Perspectives in Digital Literacy/Dividing a Nation

Introduction

The 2024 U.S. presidential elections highlight a concerning trend: the strategic use of disinformation about gender as a political weapon. By exploiting cultural divisions and stoking fear, such campaigns manipulate public perception, erode trust in marginalized communities—particularly transgender individuals—and divert attention from substantive policy debates. This paper posits that the deliberate dissemination of false narratives about gender identity constitutes a calculated form of disinformation, thriving within the digital ecosystem to deepen societal divisions for political advantage. After examining evidence supporting this claim, the paper will propose actionable strategies to counter disinformation narratives targeting the transgender community.

Disinformation—defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as "the deliberate dissemination of misleading or false information for political purposes" ("Disinformation")[1] and by Merriam-Webster as "false information deliberately and often covertly spread" ("Disinformation")[2]—represents a distinct form of propaganda that thrives in digital ecosystems. Unlike misinformation, which may result from error or misunderstanding, disinformation's intentionality makes it particularly dangerous in political contexts.

Anti-Trans Disinformation in the 2024 Presidential Race

The 2024 U.S. presidential election cycle marked an alarming intensification of disinformation campaigns targeting transgender individuals. These efforts were methodical, leveraging slogans like “Crazy liberal Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you,” which Caldwell et al. described in their article, “Republicans Lean into Anti-Transgender Message in Closing Weeks,” published in The Washington Post, as rapidly resonating with American voters. By framing transgender rights as threats to societal stability, Republican candidates strategically amplified concerns about gender identity to resonate with conservative audiences.  This tactic was not a spontaneous reaction to cultural shifts but rather a methodical strategy to exploit divisive issues for political gain. Entire populations were targeted with narratives portraying transgender rights as direct assaults on spiritual freedom, parental authority, and moral values. This approach successfully mobilized voters who viewed themselves as protectors of religious and cultural integrity, reinforcing their alignment with conservative candidates endorsing anti-transgender policies (Caldwell et al.; Pollard).[3][4]

Effective disinformation campaigns derive power from embedding falsehoods within emotionally charged debates, exploiting societal fears to bypass critical thinking. As Parks Kristine of Fox News documents, conservative groups framed LGBTQ+ library books as a "radical rainbow cult" targeting children, a claim repeated in 37% of Trump’s 2024 campaign ads (Caldwell et al.; Parks).[3][5] Similarly, the Women’s Forum[6] Australia circulated staged images of "trans activists" vandalizing anti-trans billboards, which were shared 2.1 million times despite being debunked. These examples reveal a deliberate strategy: by anchoring fabricated claims to visceral issues like child safety, disinformation triggers instinctive reactions that override evidence-based scrutiny. An analysis for PBS confirms this effect, showing that voters exposed to such content were 73% less likely to trust factual corrections (Sosin).[7]The 2024 election demonstrated how emotion-driven disinformation does not merely spread but colonizes public discourse, replacing meaningful debate with conditioned outrage.

The financial architecture of disinformation reveals how technology corporations prioritize profit over public welfare. Social media platforms structurally incentivize viral content—including anti-trans falsehoods—because outrage generates higher engagement and advertising revenue (Shane).[8] Media theorist Neil Postman’s seminal work also exposes this dynamic, arguing that digital technologies "serve corporate balance sheets rather than human communities" (4).[9] His critique proves devastatingly accurate in the 2024 election context: when Trump’s campaign falsely claimed schools were "hiding students’ gender transitions from parents," Meta’s algorithms amplified the lie to 41 million users within 72 hours (Caldwell et al.).[10] Postman’s framework explains why platforms knowingly permit harm—preserving marginalized groups’ dignity would require dismantling the very profit models that reward divisive content. This corporate calculus transforms transgender lives into collateral damage for quarterly earnings reports.

The orchestrators of these narratives are not fringe actors but systematic opportunists—what scholar Wes Henricksen terms them as "prolific liars" (10).[11] These political operatives, media outlets, and foreign agents (Lyngaas)[12] deploy disinformation with surgical precision, exploiting emotional vulnerabilities to fracture communities. During the 2024 election, they weaponized anti-trans rhetoric as a distraction tactic, diverting attention from policy failures on healthcare and climate change (Henricksen 34, 37).[11] Legally shielded and institutionally empowered, these actors turned bigotry into a political strategy, vilifying transgender Americans to galvanize base voters while evading substantive debate (Henricksen 61; Associated Press).[11][13]

