Little more than a month into the new US presidency, The Washington Post’s owner dimmed the light on a motto that became a beacon for freedom during the first Trump administration.

“Democracy dies in darkness” has appeared below Washington Post for the past eight years.

Last month it was powdered in irony after the newspaper’s owner, Jeff Bezos, decreed in an email to staff that the newspaper’s editorial section would shift its editorial focus and that only opinions that support and defend “personal liberties” and “free markets” would be welcome.

Amazon founder Bezos had already sullied the Post’s reputation by refusing to allow it to endorse a candidate during the presidential election — an action capable of no other interpretation than support for Donald Trump.

Since then, there has been a US$1 million Amazon contribution to Trump’s inauguration and, according to the Wall Street Journal, a US$40 million deal with First Lady Melania Trump for an authorised documentary to be run on Amazon’s streaming service.

Now Bezos has openly bowed before the new emperor and dimmed The Washington Post’s lights.

Martin Baron, editor of the Post when the democracy motto — the first in the newspaper’s 140-year history — was adopted, last month described Bezos’s directive as a “betrayal of the very idea of free expression”.

Standing up to Trump
Two years after the slogan appeared on the Post masthead, a former editor of The New York Times, Jill Abramson, published a book titled Merchants of Truth. In it she praised Bezos (who had bought the Washington newspaper six years earlier) for his support of Baron in standing up to Donald Trump’s assaults on the media and his serial falsehoods.

However, she also made a prediction.

“Though it hadn’t yet happened, it seemed all but inevitable that the Post’s coverage would one day bring Bezos’s commitment to freedom of the press into conflict with Amazon’s commercial interests, given the company’s size and power as it competed with Apple to become America’s first trillion-dollar conglomerate.”

That day has come.

It is patently obvious that Jeff Bezos puts the interests of his US$2 trillion Amazon empire ahead of a newspaper that last year lost US$100 million. In the process he has trashed the Post and turned readers against it.

In the 24 hours after last month’s email was revealed, it lost 75,000 online subscribers. It had already shed close to 300,000 when the refusal to endorse a presidential candidate was revealed (I was one of them).

It is unsurprising that he puts an enormously profitable enterprise ahead of one that is costing him money. However, rather than risking the future of a fine newspaper, he could have sought a buyer for it.

He could even afford to sell it for one dollar to staff or to an individual who has a stronger commitment to the principles of free speech than he can now muster. He has done neither.

Chilling effect
Instead, he is prepared to modify content to make The Washington Post more acceptable to the White House in order to protect — perhaps even enhance — his other interests. That will have a chilling effect on the journalists he employs.

In an industry that has lost more than 8000 newsroom roles over the past three years, fear for your job can be a powerful inducement to conform.

An analysis of Bezos’ current strategy by the Wall Street Journal (which paid more attention to commercial interests than journalistic principles) suggested that Bezos had already paid a very high price for being perceived by Trump as an enemy during his first term.

“In 2019, the cost of crossing Trump and funding the Resistance became staggeringly clear to Bezos. Amazon lost out to rival Microsoft on a mammoth $10 billion cloud-computing contract issued by the Pentagon.

“It was a surprising decision since Amazon Web Services was the industry leader in cloud computing and was judged by many to have presented a stronger bid. This time around, the risks to Bezos appear far greater. Trump 2.0 is faster, more ruthless and more skilled at pulling the levers of government power.

“Amazon is vulnerable on many fronts — from antitrust to contracts.”

An even higher price could be paid, however, by the people of the United States (and beyond) as Trump uses those levers to diminish the ability of news media to hold him to account.

Press Corps manipulation
His manipulation of the make-up of the White House Press Corps has been another example. The White House Correspondents Association has been stripped of its role in deciding which journalists have access to the president. Not only has this resulted in the ascendancy of Trump acolytes like Brian Glenn of Real America Voice but America’s pre-eminent wire service, the Associated Press, has been ejected from the Press Pool.

Ostensibly, the ban was due to the AP refusing to change the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America in its copy. It is far more likely, however, that the wire service’s balanced coverage and quest for accuracy stands in the way of Trumpian disinformation.

And, of course, his war on words even goes beyond the media to stripping government websites of words, phrases and ideas that challenge or complicate the administration’s views.

I agree with a New York Times editorial that characterised these actions as Orwellian — protecting free speech requires controlling free speech. It said the approach was “deliberate and dangerous.” It labelled Trump’s moves to control not only the flow of information but the way it was presented as “an expansive crackdown on free expression and disfavoured speakers that should be decried not just as hypocritical (Trump and his supporters advocate a form of free speech absolutism) but also as un-American and unconstitutional”.

These are strong words. Sadly, they have yet to result in a mass movement to restore sanity.

And that leaves me at a loss to understand what in Hell’s name has happened to principled people in the United States. If I (and many like me) are affronted by what is happening far from here, why are we not hearing a mass of voices demanding a stop to actions that threaten not only the United States’ international reputation but the very fabric of its society?

