The recent introduction of a new location feature on X has sparked a controversy, revealing the presence of numerous influential accounts with misleading information about their origins. This development has shed light on the complex world of online political discourse and the potential impact of such accounts on public opinion.
The Power of Misinformation
Dozens of highly engaging accounts on X have been called out for deceiving users, following the rollout of a transparency tool that displays user locations. Pro-Trump accounts, in particular, have come under scrutiny, with users uncovering instances where these accounts, despite posting about US politics, are actually based outside the country. Interestingly, anti-Trump accounts have also been found to be misleading in their location claims.
The implications of this are significant. Posts from these accounts have garnered millions of impressions, which can lead to monetary gains from X. However, BBC Verify cannot independently verify the accuracy of the information provided by X about each account.
X, however, stands by its data, claiming it to be '99% accurate'. This information is now visible in a new 'about this account' tab on every profile, which also includes a disclaimer about potential influences on location data.
A Global Reach, A Local Impact
One notable example is the account 'TRUMPARMY', which celebrated a Supreme Court ruling on Truth Social, suggesting the president could deport criminals to El Salvador. With over half a million followers, including a senior Republican senator, this account's influence is undeniable. Yet, X's data reveals a surprising truth: the account is based in India, and its username has changed multiple times since 2022.
Similarly, 'IvankaNews_', a fan account for Trump's daughter, has amassed over a million followers and posted about voting for the president last year. However, this account is based in Nigeria, and its username has changed frequently since 2010, according to X.
After its location was exposed, 'IvankaNews_' posted a defense, stating that some supporters of Trump's movement live outside the USA. This account has since been suspended by X, but the reason remains unclear.
The impact of these accounts extends beyond US borders. BBC Verify has identified accounts sharing anti-Trump content, which, according to X's new feature, are based outside the US. One such account, claiming to be a 'proud Democrat' and 'professional Maga hunter', had 52,000 followers but was actually based in Kenya.
Scottish politics has also been affected, with accounts claiming to be from Scotland and exclusively posting in favor of independence. However, X's data shows these accounts are accessing the platform from Iran, and all have small followings. BBC Verify has attempted to contact these accounts but received no response.
The Motivation Behind the Masquerade
Most of these accounts have been verified with blue ticks, indicating they subscribe to X's Premium feature and could potentially earn money from their posts. To gain access to X's monetization program, users must meet several criteria, including passing identity checks and achieving over 5 million impressions within three months.
Alexios Mantzarlis from Cornell Tech believes these blue tick accounts are exacerbating issues on the platform. He states that X's pay-for-play badging is more about revenue generation than serious verification. However, he acknowledges other features, like 'community notes', which allow contributors to provide context to viral posts, as a positive step towards transparency.
Researchers suggest various motivations behind the lack of transparency in these accounts' locations. Darren Linvill, an expert in misinformation from Clemson University's Media Forensics Hub, explains that some accounts are run by troll farms or nation states, while others simply aim to profit by pretending to be American.
Mantzarlis agrees that money is often a driving factor, citing the potential earnings from stoking America's culture wars on social media. He adds that organized state actors and political parties have repeatedly used sockpuppet accounts, suggesting a combination of financial gain and political influence.
Despite X's efforts, Prof Linvill believes some users will find ways to bypass the new feature. Bad actors, he predicts, will quickly adapt, using VPNs and other methods to appear as if they are creating their accounts in the west or the United States.
This controversy raises important questions about the role of social media platforms in political discourse and the need for increased transparency and accountability. As the debate continues, it remains to be seen how X and other platforms will address these issues and ensure a more authentic online environment.