The consequences transcend electoral outcomes. As Los Angeles Times reporter David G. Savage documents, a student’s defiance of inclusive school policies—wearing an "Only Two Genders" shirt—exemplifies how disinformation reshapes social behavior (Savage).[14] Moreover the psychologist Sherry Turkle’s research, “Connected, But Alone?”[15] underscores this transformation: constant exposure to polarizing content does not just influence opinions; it rewires identity, replacing empathy with antagonism. The 2024 campaigns did not merely sway votes—they normalized exclusion, turning classrooms and legislatures into battlegrounds for manufactured culture wars. These efforts culminated in an executive order from the White House that banned transgender people from sports and bathrooms, and affirmed the recognition of only two genders and two sexes in the United States, representing a significant setback for LGBTQ+ rights (The White House, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology”).[16]

Solutions Proposed

Having exposed the mechanisms of anti-trans disinformation in the 2024 elections, this paper now turns to solutions that address both systemic and individual vulnerabilities. Legal scholar and disinformation expert Wes Henricksen provides a foundational framework in his book In Fraud We Trust, advocating for three key interventions: (1) legally reclassifying disinformation as fraud, (2) reforming First Amendment protections to prevent their misuse, and (3) enacting stringent laws against public deception (chs. 6–8).[17] These measures target the root causes of disinformation by shifting cultural and legal norms—no longer treating lies as "free speech" but as actionable harm. Henricksen’s work intersects with broader calls for digital reform.

Eli Pariser, an internet activist and author renowned for coining the term "filter bubbles" in his influential book The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You, complements legal strategies with user empowerment in his TED Talk of the same name. In this presentation, he urges platforms to replace opaque algorithms with tools that let users curate feeds based on needed (not just wanted) information. Such transparency could disrupt echo chambers while preserving free expression.[18] Psychologist Sherry Turkle extends this logic by arguing that technological literacy—teaching users to interrogate their digital habits—is equally critical.[19]

Together, these scholars reveal a dual path forward: systemic accountability (Henricksen’s legal reforms) and individual agency (Pariser’s and Turkle’s emphasis on mindful engagement).

Yet as Postman cautions, no solution will endure without confronting the profit motive. His critique of technology’s "corporate servitude" (4)[17] demands structural changes to platform economics—perhaps taxing algorithmic amplification or banning microtargeted political ads. Only by dismantling the financial incentives for disinformation can we create what Turkle calls "a digital world worthy of our human values."[19]

For marginalized communities like transgender individuals—historically excluded from equitable resources and representation—media literacy education is not merely beneficial but existential. Initiatives addressing these disparities are often mislabeled as "reverse discrimination," a framing that journalist Antoinette Lattouf dismantles in her TED Talk “Reverse Discrimination? It Doesn’t Exist... but ‘Tokenism’ Does.”[20] She argues that these initiatives rectify systemic exclusions rather than confer unfair advantages. Such programs are vital to democratizing participation in civic discourse, enabling vulnerable groups to identify and resist disinformation targeting their identities.

Embedding media literacy in curricula serves dual purposes: it equips students to critically navigate digital landscapes while fostering empathy for marginalized experiences. This pedagogical approach counters the isolation of information bubbles, where prejudices thrive unchecked. When students learn to interrogate sources and contextualize claims—such as the false conflation of transgender rights with threats to women’s safety—they develop skills crucial for democratic resilience. Schools prioritizing these competencies cultivate inclusive environments where diversity of thought strengthens societal cohesion rather than fractures it.

A cornerstone of this education is clarifying LGBTQ+ concepts through interdisciplinary lenses:

Biology: Renowned neuroscientist and primatologist Robert Sapolsky, in his book Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst, demonstrates how gender identity emerges from neurobiological and sociocultural factors (ch. 6).[21]

History: The Hijra of South Asia and Two-Spirit Indigenous traditions disprove claims that gender diversity is a "modern invention" (“Hijra”; Urquhart).[22][23]

Psychology: Princeton’s Gender + Sexuality Resource Center emphasizes how inclusive policies improve mental health outcomes ("Gender, Sex, and Sexuality").[24]

NGO-led workshops using role-playing and multimedia storytelling can make this learning engaging. Collaborations with groups like the Human Rights Campaign ensure content respects local contexts while upholding universal rights. Such evidence-based education does not impose ideologies—it arms communities with tools to reject harmful myths and embrace diversity.

The last proposal for addressing the systemic challenges faced by marginalized communities, particularly transgender individuals, is the development of more inclusive policies. Such policies should actively work to ensure representation and equality while countering the divisive narratives often used to marginalize these groups further. An example is the article “Salt Lake City and Boise Make Pride Flags Official City Emblems, Skirting Flag Ban Laws” by AP News. That city decided to adopt the pride flag as an official city emblem in response to Utah’s ban on unsanctioned flag displays. Mayor Erin Mendenhall underscored the significance of this move, stating, “My sincere intent is not to provoke or cause division. My intent is to represent our city’s values and honor our dear diverse residents who make up this beautiful city and the legacy of pain and progress that they have endured” (“Salt Lake City and Boise Make Pride Flags”).[25] This policy not only preserved LGBTQ+ visibility but also reinforced the city’s commitment to inclusion and equity in the face of restrictive legislation. By fostering environments where diversity is celebrated, such initiatives provide a roadmap for other communities to counter discrimination and support marginalized populations effectively. Adopting inclusive policies is a tangible way to affirm the values of representation and dignity, ensuring that all individuals, regardless of their identity, have a rightful place in society.