Orwell on truth
In 1941, George Orwell made a radio broadcast on truthfulness that may have awful portents for Americans. In it he said:

“Totalitarianism has abolished freedom of thought to an extent unheard of in any previous age. And it is important to realise that its control of thought is not only negative but also positive. It not only forbids you to express — even to think — certain thoughts but it dictates what you shall think, it creates an ideology for you, it tries to govern your emotional life as well as setting up a code of conduct. And as far as possible it isolates you from the outside world, it shuts you up in an artificial universe in which you have no standards of comparison.”

That, I suspect, would be music to Donald Trump’s ears. And Jeff Bezos’s dictating the limits of what is acceptable on The Washington Post’s op/ed pages is one tiny step it that direction.

Dr Gavin Ellis holds a PhD in political studies. He is a media consultant and researcher. A former editor-in-chief of The New Zealand Herald, he has a background in journalism and communications — covering both editorial and management roles — that spans more than half a century. This article was published first on his Knightly Views website on 4 March 2025 and is republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Jeremy Scahill and Sharif Abdel Kouddous of Dropsite News

Hamas officials submitted a two-page report to mediators yesterday listing a wide range of Israeli violations of the Gaza ceasefire since the agreement went into effect on January 19 — including the killing of civilians, repeated ground and air incursions, the beating and humiliation of Palestinian captives during their release and the deportation of some without their consent, and the denial of humanitarian aid.

Drop Site News obtained a copy of the report delivered to mediators from Qatar and Egypt.

“Hamas is committed to the ceasefire agreement if the occupation is committed to the agreement,” Hamas said in a statement.

“We confirm that the occupation is the party that did not abide by its commitments, and it bears responsibility for any complications or delays.”

The move comes in response to accusations by US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Hamas had violated the agreement, threatening a full resumption of the war — yet it was Israel’s nearly daily breaches of the deal that prompted Hamas to announce it would postpone the next release of Israeli captives.

On Monday, Abu Obeida, the spokesperson for the Al Qassam Brigades, Hamas’s military wing, announced the next planned release of three Israeli captives, scheduled for Saturday, would be “postponed indefinitely”.

Abu Obeida cited “delays in allowing displaced Palestinians to return to northern Gaza, targeting them with airstrikes and gunfire across various areas of the Strip, and failing to facilitate the entry of humanitarian aid as agreed”.

Israel violating ceasefire agreement
Hamas issued a statement soon afterwards reiterating that Israel was violating the agreement by blocking aid, attacking civilians, and restricting movement in Gaza, and warning that the next release of captives would be postponed until it complied.

“By issuing this statement five full days ahead of the scheduled prisoner handover, Hamas aims to grant mediators sufficient time to pressure the occupation to fulfill its obligations,” the statement said.

Three Israeli officials and two mediators speaking anonymously to The New York Times confirmed that Israel had not fulfilled its obligations to send humanitarian aid into Gaza. This fact was mentioned in the 9th paragraph of the Times story.

In response, President Trump, on Monday told reporters that the ceasefire should be cancelled if Hamas did not release all the remaining captives it was holding in Gaza by midday Saturday, warning “all hell is going to break out”.

Yesterday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu doubled down on Trump’s comments.

“If Hamas does not return our hostages by Saturday noon,” Netanyahu said in a video statement, “the ceasefire will end, and the IDF will return to intense fighting until Hamas is finally defeated.”

Netanyahu reportedly ordered the military to add more troops in and around Gaza to prepare for “every scenario” if the captives were not released.

It was not immediately clear if he was referring to the three Israelis originally scheduled for release Saturday, all remaining captives, or all living Israelis slated for release in Phase 1.

Document submitted to mediators
The two-page document submitted by Hamas to mediators yesterday divided the violations into five separate categories: Field Violations, Prisoners, Humanitarian Aid, Denial of Essential Supplies, and Political Violations.

Israel has repeatedly violated the ceasefire deal since it came into effect, targeting Palestinians in Gaza on an almost daily basis. The document outlines 269 “field violations” by the Israeli military, including the killing of 26 Palestinians and the wounding of 59 others.

The number of people killed appears to be a dramatic undercount compared to the official toll documented by the Ministry of Health in Gaza.

The Director-General of the Health Ministry, Dr Monir al-Barsh, announced separately yesterday that 92 Palestinians had been killed and 822 wounded in “direct targeting” by the Israeli military since January 19, when the ceasefire came into effect.

The report also lists repeated ground incursions into Gaza beyond the designated buffer zone, particularly in the Philadelphi corridor — the 14km strip of land that runs along the border of Egypt.

These incursions “were accompanied by gunfire and resulted in the deaths of citizens and the demolition of homes,” the report said.

It also accused Israeli authorities of subjecting Palestinian captives to beatings and humiliation during their release, forcibly deporting released captives to Gaza without their coordination or consent, preventing families of deported prisoners from leaving the West Bank to join them, and delaying prisoner releases by several hours.

