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

USD -
AED 3.673042
AFN 63.503991
ALL 82.403989
AMD 368.150403
ANG 1.790403
AOA 918.000367
ARS 1465.449815
AUD 1.42575
AWG 1.8025
AZN 1.70397
BAM 1.705709
BBD 2.013483
BDT 122.708482
BGN 1.69088
BHD 0.37702
BIF 2985
BMD 1
BND 1.290663
BOB 6.90816
BRL 5.152304
BSD 0.999721
BTN 94.239742
BWP 13.585663
BYN 2.777729
BYR 19600
BZD 2.010527
CAD 1.415225
CDF 2280.000362
CHF 0.807055
CLF 0.02293
CLP 902.460396
CNY 6.769604
CNH 6.783725
COP 3452.68
CRC 453.506829
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 96.403894
CZK 21.091104
DJF 177.720393
DKK 6.516504
DOP 58.403884
DZD 133.34504
EGP 49.986489
ERN 15
ETB 158.37504
EUR 0.871881
FJD 2.235504
FKP 0.755912
GBP 0.755512
GEL 2.650391
GGP 0.755912
GHS 11.22504
GIP 0.755912
GMD 73.503851
GNF 8775.000355
GTQ 7.625892
GYD 209.119888
HKD 7.83685
HNL 26.68504
HRK 6.568104
HTG 130.583803
HUF 306.820388
IDR 17826.3
ILS 2.95976
IMP 0.755912
INR 94.330504
IQD 1310
IRR 1375000.000352
ISK 125.530386
JEP 0.755912
JMD 157.959917
JOD 0.70904
JPY 161.30504
KES 129.403801
KGS 87.450384
KHR 4010.00035
KMF 429.503794
KPW 900.00035
KRW 1527.650383
KWD 0.30793
KYD 0.833035
KZT 487.855928
LAK 22055.000349
LBP 89550.000349
LKR 333.641485
LRD 182.150382
LSL 16.405039
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.375039
MAD 9.225039
MDL 17.654036
MGA 4200.000347
MKD 53.732839
MMK 2099.523204
MNT 3579.573337
MOP 8.070939
MRU 40.060379
MUR 47.850378
MVR 15.450378
MWK 1737.000345
MXN 17.326504
MYR 4.137904
MZN 63.910377
NAD 16.403727
NGN 1360.440377
NIO 36.610377
NOK 9.680204
NPR 150.787532
NZD 1.741735
OMR 0.384983
PAB 0.999725
PEN 3.384039
PGK 4.38775
PHP 60.716504
PKR 278.325038
PLN 3.71375
PYG 6138.96617
QAR 3.640504
RON 4.568104
RSD 102.170373
RUB 73.103247
RWF 1464
SAR 3.74824
SBD 8.061424
SCR 13.683262
SDG 600.503676
SEK 9.57882
SGD 1.292404
SHP 0.746601
SLE 24.750371
SLL 20969.503664
SOS 571.503662
SRD 37.402504
STD 20697.981008
STN 21.4
SVC 8.747449
SYP 110.532098
SZL 16.403649
THB 32.890369
TJS 9.272075
TMT 3.5
TND 2.91175
TOP 2.40776
TRY 46.438204
TTD 6.779085
TWD 31.715038
TZS 2630.985038
UAH 44.909735
UGX 3638.520172
UYU 39.96965
UZS 12005.000334
VES 606.63266
VND 26310
VUV 118.645306
WST 2.751804
XAF 572.078806
XAG 0.015419
XAU 0.00024
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.801643
XDR 0.703697
XOF 565.000332
XPF 104.250363
YER 238.603589
ZAR 16.458037
ZMK 9001.203584
ZMW 17.919703
ZWL 321.999592
  • VOD

    -0.2300

    14.3

    -1.61%

  • NGG

    -1.2400

    79.44

    -1.56%

  • CMSC

    0.0500

    22.37

    +0.22%

  • BCC

    3.8500

    74.66

    +5.16%

  • CMSD

    0.0000

    22.29

    0%

  • RBGPF

    -0.5300

    60.61

    -0.87%

  • RYCEF

    -0.0300

    18.4

    -0.16%

  • RELX

    -0.8300

    31.18

    -2.66%

  • BCE

    0.0000

    23.28

    0%

  • JRI

    0.0500

    12.67

    +0.39%

  • RIO

    -2.5900

    100.08

    -2.59%

  • GSK

    -1.4800

    50.67

    -2.92%

  • BTI

    -0.5800

    58.91

    -0.98%

  • AZN

    -2.9600

    174.93

    -1.69%

  • BP

    -1.0400

    39.1

    -2.66%

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