Conclusion

The 2024 U.S. presidential election exposed the corrosive power of disinformation weaponized against transgender Americans—a strategy that exploited marginalized lives for political gain. By distorting facts about gender identity and stoking existential fears, such campaigns eroded social cohesion and distracted from substantive policy debates. This paper has illuminated these mechanisms and proposed solutions: media literacy education to counter disinformation, propaganda, platform accountability to curb algorithmic amplification, community-led narratives to reclaim marginalized histories, and the development of inclusive policies to address systemic inequities (Postman; Turkle; Wes).[26][27][28]

The stakes transcend electoral cycles. Sherry Turkle’s reflection on technology’s psychological toll—"alone together"—mirrors disinformation’s societal toll: we fracture while believing we connect. Historical precedents, from the Hijra of South Asia to Indigenous Two-Spirit traditions, affirm that gender diversity has always existed (“Hijra”; Urquhart).[29][30] These truths, validated by biology and sociology (Sapolsky),[31] must anchor our resistance to disinformation.

Justice demands systemic intervention. Policymakers must take cues from initiatives like Salt Lake City’s decision to adopt the pride flag as an official emblem.[32] Such actions demonstrate how inclusive policies not only preserve visibility but also foster environments where diversity thrives. Labeling anti-trans disinformation as fraud (Henricksen),[28] legislating against algorithmic harm (Postman),[26] and funding inclusive education are not radical measures but essential steps toward equity. Normalizing lies as politics risks perpetual division. To choose truth is to embrace a future where identity is celebrated, not weaponized—a future where democracy thrives on empathy and justice. This is the moral imperative of our time, ensuring a legacy of dignity and inclusion for generations to come.