The report also says that fewer than 25 fuel trucks per day have been allowed into Gaza, which is half of the allotted 50 fuel trucks per day, as outlined in the deal. The entry of commercial fuel was blocked entirely, the report says, again in violation of the agreement.

Only 53,000 tents allowed
Just over 53,000 tents were allowed into Gaza, the reports says, out of the 200,000 allotted and no mobile housing units out of the 60,000 agreed on.

Heavy machinery for the removal of massive amounts of debris and retrieval of bodies was similarly blocked, with only four machines allowed in.

Israel also blocked the entry of supplies to repair and operate the power plant and electrical grid, the report said.

No medical supplies, ambulances have been allowed in and no equipment for civil defense teams. Meanwhile banks were not allowed to receive cash to replenish a severe currency shortage.

The report ends on “Political Violations” criticising statements by the “Israeli Prime Minister and ministers openly calling for the expulsion of Gaza’s population, sending a clear message that the occupation does not wish to honour the agreement and aims to implement Trump’s plan to displace Gaza’s residents”.

It also criticises the “deliberate delay” in starting the negotiations on Phase 2 of the ceasefire and “the introduction of impossible conditions.”

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The editorial board of The New York Times has demolished Donald Trump in a single paragraph calling on readers to vote for Vice-President Kamala Harris in today’s US elections.

The editorial, published on Saturday, was only the Times’ latest attack on the former president in the run-up to the election, but the searing indictment was all the more brutal for its brevity.

The 10-line editorial simply said:

“You already know Donald Trump. He is unfit to lead. Watch him. Listen to those who know him best. He tried to subvert an election and remains a threat to democracy. He helped overturn Roe, with terrible consequences. Mr. Trump’s corruption and lawlessness go beyond elections: It’s his whole ethos. He lies without limit. If he’s re-elected, the G.O.P. won’t restrain him. Mr. Trump will use the government to go after opponents. He will pursue a cruel policy of mass deportations. He will wreak havoc on the poor, the middle class and employers. Another Trump term will damage the climate, shatter alliances and strengthen autocrats. Americans should demand better. Vote.”

The dismissal of Trump by The Times was in contrast to two other major US newspapers, both owned by billionaires — The Washington Post and the LA Times — which last month controversially refused to make an editorial call.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

French Polynesia’s top leaders have voiced united angry protests against a New York Times story published this week headlined “Olympic Surfing Comes to a ‘Poisoned’ Paradise”.

The story, published in Tuesday, was referring to the fallout in 1974 from one of the French nuclear tests — 193 were carried out between 1966 and 1996 on the atolls of Moruroa and Fangataufa — that would have contaminated the main island of Tahiti where the surfing events of the Olympics are currently being held in Teahupo’o.

Reacting to the article, Tony Géros, President of Polynesia’s Territorial Assembly, told public broadcaster Polynésie La Première TV that “just because The New York Times brings up age-old subjects doesn’t mean that today we’re going to question the entire future of the country regarding this matter.

“It just doesn’t hold water.

“You know, they have the right to think what they want. They can come and lecture us.

“I think the United States also conducted their own nuclear tests,” said French Polynesia President Moetai Brotherson.

“So there you go, it doesn’t bother me that much.

“What would bother me was if this story became a big deal.”

Immediately after the Second World War, the US established its nuclear test Pacific Proving Grounds in the UN mandated trust territory of Micronesia.

Several sites in the Marshall Islands and a few other sites in the Pacific Ocean were where the US conducted 105 atmospheric and underwater — not underground — nuclear tests between 1946 and 1962.

The US tested a nuclear weapon codenamed Able on Bikini Atoll on 1 July 1946. It was followed by Baker three weeks later on July 25.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ with additional reporting by Asia Pacific Report.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The obscure UN organisation attempting to set rules for the exploitation of deep-sea metals is facing a potential shake-up as more nations call for a mining moratorium and a new candidate for its leadership vows to address perceptions of corporate bias.

The number of countries against the imminent start of mining for metallic nodules on the seafloor has jumped to 32 during the International Seabed Authority’s annual assembly this week in Kingston, Jamaica after Austria, Guatemala, Honduras, Malta and Tuvalu joined their ranks.

“We are running ahead of ourselves trying to go and extract minerals when we don’t know what’s down there, what impact it is going to have,” said Surangel Whipps, president of the Pacific island nation of Palau.

As governments become more aware of the risks, “hopefully we get them motivated to say let’s have a pause, let’s have a moratorium until we understand what we are doing,” he told BenarNews.

Tuvalu delegates Monise Laafai and Demi Afasene declared their country’s support for a precautionary pause on deep-sea mining, pictured on July 30, 2024. [IISD-ENB]

Ten members of the 18-nation Pacific Islands Forum (PIF), including the territories of New Caledonia and French Polynesia whose foreign policies are set by France, are now opposed to any imminent start to deep-sea mining.

Mining of the golf ball-sized nodules that litter swathes of the sea bed is touted as a source of metals and rare earths needed for green technologies, such as electric vehicles, as the world reduces reliance on fossil fuels.

