The China Mail - In volatile election season, US companies battle 'brand disinformation'

USD -
AED 3.672945
AFN 71.515562
ALL 86.94961
AMD 389.939958
ANG 1.80229
AOA 915.999667
ARS 1172.9892
AUD 1.560185
AWG 1.8
AZN 1.687821
BAM 1.720875
BBD 2.018575
BDT 121.46782
BGN 1.725883
BHD 0.37691
BIF 2935
BMD 1
BND 1.306209
BOB 6.908081
BRL 5.674401
BSD 0.99974
BTN 84.489457
BWP 13.685938
BYN 3.271726
BYR 19600
BZD 2.008192
CAD 1.37935
CDF 2872.999879
CHF 0.825695
CLF 0.024788
CLP 951.229649
CNY 7.27135
CNH 7.270995
COP 4243.1
CRC 504.973625
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 97.62505
CZK 22.028021
DJF 177.720538
DKK 6.590695
DOP 58.849845
DZD 132.651987
EGP 50.839498
ERN 15
ETB 131.849601
EUR 0.883015
FJD 2.25945
FKP 0.7464
GBP 0.750775
GEL 2.744963
GGP 0.7464
GHS 14.125014
GIP 0.7464
GMD 71.502639
GNF 8655.000086
GTQ 7.69911
GYD 209.794148
HKD 7.755845
HNL 25.824976
HRK 6.653403
HTG 130.612101
HUF 357.316013
IDR 16554.05
ILS 3.63992
IMP 0.7464
INR 84.561198
IQD 1310
IRR 42112.49408
ISK 128.649713
JEP 0.7464
JMD 158.264519
JOD 0.709199
JPY 143.008025
KES 129.497429
KGS 87.450184
KHR 4001.999982
KMF 434.49611
KPW 899.962286
KRW 1424.74995
KWD 0.306504
KYD 0.833176
KZT 513.046807
LAK 21614.999723
LBP 89600.000276
LKR 299.271004
LRD 199.577898
LSL 18.629585
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 5.454983
MAD 9.26875
MDL 17.160656
MGA 4509.999741
MKD 54.316596
MMK 2099.391763
MNT 3573.279231
MOP 7.987805
MRU 39.750136
MUR 45.159946
MVR 15.410097
MWK 1735.999892
MXN 19.613201
MYR 4.314499
MZN 64.000264
NAD 18.629738
NGN 1602.529753
NIO 36.697423
NOK 10.402335
NPR 135.187646
NZD 1.68454
OMR 0.384943
PAB 0.99974
PEN 3.6615
PGK 4.030499
PHP 55.780526
PKR 280.898478
PLN 3.78005
PYG 8007.144837
QAR 3.640973
RON 4.395801
RSD 103.43097
RUB 82.013774
RWF 1415
SAR 3.751221
SBD 8.361298
SCR 14.237635
SDG 600.502786
SEK 9.662047
SGD 1.305725
SHP 0.785843
SLE 22.790211
SLL 20969.483762
SOS 571.999643
SRD 36.846978
STD 20697.981008
SVC 8.747487
SYP 13001.4097
SZL 18.630308
THB 33.430038
TJS 10.537222
TMT 3.5
TND 2.96375
TOP 2.342099
TRY 38.52375
TTD 6.771697
TWD 32.047014
TZS 2690.000195
UAH 41.472624
UGX 3662.201104
UYU 42.065716
UZS 12945.00049
VES 86.73797
VND 26005
VUV 120.409409
WST 2.768399
XAF 577.175439
XAG 0.030629
XAU 0.000305
XCD 2.70255
XDR 0.71673
XOF 576.000137
XPF 105.649908
YER 244.950087
ZAR 18.60662
ZMK 9001.201184
ZMW 27.817984
ZWL 321.999592
  • RBGPF

    -0.4500

    63

    -0.71%

  • CMSC

    -0.2300

    22.01

    -1.04%

  • RELX

    0.8400

    54.63

    +1.54%

  • SCS

    -0.0900

    9.92

    -0.91%

  • RYCEF

    -0.2500

    10

    -2.5%

  • BTI

    0.6900

    43.55

    +1.58%

  • VOD

    0.1800

    9.76

    +1.84%

  • AZN

    0.0800

    71.79

    +0.11%

  • RIO

    -1.4800

    59.4

    -2.49%

  • GSK

    0.8800

    39.85

    +2.21%

  • NGG

    -0.0400

    73

    -0.05%

  • BCC

    -1.2200

    93.28

    -1.31%

  • CMSD

    -0.0500

    22.3

    -0.22%

  • JRI

    -0.0200

    12.91

    -0.15%

  • BCE

    0.3300

    22.25

    +1.48%

  • BP

    -0.6100

    27.46

    -2.22%

In volatile election season, US companies battle 'brand disinformation'
In volatile election season, US companies battle 'brand disinformation' / Photo: © GETTY IMAGES NORTH AMERICA/AFP

