Skip to content

נרטיב

הופרך

“Foreign interference decided who won the election”

The most portable election narrative there is: a documented influence operation is treated as proof that it changed the result. The step it skips is the one that matters — reach is not persuasion, and persuasion is not a changed count. Every case in this database where interference was documented and the outcome was then examined found the same thing: the operation was real and the outcome held. Canada’s public inquiry said the Liberals would have formed government in 2019 and 2021 regardless; Macron won by 32 points on hand-counted paper after MacronLeaks; Google found almost no organic engagement with DragonBridge’s Taiwan campaign. The narrative is also useful to the interfering state, which gains more from being believed to be decisive than from being decisive.

מעקב אחר טענות

בחירות

ספריית ראיות

דוח רשמיPublic Inquiry into Foreign Interference in Federal Electoral Processes and Democratic InstitutionsJanuary 28, 2025
הדוח הסופי של ועדת ההתערבות הזרה בקנדה, כרך 1
מקוריבארכיון
מחקרAtlantic CouncilJune 2021
מבצע #MacronLeaks: ניתוח שלאחר מעשה
מקוריבארכיון
מחקרAtlantic CouncilJune 2021
מבצע #MacronLeaks: ניתוח שלאחר מעשה
מקוריבארכיון
Published September 22, 2026
September 22, 2026Published1579e19e
Every change to this record is a commit in the project’s version history. The reference beside each date identifies it.
שיתוףXBlueskyFacebookLinkedInRedditWhatsAppTelegramEmail

קישורי השיתוף פותחים את המלחין של הרשת עצמה. דבר אינו מוטמע כאן, ולכן אף צד שלישי אינו לומד אילו דפים קראתם.