Irreparable damage
Sceptics say such minerals are already abundant on land and warn that mining the sea bed could cause irreparable damage to an environment that is still poorly understood by science.

Brazil has nominated its former oil and gas regulator Leticia Carvalho, as its candidate for ISA secretary-general, challenging the two-term incumbent Michael Lodge. He has been criticized for his closeness to The Metals Company, which is leading the charge to hoover up the metallic nodules from the seabed.

Carvalho, a former oceanographer and currently a senior official at the UN Environment Program, said a third consecutive term for Lodge would be inconsistent with “best practices” at the UN

“I would be guided by integrity as a value,” she told BenarNews. “Secondly the secretary-general function, it’s a neutral function. You are a civil servant, you are there to set the table for the decision makers, which are the state parties.”

“I have learned in my life as a regulator that you try to find by consensus, balances – what you agree collectively to protect and what you agree to sacrifice,” Carvalho said.

Lodge has been nominated by Kiribati, one of three Pacific Island nations that The Metals Company is working with to harvest vast quantities of nodules from their areas in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone.

The 4.5 million square kilometer [1.7 square million mile] area in the central Pacific is regulated by the ISA and contains trillions of polymetallic nodules at depths of up to 5.5 kilometers. All up, the ISA regulates more than half of the world’s seafloor.

Dropped out
Carvalho said she was present at a meeting at the UN in New York last month, first reported by The New York Times, when Kiribati’s ambassador to the UN. Teburoro Tito, proposed to Brazil’s ambassador that Carvalho drop out of contention for secretary-general in exchange for another senior role at the ISA.

Lodge has said he was not involved in that proposal and also denied the concerns of some ISA delegates that his travel this year to nations including China, Cameroon, Japan, Egypt, Italy and Antigua and Barbuda was a re-election campaign using ISA resources.

“Mr Lodge has no comment on any questions concerning hearsay,” the ISA said in a statement. “Mr Lodge was not privy to the discussions referenced and is not party to the alleged [Kiribati] proposal.”

Deep-sea mineral extraction has been particularly contentious in the Pacific, where some economically lagging island nations see it as a possible financial windfall, but many other island states are strongly opposed.

Nauru President David Adeang told the assembly that its mining application currently being prepared in conjunction with The Metals Company would allow the ISA to make “an informed decision based on real scientific data and not emotion and conjecture”.

Nauru in June 2021 notified the seabed authority of its intention to begin mining, which triggered  the clock for the first time on a two-year period for the authority’s member nations to finalise regulations.

Through deep-sea mining, Nauru, home to some 10,000 people and just 21 square kilometers in area, would contribute critical metals and help combat global warming, Adeang said.

‘Necessity’ for our survival
“The responsible development of deep sea minerals is not just an opportunity for Nauru and other small island developing states,” he said. “It is a necessity for our survival in a rapidly changing world.”

Still, a sign of how little is understood about deep sea environments came earlier this month when scientists published research that showed the metallic nodules generate oxygen, likely through electrolysis.

It was an own-goal for The Metals Company, which partly funded the research in Nauru’s area of the Clarion-Clipperton Zone. It quickly attacked the results as based on flawed methodology.

“Firstly it’s great that through our funding this research was possible. However we do see some concerns with the early conclusion and will be preparing a rebuttal that will be out soon,” chief executive Gerard Barron told BenarNews.

Among the other 32 nations at the 169-member ISA supporting a stay on deep-sea mining are Brazil, Canada, Chile, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, France, Germany, Mexico, New Zealand, Palau, Samoa, United Kingdom, and Vanuatu.

Copyright ©2015-2024, BenarNews. Republished with the permission of BenarNews.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Last week’s leaked New York Times staff directive, as to what words can and cannot be used to describe the carnage Israel is raining on Palestinians, is proof positive, since those reports are published verbatim here in New Zealand, that our understanding of the conflict is carefully managed to always reflect a pro-Israel bias.

Forget the humanity of 120,000 dead and wounded Palestinians and countless others facing famine and disease sheltering in tents or what’s left of destroyed buildings, even internationally recognised terms and phrases such as “genocide,” “occupied territory,” “ethnic cleansing” and even “refugee camps” are discouraged, along with “slaughter”, “massacre” and “carnage”.

Though such language restrictions are claimed to be in the interests of “fairness”, an earlier investigation showed that between October 7 and November 14, The Times used the word “massacre” 53 times when it referred to Israelis being killed by Palestinians and only once in reference to Palestinians being killed by Israel.

By that date, thousands of Palestinians had perished, the vast majority of whom were women and children, and most of them were killed inside their own homes, in hospitals, schools or United Nations shelters.

This carefully managed use of words is deliberate and insidious and, as Jack Tame’s interview with Israel’s ambassador on last Sunday’s Q&A programme showed, even our most experienced media people are not immune to its effects.

