic now, which could be fueling that spike. 

"Even just focusing on the Russian invasion of the Ukraine, we’ve seen a Wikipedia editor arrested for spreading anti-Russian information in Belarus, the Deputy Prime Minister of the Ukraine making pleas to tech CEOs like Mark Zuckerberg asking for Russian media to be removed from Facebook, and the White House providing informational briefings to TikTok influencers," he said.

What to watch: As the public conversation around mis- and disinformation  becomes more prevalent, social media firms have been forced to act faster to address public concerns. 

For example, most major platforms took action on Russian state media accounts within days of the war's start, while it took tech platforms many months to finally begin taking action on anti-vaccine content at the start of the pandemic. 

Facebook didn't ban the military in Myanmar from its platform until 2021, more than two years after the UN slammed the tech giant for the role it played in spreading information used to legitimize a genocide against the Rohingya  population in that country.

Two years of information chaos

The public conversation on mis- and disinformation has grown vast on Twitter, new data shows.

Much of the misinformation spreading around Russia's war with Ukraine doesn't involve AI-generated deepfakes or expertly-edited videos but originates when everyday social media users take and share images out of context.

Why it matters: "Especially in a war, there is a human cost to false info going viral," said Graham Brookie, director and managing editor of the Digital Forensic Research Lab within the Atlantic Council.

Low-tech misinformation is often conveyed by well-meaning people trying to make sense of a confounding situation to feel less helpless, said Rachel Moran, postdoctoral fellow at the University of Washington's Center for an Informed Public.

The big picture: No previous war has been quite so fully documented on so many digital platforms by both official channels and people on the ground and around the world. That comes with advantages and drawbacks.

"This might be the best-recorded, almost live-broadcasted, conflict as of today," said Lukas Andriukaitis, the Belgium-based associate director of the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab.

Details: Many of the images being shared that look like they're from the current crisis are actually from older wars or events or simply not presented with proper context.

On visual platforms like Instagram and TikTok, designed to keep users on the app without many chances for users to click away to external sources or fact-checks, misleading information can proliferate, Moran said.

That's made even worse by the emotional climate surrounding a war, which enhances misinformation's velocity thanks to its shock value or pull on users, she added.

"It's a lot easier for someone to search around for a photo or video and repost it rather than create a deepfake, which are hard to make," said Daniel Funke, a reporter on USA Today's fact-checking team.

For example, one widely-spread image that was debunked by Funke's team claimed to show a Russian attack on Ukraine but actually depicted an air strike in the Gaza Strip from May 2021. That same image, Funke noted, was also circulated out of context during the 2021 fall of Afghanistan.

Another video claimed to show a recent explosion in Ukraine, but the TikTok post the video originated from was created in January.

Between the lines: Videos that appear to show what's happening on the ground are spreading widely on social media, in part, because algorithms have shifted in the past few months to elevate more vertical video content from everyday users.

Funke noted an explosion of misinformation on TikTok: "It's just a platform that's kind of like on steroids in some ways, where its algorithm is really strong and it does have a really dedicated user base."

Moran said users share non-vetted information as long as they feel it "raises awareness" of the conflict, which adds to the churn of out-of-context images or misleading videos.

Be smart: Certain images or videos that are engaging, but lack easily-identifiable information (like street signs), tend to be recycled from one conflict to the next.

"In any crisis information environment we expect to see misinformation that we’ve seen before (like the shark swimming on the interstate meme every hurricane). Some users think it’s funny, some users do it for the engagement," said Brookie.

Yes, but: Content with manipulated context can also be promoted intentionally by official channels, as the Russian state media has done to falsely frame the invasion as a response to Ukrainian aggression.

"[T]o be clear, Russia is the only actor in this conflict deploying influence operations dependent on disinformation at scale," Brookie said.

"General posts from users saying inaccurate things like 'this just happened in x location' can be harmful, and is certainly a content moderation challenge for platforms. But [it] isn’t comparable to the concerted, state-backed disinformation effort the Russian government."

