The Fort Worth Press - In volatile election season, US companies battle 'brand disinformation'

USD -
AED 3.672502
AFN 64.000173
ALL 82.24974
AMD 367.469971
ANG 1.790403
AOA 917.503419
ARS 1491.993459
AUD 1.443804
AWG 1.8025
AZN 1.700431
BAM 1.710303
BBD 2.013834
BDT 123.232447
BGN 1.69088
BHD 0.377022
BIF 2984
BMD 1
BND 1.291434
BOB 6.923833
BRL 5.172898
BSD 0.999886
BTN 94.906999
BWP 13.504556
BYN 2.855969
BYR 19600
BZD 2.010948
CAD 1.42021
CDF 2254.999849
CHF 0.80896
CLF 0.023553
CLP 926.990054
CNY 6.79415
CNH 6.80416
COP 3339.9
CRC 455.51533
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 96.874973
CZK 21.24785
DJF 177.719724
DKK 6.554315
DOP 58.875018
DZD 133.037492
EGP 48.812978
ERN 15
ETB 159.150632
EUR 0.87681
FJD 2.24225
FKP 0.74808
GBP 0.749185
GEL 2.644973
GGP 0.74808
GHS 11.415015
GIP 0.74808
GMD 73.504962
GNF 8780.000311
GTQ 7.629008
GYD 209.151527
HKD 7.841895
HNL 26.765367
HRK 6.607203
HTG 130.805488
HUF 311.729914
IDR 18004
ILS 3.03695
IMP 0.74808
INR 95.59365
IQD 1310.5
IRR 1375000.00032
ISK 125.92028
JEP 0.74808
JMD 157.475908
JOD 0.709023
JPY 162.336498
KES 129.260179
KGS 87.450065
KHR 4009.999997
KMF 430.99991
KPW 900.00035
KRW 1519.520206
KWD 0.30976
KYD 0.833206
KZT 469.178771
LAK 22525.000044
LBP 89241.75391
LKR 334.761659
LRD 181.734998
LSL 16.240134
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.40982
MAD 9.365014
MDL 17.592738
MGA 4289.999851
MKD 54.043747
MMK 2099.417966
MNT 3585.605216
MOP 8.076412
MRU 40.060038
MUR 47.079996
MVR 15.459923
MWK 1737.000044
MXN 17.525401
MYR 4.080102
MZN 63.910313
NAD 16.240306
NGN 1371.319779
NIO 36.795039
NOK 9.807005
NPR 151.84952
NZD 1.760955
OMR 0.384505
PAB 0.999886
PEN 3.398498
PGK 4.37975
PHP 61.560501
PKR 278.201278
PLN 3.772605
PYG 6087.237875
QAR 3.643502
RON 4.5899
RSD 102.901785
RUB 76.497718
RWF 1465.5
SAR 3.82526
SBD 8.097299
SCR 13.206138
SDG 600.495264
SEK 9.70137
SGD 1.29333
SHP 0.746601
SLE 24.374984
SLL 20969.503664
SOS 571.498647
SRD 37.587027
STD 20697.981008
STN 21.7
SVC 8.749262
SYP 110.532098
SZL 16.269857
THB 33.427984
TJS 9.243786
TMT 3.51
TND 2.950222
TOP 2.40776
TRY 46.858204
TTD 6.785945
TWD 32.150904
TZS 2624.997975
UAH 44.49669
UGX 3659.688336
UYU 40.243455
UZS 12035.000163
VES 674.08685
VND 26292
VUV 120.145102
WST 2.767779
XAF 573.619637
XAG 0.016725
XAU 0.000244
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.801948
XDR 0.71319
XOF 571.999846
XPF 104.875019
YER 237.049627
ZAR 16.31925
ZMK 9001.214885
ZMW 18.422779
ZWL 321.999592
  • RBGPF

    0.1700

    68.32

    +0.25%

  • CMSC

    -0.0800

    21.98

    -0.36%

  • BCC

    -1.8800

    73.4

    -2.56%

  • NGG

    0.5200

    83.11

    +0.63%

  • VOD

    -0.0300

    13.05

    -0.23%

  • GSK

    0.2300

    53.32

    +0.43%

  • RYCEF

    -0.6600

    19.43

    -3.4%

  • RIO

    -2.3300

    91.25

    -2.55%

  • BCE

    0.5300

    21.4

    +2.48%

  • BTI

    0.3400

    61.8

    +0.55%

  • RELX

    0.5400

    32.81

    +1.65%

  • JRI

    -0.0100

    13.1

    -0.08%

  • CMSD

    -0.0400

    22.19

    -0.18%

  • AZN

    2.9600

    193.12

    +1.53%

  • BP

    1.2200

    38.61

    +3.16%

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."

J.Barnes--TFWP