Here is our interview with Israel Ambassador, Ran Yaakoby. From this morning’s @NZQandA https://t.co/pSHdxpccre

— Jack Tame (@jacktame) April 20, 2024

From his introduction, “establishing” that the genocide taking place in Gaza had its genesis in the October 7 attack by Hamas, and not in the Nakba of 1948, Jack Tame and TVNZ facilitated an almost hour-long presentation of pro-Israel propaganda, justifying its atrocities.

For its appalling lack of balance, including Tame’s obsequious allowance and nodding agreement with the Israeli ambassador’s thoroughly discredited claims of Hamas atrocities; “beheadings” “necrophilia” and for describing Israelis’ as being “butchered” (five times he used the word) while Palestinians were merely “killed”, this was a new low in our media’s record of bias when it comes to the presentation of the facts about the Palestine/Israel conflict.

In the very week that we prepare to remember the horrific sacrifices made in previous wars and even as Israel‘s genocidal slaughter of Palestinians brings us closer to World War Three than at any time since the Cuban missile crisis, that TVNZ should have, pre-recorded and so had time to edit, such a disgraceful presentation is simply appalling — and heads should roll.

Republished from The Daily Blog with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

It has been billed as the most significant US election in generations, and with nearly 100 million votes already cast, it is well underway.

An estimated 50 million more votes are expected on the last day of in-person voting on Tuesday (Wednesday NZ time), with mail-in ballots still making their way through the postal service, including from overseas and military voters.

It is not only the White House up for grabs, but all 435 seats in the House of Representatives and 35 of the 100-seat Senate.

In addition, 11 gubernatorial (state governor) races, various state legislatures, and a plethora of local judges, sheriffs, school boards and supervisory roles are also on the ballot. A quick glance at a US ballot illustrates how America has more democratically elected positions per capita than any other country in the world.

A turbulent four years of Trump
This election will be one for the history books. The White House incumbent, impeached on abuse of power charges and litigating against Congressional oversight of potential financial conflicts of interest, has refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power.

In the year following more than 1,000 former federal prosecutors confirming President Donald Trump would be indicted if not for the current immunity the Oval Office provides him, Trump has stepped up rhetoric that any election that he does not win is “rigged”.

Then came the “October surprise” from The New York Times that the president has at least US$400 million in personally guaranteed loans due over the next possible term and previously undisclosed Chinese bank accounts. This has brought the president’s priorities under intense scrutiny alongside a flailing economy and federal mismanagement of the covid pandemic response.

Citing these concerns, formal endorsements of Trump’s political opponent, former Vice-President Joe Biden, have come from unlikely places. Republican national security veterans, GOP governors and nonpartisan communities of scientists and physicians have endorsed Biden, some for the first time in the history of their organisations.

A group of 73 high-level former GOP US National security officials from administrations spanning Reagan to Bush Jr wrote in an open letter that Trump is “dangerously unfit to serve another term”, citing his undermining of the rule of law, failure to lead Americans through the pandemic, and damage to the US’s global reputation.

More than 780 prominent Republicans and Democrats, including former defence secretaries, ambassadors, and retired military brass, also decried Trump, writing that:

[…] thanks to his disdainful attitude and his failures, our allies no longer trust or respect us and our enemies no longer fear us.

A chorus of Trump’s own former administration officials have joined The Lincoln Project, Republican Voters against Trump, 43 for Biden (featuring members of the George W. Bush administration) and former staffers of late senator John McCain, to mount powerful testimonials targeting Trump’s base, independents and new voters.

The Biden camp has stressed a return to decency and cooperation, a United States of America. A popular ad encapsulates the message,

There is only one America. No Democratic rivers, no Republican mountains. Just this great land and all that’s possible on it with a fresh start. There is so much we can do if we choose to take on problems and not each other and choose a president who brings out our best.

Other “anyone but Trump” ads target voters who may have supported him in 2016 as a fiesty outsider, but have tired of the noise.

Ads, endorsements and of course polls are potentially useful indicators during the final week of voting. But what are some other trends that will likely impact electoral turnout and the results? Here are a few to look out for.

Millennial voter generation
Against the tight margins of the 2016 election in a handful of decisive states, a new generation of voters has emerged who may tip the balance of power. They drove a higher turnout in the 2018 midterm election and are not only voting but running and winning office. Enter the millennials.

The US is on the cusp of a generational shift. This is the first US presidential election in which the millennial generation is now the largest voting-age cohort, displacing the baby boomers who have held the title since the 1970s.

Younger millennials, who may have spent the previous presidential election in a high school walk out, or participated in the March for Our Lives for gun safety, are now eligible to vote.

Older millennials, who are approaching 40, grew up with high school shootings and are now watching their own young children do lockdown drills, rewarded with a candy if they remain quietly hidden in the toilet with their feet up to avoid detection.

Heartstopping PSA on school shootings released by Sandy Hook Promise.

Amid concern about growing economic inequality, the millennials will likely be the first generation to be less financially secure than their parents, and the most likely to compare themselves with international OECD peers who enjoy universal healthcare, gun control and better financial support during the pandemic.