The big picture: Tech platforms have taken measures to slow Russian state propaganda by restricting their accounts and limiting their ability to sell ads. It's much harder to combat misinformation posted by well-intentioned users. 

Ukraine misinformation spreads as users share videos out of context

Well-intentioned users who don't bother to check dates or context are behind much of this war's viral misinformation.

China is becoming the most formidable rival America has faced, and the risk of confrontation with Russia, North Korea or Iran still looms. Authoritarians are rising, the chaotic Afghanistan exit revealed the limits of U.S. power, and the pandemic, climate change and other critical challenges continue to pose grave threats.

World

In a world filled with distrust and misinformation, the new boss of Wikipedia's parent organization holds the volunteer-run encyclopedia up as a model for how people can disagree while still embracing the same set of facts.

Why it matters: Debate over how content should be moderated has raged in recent years, with little consensus on the role that governments and businesses can and should play. Meanwhile, Wikipedia has somehow managed to tackle some of the thorniest issues without devolving into chaos.

"A neutral point doesn't mean everybody agrees," Wikimedia Foundation CEO Maryana Iskander told Axios. Rather, she says, it means having the debate transparently and with sources and citations to back up assertions.

Catch up quick: Iskander, who replaces Katherine Maher as Wikimedia's leader in January, was previously CEO of the Harambee Youth Employment Accelerator in South Africa and before that was chief operating officer of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America in New York.

Iskander says she wants to make sure more of the world not only sees Wikipedia's content, but also sees that a crowd-sourced, volunteer-led effort is thriving.

"We want to stand on the proverbial mountaintop," she said. "This is possible, it's real and we want more of it."

Yes, but: Wikipedia has been criticized for the prevalence of white men in posting and editing content.

Iskander says that the company needs to try a lot of different approaches to change that. Edit-a-thons, for example, have worked in some parts of the world.  But in other places a lack of access to technology or societal norms can make it tough to get a diverse set of contributors.

"I suspect this is not one thing," she said. "We've got to try lots of ideas."

Between the lines: Iskander urges regulators to be cautious as they wade into the murky waters of content moderation. Iskander said she shares some of their concerns with everything from the power of large tech companies to the impact of state actors with bad motives.

"I think we are very sympathetic to policy makers and regulators worried about things we are seeing in the society," she said. But she also wants to make sure that laws are carefully worded "so that Wikipedia doesn't suffer at the hands of regulations not intended for our model."

"That worries me," she said. "The risk of unintended consequence is high for us."

The big picture: Iskander is also charged with charting the financial and technical future for the company.

While it still relies mostly on donations, Wikimedia has started to offer a paid product for the giant tech companies that use its data in bulk. That's a model she would like to see expand even as the group works to keep its content freely accessible. "I think that Wikimedia Enterprise is a step in the right direction," she said.

Meanwhile, Iskander also aims to expand Wikimedia's multimedia content. That's more technically complex than managing a digital encyclopedia made up largely of text.

What's next: Iskander acknowledged she is still trying to figure out what is working and what isn't.

"This place is like an onion with many, many layers," she said.

Editor's note: We've adjusted the wording in this story's headline and body to clarify Iskander's role as "leader" of Wikipedia rather than "boss."

New Wikipedia leader sees it as a misinformation-age model

The collectively created encyclopedia can be a model for how to disagree online, she says.

Photo Illustration: Annelise Capossela. Photo: Gabriel Diamond via Wikimedia Commons

Internet

Column / Signal Boost

Three-quarters of Americans say that U.S. democracy could be at risk without stronger regulation of false information online, according to a poll by bipartisan advocacy group the Future of Tech commission, results of which were shared first with Axios. The same survey found broad bipartisan support for stronger privacy regulation and increased spending on cybersecurity.

