We live in a world where news travels faster than wildfire. A single tweet can reach millions in minutes, a Facebook post can shape opinions overnight, and a viral TikTok can change the conversation entirely. But here’s the troubling reality we’re facing: not all of that information is true. And when it comes to our elections, the stakes couldn’t be higher.

Consider this sobering fact from Portugal’s recent elections: 59% of the accounts that actively supported the victorious Chega party turned out to be fake. Let that sink in for a moment. More than half of the supposed grassroots support was manufactured, artificial, scripted. If this doesn’t give you pause about what’s happening in our own political landscape, it should.

The way misinformation spreads through our political campaigns has evolved far beyond anything we saw even a decade ago. We’re not just dealing with misleading headlines or biased reporting anymore. Today’s misinformation arsenal includes AI-generated deepfakes so convincing they can fool seasoned journalists, fabricated endorsements from celebrities, and coordinated bot networks that can make fringe ideas seem mainstream. It’s becoming nearly impossible for everyday voters to separate what’s real from what’s been manufactured to deceive them.

What makes this particularly concerning is that studies consistently show fake accounts gravitating toward right-wing parties, though the phenomenon isn’t limited to one side of the political spectrum. The question we need to ask ourselves isn’t just whether this is happening, but whether we’re comfortable with elections being influenced by armies of non-existent people.

This isn’t just about politics—it’s about the foundation of our democracy. When voters can’t trust what they’re seeing, hearing, or reading, how can they make informed decisions? How can we have faith in the results?

Understanding the Landscape: More Than Just “Fake News”

Before we dive deeper, let’s get our terminology straight. The information warfare we’re witnessing isn’t just one thing—it’s a spectrum of deception with different motivations and methods.

Misinformation is false information shared without malicious intent. Think of your well-meaning aunt who shares that debunked health article on Facebook because she genuinely wants to help people. The information is wrong, but her heart is in the right place.

Disinformation is where things get sinister. This is deliberately crafted false information designed to deceive and manipulate. Someone creates this content knowing it’s false, specifically to influence opinions, sway votes, or create chaos.

Malinformation takes true information and weaponizes it to cause harm. It might be a real photo taken out of context, or genuine information released at a strategic moment to maximum damage.

Why do these distinctions matter? Because the solutions are different for each type. You can educate someone sharing misinformation, but disinformation requires more aggressive countermeasures. And as AI makes creating convincing fake content easier and cheaper, the volume of all three types is exploding.

The real tragedy is how this flood of false information erodes trust in our democratic institutions. When everything is potentially fake, people start to believe nothing—or worse, they only believe sources that confirm what they already think.

How We Got Here: The Evolution of Digital Campaigning

Ten years ago, social media was a nice-to-have for political campaigns. Today, it’s the battlefield where elections are won and lost. Over half of American adults now get at least some of their news from social media platforms, which means these platforms don’t just reflect public opinion—they shape it.

This shift has created incredible opportunities for democratic engagement. Candidates can speak directly to voters without traditional media gatekeepers. Grassroots movements can organize with unprecedented speed and reach. Young people who might never watch a political debate on TV are engaging with political content through viral videos and memes.

But every powerful tool can be misused, and social media is no exception.

The Early Warning Signs

We started seeing the destructive potential during the 2016 election cycle, but the problems have intensified dramatically since then. Misinformation doesn’t just spread false facts—it undermines the entire concept of shared truth. When claims about crowd sizes can be instantly “verified” with AI-manipulated photos, or when audio clips can be fabricated to make politicians say things they never said, we’re not just dealing with spin anymore. We’re dealing with manufactured reality.

These false narratives don’t just confuse voters—they actively endanger the people who run our elections. Two-thirds of election officials reported in 2022 that their jobs had become more dangerous due to the spread of false information. These are our neighbors, our community members, people who often volunteer their time to ensure our democracy functions. They shouldn’t have to fear for their safety because of lies spreading online.

The Technology Revolution

The emergence of AI has supercharged these problems in ways we’re only beginning to understand. Creating a convincing fake video used to require Hollywood-level resources and expertise. Now, someone with a laptop and an internet connection can create content that fools millions of people.

The tech companies aren’t ignoring this threat. Major platforms came together at the Munich Security Conference in 2024 to sign the AI Elections Accord, committing to fight AI-driven deception. Some platforms, like TikTok, have banned political advertising entirely. Others are experimenting with watermarking AI-generated content or using AI itself to detect fakes.

But it’s an arms race, and the creators of false content are adapting as quickly as the platforms trying to stop them.

The 2024 Battlefield: A Case Study in Modern Misinformation

The 2024 election cycle gave us a preview of what elections might look like in an AI-powered world, and frankly, it should worry all of us. The sophistication of the misinformation tactics reached new heights, while the speed at which false narratives spread reached new lows.

Pennsylvania became ground zero for much of this activity. On Election Day 2024, analysis showed that the majority of social media posts about the state focused on alleged election fraud—claims that had no basis in reality but spread like wildfire anyway.

