Researchers Investigating Misinformation and Election Integrity Under Fire
Kate Starbird, a computer scientist at the University of Washington, witnessed a surge in misinformation during the 2016 US presidential election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Unlike most, Starbird was equipped to delve into the issue, having previously studied the spread of misinformation during crises like hurricanes and civil wars. She observed not just rumours but deliberate lies, noting that disinformation was “sinking into the structure of the Internet.” By the 2020 election, Starbird tracked the viral spread of over 300 fake stories on Twitter, aimed at undermining the election's legitimacy.
Following the publication of her findings, Starbird and her colleagues faced a “multi-pronged” strategy to discredit their work. She became a defendant in high-profile lawsuits, was subpoenaed for congressional hearings, and faced accusations of collusion with the government to censor free speech. Additionally, she was inundated with public-information requests, sued for delayed responses, and targeted by hostile media outlets.
Researchers like Starbird, who study electoral processes and their influencing factors, often become focal points for public and political backlash, particularly in highly polarized environments. Political polarization has intensified in countries such as the United States, Turkey, India, Poland, and Brazil. With nearly half of the world's population living in countries holding elections in 2024, concerns about the erosion of democratic processes are prevalent.
The Redistricting Challenge and Gerrymandering Accusations
In the US, redistricting — the process of redrawing electoral maps post-census — is a contentious issue, often manipulated for political gain. Sam Wang, a neuroscientist at Princeton University, recognized this in 2012, describing his realization as mind-blowing. Wang founded the Princeton Gerrymandering Project to develop mathematical tests to assess the fairness of electoral maps. His influential 2016 paper and subsequent briefs to the US Supreme Court highlighted these issues.
In 2022, Wang served as a technical expert during New Jersey’s redistricting, advising on a map that was ultimately favoured by the Democratic party. This led to public accusations of bias and data manipulation. Additionally, unfounded claims of sexual harassment and workplace misconduct were directed at him, which Princeton University and the New Jersey State Commission of Investigation (SCI) later debunked. Throughout the investigations, Wang faced significant personal attacks but was supported by Princeton’s statements refuting the allegations.
Institutional Support is Crucial
For researchers like Starbird and Wang, institutional support is paramount amidst public and political scrutiny. Despite the challenges, Wang remains dedicated to his dual focus on neuroscience and election integrity, underscoring his commitment to both fields. As political scientists continue to navigate these turbulent waters, their work remains essential in safeguarding the integrity of democratic processes.