Why it matters: Congress is considering a range of new restrictions on tech, including bills related to privacy, competition and possible limits to Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which protects online platforms from being sued for user-contributed content.

"Voters across party lines overwhelmingly support a range of government actions," Common Sense Media CEO Jim Steyer told Axios. Steyer is a co-chair of the Future of Tech commission, along with former Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick and former Education Secretary Margaret Spellings.

By the numbers: The survey of 1,000 Americans, conducted by Benenson Strategy Group on the commission's behalf, found especially strong support to limit collection of users' personal data — and even stronger support to limit it for users under 18.

78% of Americans believe consumers should have to “opt-in” before their personal data is shared.

76% of those surveyed say companies should not be able to collect and use personal data beyond what's necessary for the service being provided.

75% said they support prohibiting companies from collecting personal data on anybody 16 or under.

Yes, but: It's one thing to call for these limits in the abstract — and another once users realize they might be asked to pay for or give up services that are now supported by targeted advertising.

Between the lines: While there is strong bipartisan support, in both polls and among legislators, for reining in Big Tech, the consensus often disappears once the problems described and solutions proposed get more specific.

Steyer acknowledged a steep partisan divide when it comes to questions about  content moderation and Section 230 reform.

"That doesn’t mean we can’t get major stuff done this year," he said, noting a broader consensus around privacy regulation, as well as support for better broadband and improved cybersecurity.

The big picture: While the politics of getting anything passed by Congress are complicated, other countries are poised to act, with the EU and U.K. both considering fresh legislation.

"We have birthed the extraordinary tech revolution," Steyer said. "We should lead the world in smart, common-sense, thoughtful guardrails."

What's next: Steyer, Patrick and Spellings will present the group's legislative recommendations at a gathering next week. Also expected to attend are FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel, Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Surgeon General Vivek Murthy.

Exclusive: U.S. majority supports tech regulation to preserve democracy

Americans polled also support regulating privacy and spending more on cybersecurity.

Illustration of numerous internet browser windows showing the US Capitol Building in red repeating

Data privacy

The FBI is warning people and businesses to remain vigilant against malicious actors who could interfere with the Beijing Olympic Games through a "broad range" of cyber activities, including theft of sensitive data.

Why it matters: High-profile events like the Olympics give cyber actors the opportunity to "make money, sow confusion, increase their notoriety, discredit adversaries, and advance ideological goals," the FBI said in a statement Tuesday.

Details: Possible disruptions include ransomware, malware, data theft or leaks, phishing campaigns, disinformation campaigns and "insider threats" that can interfere with the digital infrastructure supporting the Olympics, according to the FBI.

Cyber actors could target networks of hotels, mass transit providers, ticketing services and event security, among others.

"The FBI to date is not aware of any specific cyber threat against the Olympics, but encourages partners to remain vigilant and maintain best practices in their network and digital environments," the agency said.

Olympic participants and travelers should use temporary phones in order to decrease the risk of threats associated with apps.

The FBI is also urging service providers and other relevant businesses to provide training on potential cyber threats and how they happen. 

Our thought bubble, via Axios' Ina Fried: Olympics are always a prime target for cyberattacks, though Tokyo Olympics was relatively calm on that front.

But, but, but: The 2020 Tokyo Olympics and Paralympics experienced over 450 million attempted cyber-related incidents, according to NTT Corporation, which provided telecoms and network security services for the events. 

None were successful due to existing measures, but popular attack methods included email spoofing, malware and the use of fake websites and streaming services designed to imitate official Olympic providers, per the FBI.

FBI warns of cyber threats at Beijing Olympics

High-profile events like the Olympics give cyber actors the opportunity to "sow confusion ... and advance ideological goals," the FBI said.

Photo of Team USA short track speed skaters on the ice skating in a line formation

Team USA athletes skate during a short track speed skating practice session ahead of the Beijing 2022 Winter Olympic Games at Capital Indoor Stadium on Feb. 1 in Beijing, China. Photo: Elsa via Getty Images

2022 Winter Olympics

Beijing Winter Olympics

Shifts in technology and media are changing the way we play, watch and understand sports. Business models are adapting and social change is forcing those in charge of teams and leagues to reconsider decades-old practices.

