Allegations of electoral fraud in the runoff: what can we expect from Twitter?

With a technical tie in the polls, the outcome of the second presidential round in Colombia is being lived in the midst of tension and expectation. The possibility of a close vote difference between both candidates opens the door for the return of allegations, rumors and misinformation about electoral fraud. So far, Twitter has not intervened much. Will it do so this time?

On June 1, three days after the first round, the hashtag #FraudeElectoral became a trend in the country. The hashtag gathered different statements pointing in the same direction: according to the users who promoted the tweets, Gustavo Petro had been robbed of the election.

Between voting day and June 1, more than 60,000 tweets used the hashtag. Users who joined the trend spread different theories about the alleged way in which other candidates - mainly Rodolfo Hernández and Federico Gutiérrez - had been illegally favored on election day. For some, the Registraduría's software had been manipulated. For others, the evidence of fraud was in the erasures and amendments on the pre-count forms, which appeared to add votes for candidates other than the Historical Pact candidate.  

The conversation included elected congressmen such as Alirio Uribe and House Representative Sergio Marín, who argued that "the algorithm" subtracted Petro one out of every four votes, while Hernández and Gutiérrez received one out of every three votes.

What does Twitter say about fraud claims?

Since the 2016 U.S. presidential election, platforms have been changing their policies to control content that affects the integrity of electoral processes. In the case of Twitter, "objectionable statements that could undermine faith in the process" are now prohibited. The company gives as examples of this content unverified information about electoral fraud, ballot tampering or vote counting. 

In addition to content policies, Twitter has special rules for trending topics. The platform can temporarily ban or prevent a tweet from appearing in trending topics if it violates its rules, includes foul or adult language or violates the privacy of minors or victims of serious crimes. In certain cases, Twitter can add context to explain to users why a certain expression is trending.

On June 1, when the hashtag #FraudeElectoral went viral, the platform offered two links so that users searching for the trend would have more resources to understand the facts. However, none of the links - which Twitter still has available - refer to information that directly refers to electoral fraud or helps to clarify the most common misinformation.

The first one directs to a page of the Registraduría to consult polling places. The second takes users to an information center of the National Electoral Council, where the entity offers information on electoral crimes, observation, campaign ceilings, pollsters and a 130-page document on "electoral rules for democratic culture". 

In other contexts, such as the 2020 U.S. presidential election or the recent presidential election in the Philippines, Twitter has taken action, either to suspend those spreading false fraud claims or to monitor coordinated operations aimed at inflating candidates.

In Colombia, however, we have not seen this type of intervention on individual accounts. In a polarized and distrustful environment, if the platform were to hide a tweet or, even more, suspend the account of a candidate or political figure, it would generate greater tension than what it is trying to control. However, these rules exist, so it cannot be ruled out that, if Sunday's results are close, we may experience a debate on fraud -under all kinds of assumptions- with the additional element of some kind of sanction by Twitter.

‍