When AI Meets Politics

Perhaps the most striking example came when Donald Trump shared AI-generated images falsely suggesting Taylor Swift had endorsed him. The images were convincing enough that many people believed them, at least initially. This wasn’t just a campaign stunt—it was a demonstration of how AI can manufacture consent and create the illusion of support where none exists.

But the problem goes beyond individual incidents. We’re seeing systematic campaigns of AI-generated content designed to flood the information ecosystem with so much false information that people give up trying to discern what’s true. It’s a strategy that doesn’t just aim to convince people of specific falsehoods—it aims to exhaust their capacity for critical thinking altogether.

The Global Dimension

This isn’t just an American problem. China’s state actors used deepfake technology to interfere in Taiwan’s elections. The techniques being developed in one country are quickly adapted and used everywhere else. What we’re witnessing is the globalization of election interference through digital means.

The Human Cost

Behind all these statistics and examples are real people whose lives are affected by misinformation. Voters who make decisions based on false information. Election workers who face harassment because of manufactured conspiracies. Communities that are torn apart by artificial divisions amplified by bot networks.

When 72% of Americans express concern about misinformation’s impact on elections, we’re not talking about abstract policy concerns. We’re talking about people who are genuinely worried about the future of their democracy.

The Players in This Game

Understanding who spreads misinformation is crucial to understanding how to stop it. The landscape is more complex than many people realize.

Politicians as Amplifiers

Some political figures have discovered that spreading false information can be politically profitable, at least in the short term. When politicians with millions of followers share debunked claims about crowd sizes, election fraud, or AI-manipulated endorsements, they’re not just making campaign statements—they’re actively undermining public trust in democratic institutions.

This isn’t limited to any one party or country. Politicians in Australia, Canada, and elsewhere have also promoted unfounded narratives about election fraud. The pattern is global, and it’s accelerating.

The human cost of this behavior is real. Election officials—people who often serve their communities as volunteers—report feeling unsafe in their roles. Nearly two-thirds said in 2022 that their jobs had become more dangerous due to false information being spread about elections.

Media in the Middle

News outlets find themselves in an impossible position. They need to report on false claims when they’re made by prominent figures, but reporting on misinformation can inadvertently amplify it. Some outlets have tried ignoring false claims, others have tried debunking them immediately, and still others have tried contextualizing them within broader patterns.

None of these approaches is perfect, and the pressure on journalists to get stories out quickly in our 24-hour news cycle makes careful verification more challenging than ever.

Foreign and Domestic Troublemakers

Foreign actors have become increasingly sophisticated at mimicking legitimate news sources on social media. They create fake news sites that look professional, complete with bylines and editorial boards that don’t exist. Their goal isn’t usually to promote specific candidates—it’s to create chaos, division, and distrust in democratic institutions.

At the same time, domestic actors—motivated by political gain, ideological commitment, or sometimes just the desire to profit from viral content—contribute to the same ecosystem of false information.

What makes this particularly challenging is that the line between foreign and domestic misinformation is increasingly blurry. A false story might originate with foreign actors, be amplified by domestic political figures, and spread through networks of real Americans who genuinely believe what they’re sharing.

The Damage We’re Seeing

The effects of this information warfare are measurable and deeply concerning.

Trust in Free Fall

About 60% of Americans express dissatisfaction with how democracy is working in our country. That’s not just a political opinion—it’s a crisis of confidence in the entire system. When people don’t trust elections, they don’t trust the results. When they don’t trust the results, they don’t accept the legitimacy of whoever wins.

This erosion of trust doesn’t happen overnight, and it doesn’t get fixed overnight either. Once people start believing that elections are fundamentally rigged or that the information they’re receiving is fundamentally unreliable, rebuilding that confidence requires sustained effort over years, not months.

The Threat to Election Integrity

Misinformation doesn’t just change how people vote—it changes whether they vote at all, and whether they accept the results when the voting is done. False claims about voting procedures can suppress turnout in targeted communities. False claims about election security can lead to legislative changes that make voting more difficult for legitimate voters.

Perhaps most dangerously, persistent false narratives about election fraud create a permission structure for actual attempts to undermine election results. When people genuinely believe that elections are being stolen, some of them will conclude that extraordinary measures are justified to “protect” democracy.

AI: The Double-Edged Sword

Artificial intelligence is simultaneously the biggest threat and the biggest hope in our fight against election misinformation.

The Threat

AI has democratized the creation of convincing fake content. Tools that once required expensive equipment and specialized skills are now available to anyone with an internet connection. We’re seeing deepfake audio clips of candidates saying things they never said, AI-generated images of events that never happened, and bot networks sophisticated enough to fool both human users and platform detection systems.

The public’s ability to spot AI-generated content is limited and overconfident. Most people think they’re better at identifying fakes than they actually are, which makes them more vulnerable to deception.

The Promise

At the same time, AI is becoming our most powerful weapon against misinformation. Researchers are using machine learning to identify false content faster than human fact-checkers ever could. AI can analyze patterns in how misinformation spreads, identify coordinated inauthentic behavior, and even predict which false narratives are likely to go viral before they do.

The technology that creates the problem might also be key to solving it, but we’re in a race between the tools of deception and the tools of detection.