Sports

Axios Finish Line

NewsGuard, a service that uses trained journalists to rate news and information sites, will become available to millions of public school students this week through a partnership with the American Federation of Teachers.

Why it matters: Kids increasingly turn to the internet when looking for homework help or doing research for school projects. But unlike books in a library or articles in a journal, online resources can be difficult to filter for quality and misinformation.

"Imagine you walked into a library, and there were a trillion pieces of paper flying around in the air, and you grabbed one, and you didn’t know anything about it, or where it came from or who’s financing it," says NewsGuard co-founder Steven Brill. 

"That's the internet, that's your Facebook feed, that's your Google search."

NewsGuard hopes its ratings will help students and teachers get smarter about the news and information online.

What's happening: The AFT teachers union is buying NewsGuard licenses for its 1.7 million teachers, who will then be able to share it with tens of millions students around the country.

"We are constantly trying to help our students, particularly our middle, high school and postsecondary students, separate fact from fiction, as we help them develop their critical-thinking and analytical skills,"  AFT president Randi Weingarten says.

The bottom line: The hope is that students with the skills to spot disinformation will grow into more thoughtful and better-informed citizens and voters.

America's kids get an internet librarian

The project is designed to help students identify low-quality information.

Illustration of a hand cursor resting on the pages of an open book.

Conspiracy theories about the U.S. Capitol insurrection continue to flood private messaging groups, social networks and even major news outlets one year later. 

Why it matters: The lasting echo chamber of misinformation shows the long-term impact the event will have on future elections. 

"These ideologies and animating forces are perhaps as mainstream as ever, and getting play in some of the highest nodes of Republican influence," said Jared Holt, of the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab.

"Even without Trump in the spotlight, this anti-democratic conspiratorial, paranoid style of rhetoric is now central to conservative messaging."

The big picture: The Capitol siege was a central part of the right-wing narrative around the "Big Lie" — the collection of falsehoods alleging the 2020 election was stolen through voting fraud. The "Big Lie" is now being used to rally conservatives ahead of the 2022 midterms. 

Holt notes that in the wake of mainstream platforms cracking down on bigger conspiracy groups, the organization of extremist movements has decentralized and is now focused on people who are becoming more active in local elections, including school boards.

Driving the news: Although many individuals and groups were kicked off mainstream platforms in the wake of the Capitol siege — which Holt says helped prevent any major follow-up events — right-wing extremists have found plenty of alternative options for convening online.

"Pretty much all alternative social media sites and conversation platforms have people congregating to discuss Jan. 6 conspiracies, the anniversary and the Big Lie," said Bryce Webster-Jacobsen, director of intelligence operations at threat intelligence firm GroupSense.

The alt-right "Oath Keepers" community is active on MeWe, per a report from the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab. "Proud Boys" leader Enrique Tarrio is active on Parler. "Stop the Steal" founder Ali Alexander frequently posts on Gab. 

New posts on platforms like Patriots.win suggest the “undercover FBI” will be “looking to create false narratives” about candlelight vigils that are being promoted on right-wing forums for the people arrested for participating in the riots, whom they refer to as “political prisoners.”

How it works: Bad actors and conspiracy theorists seed falsehoods on private messaging apps or conservative social apps. That misinformation is tested and iterated before making it to bigger web platforms.

The narratives that stick often find their way to bigger networks that are less likely to take action on that type of content, like fringe conservative news sites or conservative cable channels.

A new report from NewsGuard, a service that uses journalists to rate news sites, found that the vast majority (81%) of 113 U.S. news websites that spread falsehoods in the aftermath of the 2020 election continue to spread false claims about the election and the Jan. 6 attack.

