Graphic by Haley Smith
Over Labor Day weekend, a rumor about President Trump’s passing took over social media platform X. Using #trumpdead and #whereistrump, users conspired with one another, speculating about the president’s passing.
One X user wrote on Aug. 30, “JUST IN: Senior US official says, President Trump is fine. Meanwhile, Trump’s all public events scheduled for this weekend have been canceled by the White House ‘trump is dead’ ‘Death of trum[p]’ Rumors are mere rumors???”
Others began to share evidence and repost speculations shared by others, causing hashtags regarding the president’s apparent death to trend on the platform.
However, it was all a conspiracy theory.
With the rise of social media, news from across the world travels fast — eye-catching words and phrases incentivizing never-ending doomscrolling, and allowing certain topics to be picked up and promoted by algorithms regardless of their veracity. President Trump, an eye-catching name for those in and out of the United States, is often a controversial topic, making him fantastic algorithm fodder.
According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, a conspiracy theory is “a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators.”
The conspiracy about Trump’s death was widely spread and (somewhat) accepted due to the fact many didn’t see the president for several days.
“Okay I’m hearing that every video and every picture surfacing right now are old and we still haven’t seen him TODAY. I’m gonna need to see him hold up today’s newspaper or something. #donaldtrump #whereistrump,” an X user posted on Aug. 30.
There, of course, were many “trolls” who hopped on the hashtag, posting inflammatory content meant as bait for views. Between the bots, trolls and true believers of the conspiracy, it can become impossible to differentiate between the accounts. Before speculations on his death began, there was already talk about the president’s supposed declining health.
One user made a post on Aug. 25, titled, “Good morning and Happy Monday to everyone who agrees that Americans deserve to know what kind of severe health issues the White House is hiding by spackling trump’s hand with makeup, and his dragging right leg. If he’s severely ill, he should resign.”
The theory that the White House is hiding the true state of the president’s health, along with the brief time period where Trump wasn’t seen, allowed the spark of conspiracy to flood social media, causing some to celebrate and others to panic.
As fast as the conspiracy took hold, however, it was also swiftly debunked. Users took to X on Aug. 30, sharing posts of Trump golfing, seemingly in good health.
“Sorry Libs. Donald Trump is not dead. It’s curious you all never wondered when Biden disappeared for weeks. Nah, where is trump? He’s golfing. lol,” wrote a user.
The quick acceptance and disregard of conspiracy theories, along with the hundreds (if not thousands) of troll and bot accounts, across social media call into question the reliability of social media and how one may use (or not use) media discernment. As mentioned last week, according to the Pew Research Center, 18% of adults surveyed prefer to get their news from social media. There has been a shift in human favorability towards expedient news vs. reliable news.
There, of course, are benefits to fast news. Social media, while not always reliable, is a good way for journalists to gather tips on newsworthy topics. It also allows everyday citizens to have a greater voice and opinion on certain topics. It holds journalists accountable for their words, which was the topic of precise language, the first week’s topic in this series. If a journalist isn’t precise, words can be misconstrued and shifted into something the journalist didn’t anticipate, including propaganda and conspiracy.
Many conspiracies have taken form recently, some more facetious than others. One such conspiracy is “Birds Aren’t Real,” a movement that claims the government killed “over 12 billion birds between 1959 and 1971” and replaced them with surveillance drones.
According to “Information Disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making,” conspiracy theories are effective because they are based on powerful narratives. They unconsciously tap into deep-seated fears.”
While conspiracies like birds being government spies are often not taken seriously, other conspiracies, such as “PizzaGate,” however, had much more dire consequences.
If there is one place conspiracies seem to thrive, it’s around politics. According to “Media Manipulation and Disinformation Online,” during the 2016 election cycle, “conspiracy theories spread throughout 4chan and extremist circles of Twitter and Facebook, claiming that Hillary Clinton was deeply involved in a child sex ring and satanic rituals.”
Many websites were created, mimicking mainstream news outlets to create a sense of credibility. These sites continued to create similar stories about Clinton, spreading the link on social media and garnering hundreds of thousands of interactions.
After WikiLeaks published hacked emails from Clinton and 4chan users “combed” through them, users found an interaction between campaign chair John Podesta and the owner of a Washington, D.C., pizza restaurant called Comet Ping Pong, discussing the semantics of a fundraiser set to take place there.
That was all the “evidence” the conspiracy theorists needed. These theorists believed Comet Ping Pong was the headquarters of Clinton’s child sex ring, later being dubbed “PizzaGate.”
This conspiracy led to a massive fallout. The employees at the pizza restaurant received mass harassment. One man even decided he was going to be a hero. After arming himself with an assault rifle, he entered Comet Ping Pong on Dec. 4 to “investigate” the restaurant. Shots were fired, but fortunately, no one was hurt.
Mainstream media, of course, found this event newsworthy, leading to a problem that likely can’t be solved. By covering this bizarre event, the mainstream media gave the conspiracy more coverage — more traction. These days, it seems as though viral stories are often considered newsworthy, but is that truly the case?
Many news outlets are criticized if they don’t cover a trending topic, claiming the media is “silencing” their voices. On the other side of the coin, if the media covers every viral topic, it can lead to a decrease in local journalism and reliable news. Social media is not a reliable source, but a tool. If journalists give credence to every topic, articles will have less impact.