-
Keys into Melbourne third round with Sinner, Djokovic primed
-
Bangladesh launches campaigns for first post-Hasina polls
-
Stocks track Wall St rally as Trump cools tariff threats in Davos
-
South Korea's economy grew just 1% in 2025, lowest in five years
-
Snowboard champ Hirano suffers fractures ahead of Olympics
-
'They poisoned us': grappling with deadly impact of nuclear testing
-
Keys blows hot and cold before making Australian Open third round
-
Philippine journalist found guilty of terror financing
-
Greenlanders doubtful over Trump resolution
-
Real Madrid top football rich list as Liverpool surge
-
'One Battle After Another,' 'Sinners' tipped to top Oscar noms
-
Higher heating costs add to US affordability crunch
-
Eight stadiums to host 2027 Rugby World Cup matches in Australia
-
Plastics everywhere, and the myth that made it possible
-
Interim Venezuela leader to visit US
-
Australia holds day of mourning for Bondi Beach shooting victims
-
Liverpool cruise as Bayern reach Champions League last 16
-
Fermin Lopez brace leads Barca to win at Slavia Prague
-
Newcastle pounce on PSV errors to boost Champions League last-16 bid
-
Fermin Lopez brace hands Barca win at Slavia Prague
-
Kane double fires Bayern into Champions League last 16
-
Newcastle pounce on PSV errors to close in on Champions League last 16
-
In Davos speech, Trump repeatedly refers to Greenland as 'Iceland'
-
Liverpool see off Marseille to close on Champions League last 16
-
Caicedo strikes late as Chelsea end Pafos resistance
-
US Republicans begin push to hold Clintons in contempt over Epstein
-
Trump says agreed 'framework' for US deal over Greenland
-
Algeria's Zidane and Belghali banned over Nigeria AFCON scuffle
-
Iran says 3,117 killed during protests, activists fear 'far higher' toll
-
Atletico frustrated in Champions League draw at Galatasaray
-
Israel says struck Syria-Lebanon border crossings used by Hezbollah
-
Snapchat settles to avoid social media addiction trial
-
'Extreme cold': Winter storm forecast to slam huge expanse of US
-
Jonathan Anderson reimagines aristocrats in second Dior Homme collection
-
Former England rugby captain George to retire in 2027
-
Israel launches wave of fresh strikes on Lebanon
-
Ubisoft unveils details of big restructuring bet
-
Abhishek fireworks help India beat New Zealand in T20 opener
-
Huge lines, laughs and gasps as Trump lectures Davos elite
-
Trump rules out 'force' against Greenland but demands talks
-
Stocks steadier as Trump rules out force to take Greenland
-
World's oldest cave art discovered in Indonesia
-
US hip-hop label Def Jam launches China division in Chengdu
-
Dispersed Winter Olympics sites 'have added complexity': Coventry
-
Man City players to refund fans after Bodo/Glimt debacle
-
France's Lactalis recalls baby formula over toxin
-
Pakistan rescuers scour blaze site for dozens missing
-
Keenan return to Irish squad boosts Farrell ahead of 6 Nations
-
US Treasury chief accuses Fed chair of 'politicising' central bank
-
Trump rules out force against Greenland but demands 'immediate' talks
Disinformation researchers lament 'chilling' US legal campaign
The study of disinformation has emerged as a political lightning rod in the United States, with conservative advocates launching a sweeping legal offensive that researchers fighting falsehoods denounce as an intimidation campaign ahead of the 2024 election.
As next year's vote approaches, many US academics and think-tanks focused on disinformation research are facing lawsuits by right-wing groups and inquiries from a Republican-led congressional panel.
The researchers -- including from the Stanford Internet Observatory and the University of Washington -- have worked on contentious subjects, including false claims that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump and conspiracy theories about Covid-19 vaccines.
They are accused of colluding with the government to censor conservative speech online under the guise of fighting disinformation.
But the researchers deny those claims and say the bitter wrangle is seriously impacting their work, including efforts to raise funding.
Some researchers face subpoenas from the Republican-controlled House Judiciary Committee, demanding records including emails with government officials and social media platforms dating back to 2015, according to letters seen by AFP.
The analysts say the resource-draining requests and mounting legal costs are undermining the fight against disinformation, a problem that is likely to surge in the run up to next year's White House race.
"This is having a serious chilling effect on the work being done to research different forms of false and misleading information," one leading US researcher told AFP.
"Funding is being pulled and people are so tied up responding to requests for emails that the work has all but stopped for most people."
Coming on top of online trolling and threats of violence that disinformation researchers say they routinely face amid the hyperpolarized US political climate, the legal efforts amount to a "harassment tactic" that has taken a major toll on morale, another academic told AFP.
They were among four researchers who spoke to AFP on the condition of anonymity, citing safety and legal concerns.
- 'Very troubling' -
"It's remarkable and very troubling that a congressional panel that purports to be investigating censorship is engaged in the intimidation of researchers," said Jameel Jaffer, director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.
"There's nothing at all nefarious about researchers studying online speech... The panel should withdraw its sweeping demands, which undermine the very freedoms it says it is trying to protect."
Last month, firebrand conservative lawmaker Jim Jordan, head of the House Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to Stanford University threatening legal action unless the school complies with a subpoena for records.
In a statement to AFP, Stanford University said it was "deeply concerned about ongoing efforts to chill freedom of inquiry and undermine legitimate and much needed academic research in the areas of misinformation and disinformation -- both at Stanford and across academia."
In May, America First Legal, an advocacy group led by former Trump advisor Stephen Miller, filed a class-action lawsuit in Louisiana that he said was meant to strike at the heart of the "censorship-industrial complex."
Aside from academics from Stanford and the University of Washington, the group also sued researchers from the Digital Forensic Research Lab at the Atlantic Council think-tank and the research group Graphika.
The plaintiffs in the case include Jim Hoft, founder of the far-right conspiracy website Gateway Pundit.
Stanford's researchers face another lawsuit filed in Texas by anti-vaccine advocates, who allege their social media posts were repeatedly flagged as misinformation or removed entirely as part of what it called mass censorship.
- 'Dirty tricks' -
Organizations that research disinformation dispute that they have the power to censor social media accounts and deny any collusion with government agencies.
But that argument appears to be the central premise of the House of Representatives committee led by Jordan, a Trump ally who did not respond to AFP's request for comment but has publicly accused such organizations of "censorship of disfavored speech."
Last month, a Jordan-led subcommittee on the "weaponization of the federal government" concluded in a report that a cybersecurity agency within the Department of Homeland Security had been mobilized to censor Americans in collusion with "Big Tech and disinformation partners."
Amid the sustained backlash, President Joe Biden's administration appears to have backed away from some of its efforts to counter disinformation.
For example, the State Department-backed National Endowment for Democracy (NED) recently said it will stop funding the London-based Global Disinformation Index (GDI). NED told US media its grant was meant to combat disinformation from authoritarian regimes, particularly China.
Many disinformation researchers view the backlash against them as a deliberate strategy before the 2024 election.
"If you want to get away with dirty tricks next year, you need to get rid of this space," one researcher told AFP.
"The goal is to ensure that no one is scrutinizing the playing field before the next election."
C.Kovalenko--BTB