Be smart: Far-right and conspiratorial positions are increasingly being wedged into "culture war" debates, often echoed by Fox News, other conservative outlets and members of Congress — which pushes them into the mainstream.

The bottom line: “There’s such division within this country politically and ideologically that people do not want to consume information that does not come from their life and their worldview,” said Rachel Moran, a postdoctoral scholar at the University of Washington’s Information School. 

“There’s a demand for misinformation and so people are always gonna find a way to get it.”

New wave of Jan. 6 conspiracy theories

The lasting echo chamber of misinformation shows the long-term impact the event will have.

Jan. 6

Axios on HBO: Incoming Meta CTO Andrew Bosworth on technology’s role in the spread of misinformation

Longtime Facebook veteran Andrew Bosworth insists that political and COVID-19 misinformation are societal problems rather than issues that have been magnified by social networks.

Why it matters: Critics say Facebook and other social networks have played a significant role in vaccine hesitancy and the spread of political misinformation.

"Individual humans are the ones who choose to believe or not believe a thing. They are the ones who choose to share or not share a thing," Bosworth said in an interview with "Axios on HBO." 

"I don't feel comfortable at all saying they don't have a voice because I don't like what they said."

Bosworth has been leading Facebook's hardware efforts, including those in virtual and augmented reality. Next year he will become CTO for Meta, Facebook's parent company.

Between the lines: Asked whether vaccine hesitancy would be the same with or without social media, Bosworth defended Facebook's role in combatting COVID, noting that the company ran one of the largest information campaigns in the world to spread authoritative information. 

He said that individuals make the choice whether to listen to that information or to rely on less reputable information spread by friends and family.

"That's their choice. They are allowed to do that. You have an issue with those people. You don't have an issue with Facebook. You can't put that on me."

The big picture: Pressed on whether Facebook and others are amplifying those views, Bosworth characterized it as a demand problem rather than one caused by the amount of misinformation on social media.

"People want that information," Bosworth said. "I don't believe that the answer is 'I will deny these people the information they seek and I will enforce my will upon them.' "

"At some point the onus is, and should be in any meaningful democracy, on the individual."

Facebook exec blames society for COVID misinformation

"You don't have an issue with Facebook. You can't put that on me."

Facebook

Axios on HBO

YouTube removed videos from Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro's channel Wednesday for spreading pandemic misinformation, the tech giant said.

Driving the news: YouTube said a "careful review" found rule breaches concerning incorrect comments about face masks and hydroxychloroquine, which is proven to not work as a COVID-19 treatment, per a statement to news outlets. 

The action follows post takedowns by Twitter and Facebook last year over misinformation about the coronavirus. 

The big picture: The far-right leader has frequently downplayed the virus — which has killed more than 545,600 people and infected nearly 19.5 million in Brazil, according to Johns Hopkins University. 

The Supreme Court has opened an investigation into his government's handling of vaccine contracts and the Senate is holding hearings that could lead to his impeachment, Noticias Telemundo's Marina E. Franco writes for Axios.

Go deeper: Pandemic meets political crisis as investigations hit Bolsonaro allies

YouTube pulls Bolsonaro videos over COVID misinformation

YouTube said it found  incorrect comments about masks and hydroxychloroquine, in breach of its rules.

President of Brazil Jair Bolsonaro speaks during an event at Planalto Government Palace on June 29, 2021 in Brasilia, Brazil. 

Brazil's President Jair Bolsonaro during a June event in Brasilia, Brazil. Photo: Andressa Anholete/Getty Images

Sections

Axios Local

Axios gets you smarter, faster with news & information that matters.

About

Subscribe

Misinformation

The big picture

YouTube pulls Bolsonaro videos over COVID misinformation

The search for misinformation's measure

When U.S. politicians exploit foreign disinformation

2020 rules of the road for the Age of Misinformation

Tech platforms struggle to police deepfakes

Human actors are changing the spread of disinformation

All Misinformation stories