None of these issues is well represented by the current administration, and so Trump’s approval rating hovers around 28 percent among that age group.

Trump has called climate change a Chinese conspiracy to undermine American manufacturing, pulled the US out of the Paris Agreement, and is suing to eliminate the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”).

On these crucial issues, different informational diets between generations, political parties, and even families could drive very different voting patterns.

But the millennial vote could be decisive.

Disinformation – word of the year?
If “post-truth” was the Oxford Dictionary’s Word of the Year in 2016, “disinformation” is in the running for 2020.

Disinformation – the deliberate spreading of false or misleading information in order to deceive – is a growing problem in democratic elections. It was a key theme in the Republican-chaired Senate Intelligence Committee report into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

These reports documented key disinformation techniques, narratives and purpose. Akin to Russian “active measures”, disinformation is used to undermine authoritative sources of information by blurring the line between fact and faction.

The most popular narrative, according to this report, was the myth of “voter fraud”.

While the 2016 disinformation campaign centred on voter fraud, the 2020 version targets mail-in voting. These ballots, cast in the middle of covid-19, are at the heart of competing narratives about the pandemic itself.

In this election, there has been a catalogue of disinformation about covid-19. While scientists, physicians and public health authorities have repeatedly warned the public and officials to take action to protect public health, the Trump administration has generally downplayed its severity.

Calling it “just the flu”, Trump said the problem impacts “virtually nobody”, even after nearly a quarter of a million Americans died. Recent research has shown Trump himself is one of the largest superspreaders of

‘If I Can Get Better Anyone Can Get Better’: Trump On covid-19 Recovery. Video: NBC News

Some of that disinformation will affect how people cast their ballot. While 19 states have expanded mail-in ballot options as a result of the pandemic, others have made voting harder by closing voting places while not expanding alternate options.

Texas, for instance, refused to recognise covid-19 concerns as a valid reason for those under 65 to request a mail-in ballot, with South Carolina only recently reversing a similar restriction.

Disinformation about mail-in ballots is likely to feature in court challenges. Trump has insisted the results be known on election day, which would necessarily exclude mail-in ballots postmarked in time but not yet received through the mail, including those cast by overseas military voters.

He has repeatedly signalled that his appointees in the judicial system (which number in the hundreds) will help secure his win.

While it is unprecedented for a president to attack electoral integrity, state level actions are also important to consider.

Elections run at state, county level
Voting in the US is not easy to summarise. Devoid of democracy sausages and a non-partisan federal elections commission, elections are run at the state and county level, from voter rolls to polling locations and everything in between.

Each state is in charge of its own election, and there are nearly as many systems as there are states.

Five states, including Oregon, vote entirely by mail. Five other states vote entirely on machine, including Georgia, with no traditional paper audit trail.

Other state variations include the option of early in-person voting, whether voting places are open on a Sunday, how far in advance you must register to vote, and requirements for voter ID.

Each state’s ballots look different, with users selecting their choices via handmarked bubble sheets, hole punches or hanging chads, the latter made famous in the 2000 recount in Florida that delivered George W. Bush his first term.

One of the quirks of the US voting system is the electoral college. The college is essentially a distribution of electoral votes among the states according to population size, updated after every 10-year census.

In 2020, several large states are in the spotlight as toss-ups, including Texas, which carries a prize of 38 electoral votes in the race to 270. It will be one to watch on election day, with early voter turnout already surpassing its 2016 total.

Texas is also the site of one of the most blatant attempts at disenfranchisement, with the GOP failing in its attempt to stop more than 120,000 ballots already cast in one of its largest counties.

Until recently, states were not allowed to make changes to voting procedures without judicial oversight. Plans to close significant numbers of polling places in certain districts, for instance, had to go through pre-clearance processes.

However, these protections were dismantled by a US Supreme Court ruling in 2013. This year’s presidential election will be only the second without those protections, and voter disenfranchisement could result.

One key method of disenfranchisement could be mail-in ballots. In an interview in August, Trump said he planned to block funding for the US postal service to prevent increased voting by mail.

A Trump appointee to the head of the postal service in July recently oversaw the destruction and dismantling of 700 mail processing machines, leading to more delays.

Simple polls of voting intention do not capture voter disenfranchisement and intimidation.

Intimidation tactics have been increasing across several key states. In Pennsylvania, New Jersey and North Carolina, official Republican party mailers warned voters their voting history is a matter of public record.

In New Mexico, the GOP sent mailers that read:

When the Democrats win the White House and you didn’t do your part to stop it, your neighbours will know. Voting is a matter of public record.

Experts warn of potential violence and rioting after the result. Growing polarisation, extremist groups such as QAnon threatening the use of force, and the availability of tactical weapons are all warning signs.

This year has seen more than 8 million more gun purchases than 2019, and scholars warn of increasing militia activity. Trump has publicly praised supporters who commit violence, including the Kenosha shooter.

