Today, I published what is probably my most important article in quite a long time. In this piece, I revealed how the Trump administration is covertly manipulating social media platforms & algorithms to boost the administration’s narrative and suppress opposing lines of thought.
Now, there’s no secret program or code that they’re using to do this. It’s being done through a process that I call reverse algorithmic capture.™
Instead of calling for censorship or bans directly, the Trump admin is reshaping the architecture of digital platforms in its favor.
By engineering incentives that guide algorithms to amplify preferred narratives and suppress dissent, they don’t have to issue any direct orders. They can stay at a seemingly safe distance, maintaining possible deniability, all the while pulling the strings of public algorithms.
This practice of reverse algorithmic capture has already been written into policy and is affecting the algorithms that shape everything from search results to feed curation to ad targeting, to content moderation on platforms.
It’s affecting you. Probably more than you realize.
These algorithms are essentially unseen curators of reality. They decide what content you see or don’t see; what creators you see or don’t see; what ads you get served; what your Google results look like when you search for anything from restaurants to personal health questions.
In a new EO, Trump codified this process of reverse algorithmic capture by forcing any company that wants to do business now or in the future with the federal government to implement standards to reduce “bias“ — which includes not mentioning things like diversity and equity.
That’s not even close to all of it. We have also seen companies like YouTube & Facebook respond to the Trump admin’s false claims of censorship by scrapping their own content moderation practices, which almost always benefits right wing media outlets & commentators.
Interestingly (to me at least), this set of tactics actually mirrors in some ways a Russian disinfo tactic called reflexive control. Though there are some key differences, what Trump is doing is basically forcing platform decisions by manipulating the choice architecture.
In the name of fighting censorship, the Trump administration is shaping digital ecosystems to favor its preferred narratives while chilling dissent. It is a form of soft epistemic authoritarianism—and we all (I hope) know what comes next.
We are witnessing the emergence of a privatized information infrastructure that serves public ideological aims without invoking the First Amendment—or admitting the state’s hand. It’s being done by rebranding algorithmic power as populist reform.
Hi, Bannon.
Let’s be clear: Reverse algorithmic capture isn’t a policy debate about platform bias. It’s a strategy designed & rolled out by the Trump admin to realign the rules of information visibility in favor of those in power, using regulatory levers to reprogram epistemic systems.
When governments can shape what you see w/out saying what they’ve done, democracy becomes a puppet show lit by a carefully engineered spotlight.
And if the algorithm is the gatekeeper now, then who holds the keys?
Thank you for your support. Anything you can do is greatly appreciated — retweeting, signing up for a free sub, or committing to a paid membership..
Trump targeted my research for defunding, and I don’t know how much longer I can do it without funding. You guys are my lifeline.
Really, though, I can’t thank you enough for your support and encouragement. I want you to know that none of it is taken for granted, and I appreciate every single one of you and every single show of support. I always have and I always will.
Please don’t ask me to post links in my thread when literally the whole point of the thread is that I wrote an entire article about this topic and included links throughout the entire piece. But since I’m nice, here’s your summer reading list.
New leaked documents suggest the Trump admin has quietly co-opted tools — some w/ military capabilities — that were once justified in the name of protecting Americans from foreign influence, and turned them inward to map, monitor, & target U.S. political dissidents. Link below.
The leaked docs allege that the White House is working w/ an org called Vine and Fig Tree Institute to surveil, profile, & “go after” critics of Trump and Israel, using tactics such as burner accounts, AI content, & character assassination.
The targets described in the leaked docs include a number of right-wing influencers and members of the “dissident right,” including Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, and Nick Fuentes.
They also reveal that the entire Nick Shirley thing was orchestrated by the White House.
The Texas “antifa” terrorism case didn’t start in a courtroom or an ICE facility. It started almost 10 years earlier, with one of the most expansive disinformation campaigns I’ve ever covered.
Here’s how that story was built.
(Link in next tweet).
This is part 1 of a series looking back at a decade-long effort by the Trump administration and its allies in right-wing media to criminalize dissent by manufacturing a terrorist threat. They got their strategy straight from the fascist playbook.
This disinformation campaign had it all: Fake social media accounts, right-wing extremists posing as “antifa” to incite violence, coordinated media narratives, fear-mongering content planted by law enforcement, and more.
Now, the threat they manufactured is being used as evidence in federal court. The Texas case is the first but certainly won’t be the last.
Given current events, it bears repeating that when the Trump admin spreads disinformation, they’re not doing it because they expect you to accept their lies as truth. They do it to erode the notion of truth and destroy our ability to distinguish between truth & falsehood.
The act of lying is bad enough. But selling the idea that truth doesn't matter — or doesn't even exist — is far more corrosive. Democracy rests upon a shared understanding of basic facts. We can't debate issues or hold leaders accountable w/o these agreed upon facts.
If the Trump administration can cast doubt on the very existence of an objective truth, they can also undermine the external mechanisms that we rely on to hold government officials accountable & prevent abuses of power.
You’ve probably seen Nick Shirley’s video accusing Somali-run daycares in Minnesota of fraud. Hopefully you’ve also seen some of the follow-ups showing that security footage & operating hours disprove his central claim of “no children.”
X’s new “About this account” feature just accidentally revealed a vast network of covert foreign influence accounts posing as Americans but operating from overseas — the most sweeping public exposure of covert influence on a major platform since 2016. Story is linked below.
Some of these accounts have hundreds of thousands of followers. They present themselves as American patriots, veterans, moms, truck drivers, or lifelong Republicans. Many are explicitly MAGA. But their operators are posting from overseas while shaping U.S. political narratives.
It’s not just MAGA accounts, but mostly it is. Several large anti-Trump accounts were also revealed as foreign-run, as were public health networks. The common denominator is deception: pretending to be American participants in US politics while pushing highly divisive content.
I wrote about a secret tactic shaping what you see online — one almost no one’s talking about. It’s called Moderation Sabotage, and it’s how political digital operatives overwhelm social media defenses so lies go viral before truth can catch up. Link is posted below.🧵
Imagine flooding the system so completely that moderators can’t respond in time. That’s the playbook: swamp the filters, delay enforcement, and let false or incendiary content live long enough to trend.
By the time platforms react, the damage is done.
This isn’t random chaos. It’s deliberate. Trump’s digital allies — the same architects behind Stop the Steal — have refined Moderation Sabotage into an election-year weapon. Rather than hacking the code, they’re hacking the people who keep the code honest.