Fighting Back: The Fact-Checkers and Defenders

Despite the overwhelming scale of the problem, people and organizations around the world are fighting back against misinformation with remarkable dedication and creativity.

The Fact-Checking Ecosystem

Organizations like PolitiFact and FactCheck.org work around the clock to verify claims and provide accurate information to voters. The United States has 17% of the world’s fact-checking organizations, reflecting both the scale of our misinformation problem and our commitment to addressing it.

But fact-checking faces inherent limitations. False information often spreads faster than accurate corrections. People tend to remember false claims even after they’ve been debunked. And fact-checkers themselves sometimes become targets of harassment and political attacks.

Media Organizations Under Pressure

News organizations are trying to balance their responsibility to inform the public with the risk of amplifying false narratives. Some have developed new approaches to reporting on misinformation, focusing on the harm it causes rather than repeating the false claims themselves.

But journalists are working under intense pressure, both from the need to publish quickly in a competitive environment and from political figures who attack them for fact-checking false claims.

Researchers Under Attack

Academic researchers who study misinformation face a particularly difficult situation. Their work is essential for understanding how false information spreads and developing effective countermeasures. But they’re increasingly targeted by lawsuits and political attacks that characterize their research as partisan or claim they’re working to suppress legitimate viewpoints.

The Stanford Internet Observatory, for example, faced legal challenges that ultimately affected its ability to continue its important work. When researchers can’t do their jobs safely, we all lose access to the knowledge we need to protect our democratic institutions.

Grassroots Efforts

Perhaps most inspiring are the civil society organizations working at the community level to build resilience against misinformation. These groups focus on media literacy, teaching people how to evaluate sources, and creating local networks of trusted information.

These efforts recognize that the solution to misinformation isn’t just technological—it’s social. Communities that have strong social bonds and trusted local institutions are more resistant to divisive false narratives than communities that are already fragmented and distrustful.

Building Better Defenses

Protecting our elections from misinformation requires action on multiple fronts, from individual behavior change to policy reforms to technological innovation.

Regulation and Policy

Some platforms have taken proactive steps. TikTok established a U.S. Election Center and banned political advertising entirely, recognizing that their platform’s algorithm could amplify false narratives in dangerous ways. Other platforms have implemented labeling systems for AI-generated content or policies requiring disclosure of synthetic media.

But the regulatory landscape is inconsistent and politically fraught. Meta’s decision to exempt politicians from fact-checking raises questions about whether self-regulation by platforms is sufficient. Legal challenges to government efforts to work with researchers and platforms on misinformation create uncertainty about what approaches are permissible.

The Supreme Court has generally supported collaborative efforts to address misinformation, recognizing that they serve legitimate government interests in protecting election integrity. But the legal framework is still evolving, and different courts sometimes reach different conclusions.

Technological Solutions

The AI Elections Accord signed by major tech companies represents an important step toward industry cooperation on these challenges. Companies are experimenting with watermarking AI-generated content, using machine learning to detect coordinated inauthentic behavior, and developing better tools for fact-checkers and researchers.

But technology alone won’t solve the problem. The most sophisticated detection systems can still be fooled, and determined bad actors will always work to stay ahead of defensive measures.

Public Education

Perhaps most importantly, we need to help people develop the skills to navigate this complex information environment. That means media literacy education that goes beyond “check your sources” to include understanding how algorithms work, recognizing emotional manipulation, and maintaining healthy skepticism without falling into cynicism.

Public awareness campaigns need to meet people where they are, using the same platforms and techniques that spread misinformation to spread accurate information and critical thinking skills.

The Road Ahead: Navigating Our Digital “Wild West”

We’re living through a fundamental transformation in how information spreads and how democracy works. The statistics from 2024 paint a stark picture: 61% of Election Day posts about Pennsylvania focused on false claims of election fraud. Nearly 60% of Americans are dissatisfied with how democracy is working. Advanced bots account for up to 10% of social media activity, amplifying false narratives at unprecedented scale.

This is our “Wild West” moment—a time when the rules of the game are still being written, when new technologies outpace our ability to govern them responsibly, and when the potential for both great harm and great progress exists side by side.

But we’re not powerless in this situation. We have tools and strategies that can help:

Stronger content moderation by social media companies, implemented transparently and consistently across platforms and political viewpoints.

Better public education about how misinformation works, how to spot it, and how to resist it, starting in schools but extending to all ages and communities.

Robust institutional responses that flag false narratives quickly, provide accurate information proactively, and protect the people who work to ensure election integrity.

Continued innovation in detection technologies, fact-checking tools, and platforms designed to promote accurate information rather than merely engaging content.

Most importantly, we need to rebuild public trust in democratic institutions. That means those institutions need to be trustworthy—transparent, accountable, and genuinely committed to serving all citizens rather than partisan interests.

The future of our democracy depends on our collective ability to distinguish truth from fiction in an environment designed to make that distinction as difficult as possible. It’s a challenge unlike any previous generation has faced, but it’s not insurmountable. We have the tools, the knowledge, and the motivation to meet it.

The question is whether we have the will to use them before the damage to our democratic institutions becomes irreversible. The time for action is now, and the responsibility belongs to all of us.