International allies are also concerned. After Trump used armed guards to teargas peaceful protesters in Washington DC (which Australia watched live as its reporters were bashed on air), the Scottish Parliament voted to suspend exports of riot shields, tear gas and rubber bullets to the United States.

Australia recently updated its “do not travel” advisory to the US, citing civil unrest around the election.

Regardless of the outcome of the election, some of the trends may continue beyond Inauguration Day on January 21, 2021, affecting not just the US but its relationships with allies and adversaries alike.

Australia would do well to watch carefully and wait for the final results.


Dr Jennifer S. Hunt is a lecturer at the National Security College, Australian National University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

It has been billed as the most significant US election in generations, and with nearly 100 million votes already cast, it is well underway.

An estimated 50 million more votes are expected on the last day of in-person voting on Tuesday (Wednesday NZ time), with mail-in ballots still making their way through the postal service, including from overseas and military voters.

It is not only the White House up for grabs, but all 435 seats in the House of Representatives and 35 of the 100-seat Senate.

In addition, 11 gubernatorial (state governor) races, various state legislatures, and a plethora of local judges, sheriffs, school boards and supervisory roles are also on the ballot. A quick glance at a US ballot illustrates how America has more democratically elected positions per capita than any other country in the world.

A turbulent four years of Trump
This election will be one for the history books. The White House incumbent, impeached on abuse of power charges and litigating against Congressional oversight of potential financial conflicts of interest, has refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power.

In the year following more than 1,000 former federal prosecutors confirming President Donald Trump would be indicted if not for the current immunity the Oval Office provides him, Trump has stepped up rhetoric that any election that he does not win is “rigged”.

Then came the “October surprise” from The New York Times that the president has at least US$400 million in personally guaranteed loans due over the next possible term and previously undisclosed Chinese bank accounts. This has brought the president’s priorities under intense scrutiny alongside a flailing economy and federal mismanagement of the covid pandemic response.

Citing these concerns, formal endorsements of Trump’s political opponent, former Vice-President Joe Biden, have come from unlikely places. Republican national security veterans, GOP governors and nonpartisan communities of scientists and physicians have endorsed Biden, some for the first time in the history of their organisations.

A group of 73 high-level former GOP US National security officials from administrations spanning Reagan to Bush Jr wrote in an open letter that Trump is “dangerously unfit to serve another term”, citing his undermining of the rule of law, failure to lead Americans through the pandemic, and damage to the US’s global reputation.

More than 780 prominent Republicans and Democrats, including former defence secretaries, ambassadors, and retired military brass, also decried Trump, writing that:

[…] thanks to his disdainful attitude and his failures, our allies no longer trust or respect us and our enemies no longer fear us.

A chorus of Trump’s own former administration officials have joined The Lincoln Project, Republican Voters against Trump, 43 for Biden (featuring members of the George W. Bush administration) and former staffers of late senator John McCain, to mount powerful testimonials targeting Trump’s base, independents and new voters.

The Biden camp has stressed a return to decency and cooperation, a United States of America. A popular ad encapsulates the message,

There is only one America. No Democratic rivers, no Republican mountains. Just this great land and all that’s possible on it with a fresh start. There is so much we can do if we choose to take on problems and not each other and choose a president who brings out our best.

Other “anyone but Trump” ads target voters who may have supported him in 2016 as a fiesty outsider, but have tired of the noise.

Ads, endorsements and of course polls are potentially useful indicators during the final week of voting. But what are some other trends that will likely impact electoral turnout and the results? Here are a few to look out for.

Millennial voter generation
Against the tight margins of the 2016 election in a handful of decisive states, a new generation of voters has emerged who may tip the balance of power. They drove a higher turnout in the 2018 midterm election and are not only voting but running and winning office. Enter the millennials.

The US is on the cusp of a generational shift. This is the first US presidential election in which the millennial generation is now the largest voting-age cohort, displacing the baby boomers who have held the title since the 1970s.

Younger millennials, who may have spent the previous presidential election in a high school walk out, or participated in the March for Our Lives for gun safety, are now eligible to vote.

Older millennials, who are approaching 40, grew up with high school shootings and are now watching their own young children do lockdown drills, rewarded with a candy if they remain quietly hidden in the toilet with their feet up to avoid detection.

Heartstopping PSA on school shootings released by Sandy Hook Promise.

Amid concern about growing economic inequality, the millennials will likely be the first generation to be less financially secure than their parents, and the most likely to compare themselves with international OECD peers who enjoy universal healthcare, gun control and better financial support during the pandemic.

None of these issues is well represented by the current administration, and so Trump’s approval rating hovers around 28 percent among that age group.

Trump has called climate change a Chinese conspiracy to undermine American manufacturing, pulled the US out of the Paris Agreement, and is suing to eliminate the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”).

On these crucial issues, different informational diets between generations, political parties, and even families could drive very different voting patterns.

But the millennial vote could be decisive.

Disinformation – word of the year?
If “post-truth” was the Oxford Dictionary’s Word of the Year in 2016, “disinformation” is in the running for 2020.