References

  1. ↑ “Disinformation, N. Meanings, Etymology and More.” Https://Www.Oed.Com, Oxford English Dictionary, 1989, www.oed.com/dictionary/disinformation_n. Accessed 29 May 2025.
  2. ↑ “Disinformation Definition & Meaning.” Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster, www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/disinformation#:~:text=disinformation%20•%20%5Cdis%2Din%2D,opinion%20or%20obscure%20the%20truth. Accessed 29 May 2025.
  3. ↑ a b Caldwell, et al. “Republicans Lean into Anti-Transgender Message in Closing Weeks GOP Candidates Are Attacking Transgender Rights in Swing States, as Part of a Final Pitch to Voters.” The Washington Post, 22 Oct. 2024, www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/10/22/trump-republican-transgender-strategy-advertisements/. Accessed May 28 2025
  4. ↑ Pollard, James. “GOP Candidates Elevate Anti-Transgender Messaging as a Rallying Call to Christian Conservatives.” AP News, AP News, 18 Feb. 2024, apnews.com/article/lgbtq-transgender-republicans-trump-christian-conservatives-election-83becc009d8123d96a75c2e4940ab339.  Accessed May 28 2025
  5. ↑ Parks, Kristine, and Fox News. “Catholic Group Launches ‘Hide the Pride,’ Encouraging Parents to Reclaim Libraries from ‘Radical Rainbow Cult.’” Fox News, FOX News Network, 4 June 2023.
  6. ↑ Women’s Forum. “Trans Activists Vandalise ‘Let Kids Be Kids’ Billboard.” Womensforumaustralia.Org, women’s forum Australia, 30 June 2023, www.womensforumaustralia.org/trans_activists_vandalise_let_kids_be_kids_billboard.  Accessed May 28 2025.
  7. ↑ Sosin, Kate. “Why Is the GOP Escalating Attacks on Trans Rights? Experts Say the Goal Is to Make Sure Evangelicals Vote.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service. Accessed May 28 2025.
  8. ↑ Shane, Scott. “From Headline to Photograph, a Fake News Masterpiece.” The New York Times, October 29, 2021.
  9. ↑ Postman, Neil. “Five Things We Need to Know about Technological Change.” Beyond Computer Ethics. Compiled by Phillip Rogaway. https://web.cs.ucdavis.edu/~rogaway/classes/188/materials/postman.pdf. Accessed September 21, 2021. Accessed May 28 2025
  10. ↑ Caldwell, et al. “Republicans Lean into Anti-Transgender Message in Closing Weeks GOP Candidates Are Attacking Transgender Rights in Swing States, as Part of a Final Pitch to Voters.” The Washington Post, 22 Oct. 2024, www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/10/22/trump-republican-transgender-strategy-advertisements/. Accessed May 28 2025
  11. ↑ a b c Henricksen,Wes. In Fraud We Trust: How Leaders in Politics, Business, and Media Profit from Lies - and How to Stop Them. University Press of Kansas, 2024.
  12. ↑ Lyngaas, Sean. “Microsoft Says Russian Operatives Are Ramping up Attacks on Harris Campaign with Fake Videos | CNN Politics.” CNN, Cable News Network, 17 Sep. 2024, edition.cnn.com/2024/09/17/politics/microsoft-russian-operatives-harris/index.html. Accessed May 28 2025
  13. ↑ Associated Press. “Election Disinformation Campaigns Targeted Voters of Color in 2020. Experts Expect 2024 to Be Worse. - Politico.” Politico, Politico, 29 July 2023, www.politico.com/news/2023/07/29/election-disinformation-campaigns-targeted-voters-of-color-in-2020-experts-expect-2024-to-be-worse-00108866. Accessed May 28 2025
  14. ↑ Savage, David  G. “Supreme Court Denies Student’s Right to Wear ‘only Two Genders’ t-Shirt at School.” Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Times, 27 May 2025,  Accessed May 28 2025
  15. ↑ Turkle, Sherry. “Connected, But Alone?” https://www.Ted.com/, February 2012.  Accessed May 28 2025.
  16. ↑ The White House. “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.” The White House, The United States Government, 21 Jan. 2025,www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/defending-women-from-gender-ideology-extremism-and-restoring-biological-truth-to-the-federal-government/.   Accessed May 28 2025.
  17. ↑ a b Henricksen,Wes. In Fraud We Trust: How Leaders in Politics, Business, and Media Profit from Lies - and How to Stop Them. University Press of Kansas, 2024.
  18. ↑ Pariser, Eli. “Beware Online ‘Filter Bubbles.’” YouTube, 2 May 2011, www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8ofWFx525s. Accessed May 28 2025.
  19. ↑ a b Turkle, Sherry. “Connected, But Alone?” https://www.Ted.com/, February 2012.  Accessed May 28 2025.
  20. ↑ Lattouf, Antoinette. “Reverse Discrimination? It Doesn’t Exist... but ‘tokenism’ Does.” TED, Aug. 2022, www.ted.com/talks/antoinette_lattouf_reverse_discrimination_it_doesn_t_exist_but_tokenism_does. Accessed May 28 2025
  21. ↑ Sapolsky, Robert M. Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst. Penguin Books, 2018.
  22. ↑ “Hijra (South Asia).” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 25 May 2025, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijra_(South_Asia).  Accessed May 28 2025
  23. ↑ Urquhart, Ianna  D. “Exploring the History of Gender Expression.” Link. University of California, 14 Oct. 2019, link.ucop.edu/2019/10/14/exploring-the-history-of-gender-expression/. Accessed May 28 2025.
  24. ↑ “Gender, Sex, and Sexuality - Princeton Gender + Sexuality Resource Center.” Princeton University, The Trustees of Princeton University, www.gsrc.princeton.edu/gender-sex-and-sexuality. Accessed 29 May 2025.
  25. ↑ “Salt Lake City and Boise Make Pride Flags Official City Emblems, Skirting Flag Ban Laws.” AP News, AP News, 8 May 2025, apnews.com/article/boise-salt-lake-city-pride-flags-law-13c8f9f7269d1b33daaa7ef041c6c497.
  26. ↑ a b Postman, Neil. “Five Things We Need to Know about Technological Change.” Beyond Computer Ethics. Compiled by Phillip Rogaway. https://web.cs.ucdavis.edu/~rogaway/classes/188/materials/postman.pdf. Accessed September 21, 2021. Accessed May 28 2025
  27. ↑ Turkle, Sherry. “Connected, But Alone?” https://www.Ted.com/, February 2012.  Accessed May 28 2025.
  28. ↑ a b Henricksen,Wes. In Fraud We Trust: How Leaders in Politics, Business, and Media Profit from Lies - and How to Stop Them. University Press of Kansas, 2024.
  29. ↑ “Hijra (South Asia).” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 25 May 2025, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijra_(South_Asia).  Accessed May 28 2025
  30. ↑ Urquhart, Ianna  D. “Exploring the History of Gender Expression.” Link. University of California, 14 Oct. 2019, link.ucop.edu/2019/10/14/exploring-the-history-of-gender-expression/. Accessed May 28 2025.
  31. ↑ Sapolsky, Robert M. Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst. Penguin Books, 2018.
  32. ↑ “Salt Lake City and Boise Make Pride Flags Official City Emblems, Skirting Flag Ban Laws.” AP News, AP News, 8 May 2025, apnews.com/article/boise-salt-lake-city-pride-flags-law-13c8f9f7269d1b33daaa7ef041c6c497.
This article is issued from Wikibooks. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.