In volatile election season, US companies battle 'brand disinformation'

From Google to Netflix, prominent US companies are battling internet boycott calls over their perceived political leanings in a polarizing election season that has exposed them to what researchers call "brand disinformation."

Text size:

The online campaigns, which falsely claim both Netflix and Google are funding or favoring Democratic nominee Kamala Harris ahead of the November election, illustrate how brands are vulnerable to political falsehoods that can expose them to financial perils.

Those calling for a boycott, researchers say, include fake accounts on the platform X. The site is owned by Elon Musk, who has endorsed Donald Trump and appears to exert an outsized influence on voters through the platform, which has become a hotbed of disinformation.

The recent boycott calls targeting Netflix, which also spread on other platforms such as TikTok and Instagram, were triggered by false claims of a $7 million donation from the streaming service to Harris's campaign, AFP fact-checkers reported.

Reed Hastings, the service's co-founder and executive chairman, made a contribution to Vice President Harris's campaign but the company said it was a "personal donation" and had "no connection to Netflix."

Still, calls to "cancel Netflix" flooded social media sites, with many users falsely claiming the company was indirectly funding the Harris campaign. Some shared screenshots of their canceled subscriptions.

Nearly a quarter of the boycott calls on X were traced to fake profiles, which have consistently expressed support for Trump through the past year, according to the disinformation security company Cyabra.

"Brand disinformation campaigns in today's polarized climate have far-reaching impacts beyond just corporate reputation," Dan Brahmy, Cyabra's chief executive, told AFP.

"The Netflix case demonstrates how rapidly these campaigns spread, potentially reaching hundreds of millions" and shows how "disinformation can manipulate public opinion and consumer behavior," he said.

- 'Delicate balancing act' -

As the hotly contested election nears, Brahmy cautioned, "brands must be vigilant."

Similar boycott calls recently targeted Google after unfounded claims that the company censors election-related content and manipulates search engine results in favor of Harris.

Cyabra identified hundreds of fake profiles on X –- many with a recent history of pro-Trump content -– which called for a boycott of the tech giant while promoting another search engine.

Musk, who has repeatedly criticized Google, played a "significant role in amplifying negative content" against the company, Cyabra said in a report.

In one evidence-free tweet in late July, Musk wrote: "Wow, Google has a search ban on President Donald Trump! Election interference?"

Google did not respond when AFP asked about the allegations, or about the impact of the boycott calls.

Earlier this month, a survey by the portal Sitejabber showed 30 percent of respondents had boycotted a brand over political reasons in the past 12 months, while 41 percent said they prefer that companies keep their "political positions private."

"Brands face a delicate balancing act this election year," Michael Lai, chief executive of Sitejabber, told AFP.

"While staying apolitical may seem safe, it's important for businesses to understand that even neutrality can be interpreted as a position."

- 'Chaos and distrust' -

Another survey by market research firm Certus Insights showed that consumers were divided over whether corporations should engage in partisan politics, with more than half the respondents saying companies should refrain from doing so.

Other surveys suggest consumers consider it the brand's fault if its advertising appears next to polarizing, false or defamatory content.

Such concerns have prompted many advertisers to abandon X, which has scaled back content moderation and restored once-banned accounts known to peddle disinformation or hate following Musk's 2022 acquisition of the platform.

Some also left in light of Musk's own controversial musings on the site.

Earlier this month, X sued an advertising group and several large corporations, accusing them of causing billions of dollars of losses by "illegally" boycotting his site.

"Disinformation creates chaos and distrust. Brands normally benefit from a well-informed society," Claire Atkin, co-founder and chief executive of the anti-disinformation watchdog Check My Ads, told AFP.

"On the internet, advertisers have let tech companies take their ads away from the news and straight into the arms of bad actors. Now, unfortunately, we are all experiencing the consequences."

Y.Parker--ThChM