Disinformation – the deliberate spreading of false or misleading information in order to deceive – is a growing problem in democratic elections. It was a key theme in the Republican-chaired Senate Intelligence Committee report into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

These reports documented key disinformation techniques, narratives and purpose. Akin to Russian “active measures”, disinformation is used to undermine authoritative sources of information by blurring the line between fact and faction.

The most popular narrative, according to this report, was the myth of “voter fraud”.

While the 2016 disinformation campaign centred on voter fraud, the 2020 version targets mail-in voting. These ballots, cast in the middle of covid-19, are at the heart of competing narratives about the pandemic itself.

In this election, there has been a catalogue of disinformation about covid-19. While scientists, physicians and public health authorities have repeatedly warned the public and officials to take action to protect public health, the Trump administration has generally downplayed its severity.

Calling it “just the flu”, Trump said the problem impacts “virtually nobody”, even after nearly a quarter of a million Americans died. Recent research has shown Trump himself is one of the largest superspreaders of

‘If I Can Get Better Anyone Can Get Better’: Trump On covid-19 Recovery. Video: NBC News

Some of that disinformation will affect how people cast their ballot. While 19 states have expanded mail-in ballot options as a result of the pandemic, others have made voting harder by closing voting places while not expanding alternate options.

Texas, for instance, refused to recognise covid-19 concerns as a valid reason for those under 65 to request a mail-in ballot, with South Carolina only recently reversing a similar restriction.

Disinformation about mail-in ballots is likely to feature in court challenges. Trump has insisted the results be known on election day, which would necessarily exclude mail-in ballots postmarked in time but not yet received through the mail, including those cast by overseas military voters.

He has repeatedly signalled that his appointees in the judicial system (which number in the hundreds) will help secure his win.

While it is unprecedented for a president to attack electoral integrity, state level actions are also important to consider.

Elections run at state, county level
Voting in the US is not easy to summarise. Devoid of democracy sausages and a non-partisan federal elections commission, elections are run at the state and county level, from voter rolls to polling locations and everything in between.

Each state is in charge of its own election, and there are nearly as many systems as there are states.

Five states, including Oregon, vote entirely by mail. Five other states vote entirely on machine, including Georgia, with no traditional paper audit trail.

Other state variations include the option of early in-person voting, whether voting places are open on a Sunday, how far in advance you must register to vote, and requirements for voter ID.

Each state’s ballots look different, with users selecting their choices via handmarked bubble sheets, hole punches or hanging chads, the latter made famous in the 2000 recount in Florida that delivered George W. Bush his first term.

One of the quirks of the US voting system is the electoral college. The college is essentially a distribution of electoral votes among the states according to population size, updated after every 10-year census.

In 2020, several large states are in the spotlight as toss-ups, including Texas, which carries a prize of 38 electoral votes in the race to 270. It will be one to watch on election day, with early voter turnout already surpassing its 2016 total.

Texas is also the site of one of the most blatant attempts at disenfranchisement, with the GOP failing in its attempt to stop more than 120,000 ballots already cast in one of its largest counties.

Until recently, states were not allowed to make changes to voting procedures without judicial oversight. Plans to close significant numbers of polling places in certain districts, for instance, had to go through pre-clearance processes.

However, these protections were dismantled by a US Supreme Court ruling in 2013. This year’s presidential election will be only the second without those protections, and voter disenfranchisement could result.

One key method of disenfranchisement could be mail-in ballots. In an interview in August, Trump said he planned to block funding for the US postal service to prevent increased voting by mail.

A Trump appointee to the head of the postal service in July recently oversaw the destruction and dismantling of 700 mail processing machines, leading to more delays.

Simple polls of voting intention do not capture voter disenfranchisement and intimidation.

Intimidation tactics have been increasing across several key states. In Pennsylvania, New Jersey and North Carolina, official Republican party mailers warned voters their voting history is a matter of public record.

In New Mexico, the GOP sent mailers that read:

When the Democrats win the White House and you didn’t do your part to stop it, your neighbours will know. Voting is a matter of public record.

Experts warn of potential violence and rioting after the result. Growing polarisation, extremist groups such as QAnon threatening the use of force, and the availability of tactical weapons are all warning signs.

This year has seen more than 8 million more gun purchases than 2019, and scholars warn of increasing militia activity. Trump has publicly praised supporters who commit violence, including the Kenosha shooter.

International allies are also concerned. After Trump used armed guards to teargas peaceful protesters in Washington DC (which Australia watched live as its reporters were bashed on air), the Scottish Parliament voted to suspend exports of riot shields, tear gas and rubber bullets to the United States.

Australia recently updated its “do not travel” advisory to the US, citing civil unrest around the election.

Regardless of the outcome of the election, some of the trends may continue beyond Inauguration Day on January 21, 2021, affecting not just the US but its relationships with allies and adversaries alike.

Australia would do well to watch carefully and wait for the final results.


Dr Jennifer S. Hunt is a lecturer at the National Security College, Australian National University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz