By Cliff Potts, CSO, and Editor-in-Chief of WPS News

Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines — July 1, 2026

On social media, loud voices often look like large crowds. On X, that impression can be misleading. Research over several years shows that some of the most visible political content tied to Donald Trump is amplified by accounts based outside the United States.

This essay explains how foreign amplification works, why it creates a false sense of domestic support, and why that distortion is a serious business problem for platforms and advertisers.

Amplification Is Not the Same as Support

Support comes from people who vote, donate, and organize locally. Amplification comes from accounts that boost messages to make them look more popular than they are.

On X, amplification can be driven by:

  • foreign-based accounts,
  • coordinated networks,
  • and automated or semi-automated activity.

These accounts may not represent American voters at all. Yet they can push topics into trending spaces, making fringe views look mainstream.

What Researchers Have Found

Independent researchers, journalists, and platform disclosures have repeatedly shown that political content is often boosted by accounts located outside the country where the election or debate takes place.

Before 2022, Twitter itself reported removing foreign networks tied to political influence campaigns. After ownership changes, transparency declined. The visibility of political content increased, while clarity about who was boosting it decreased.

When location and authenticity are unclear, audiences cannot judge what they are seeing.

Why Platforms Allow This to Continue

Foreign amplification drives engagement. Engagement keeps users scrolling. Scrolling keeps ads on screens.

From a business view, loud activity looks like growth. From a market view, it is distortion. Platforms benefit from the noise, even when it misrepresents reality.

This is not about one politician. The same systems can amplify any narrative that creates attention.

The Cost to Advertisers and Credibility

Advertisers pay for access to real audiences. When they cannot tell who is real, where they are, or why they are active, trust breaks down.

Brands do not want to appear next to manipulated conversations. They do not want to fund influence campaigns they cannot see. As confidence drops, spending follows.

A platform that cannot separate real support from artificial noise becomes a risky place to do business.

Why This Matters to the Philippines

The Philippines is not immune to these systems. The same amplification tools shape local debates and imported narratives. When foreign voices dominate visibility, local voices are pushed aside.

This weakens public discussion and harms creators who rely on honest reach. What looks like global conversation is often controlled amplification.

Looking Ahead

The next essay will examine why many advertisers step back from platforms with unstable rules and unclear audiences.

When you cannot tell who is speaking or why they are loud, you are not seeing a crowd.
You are seeing a machine.

For more social commentary, please see Occupy 2.5 at https://Occupy25.com

This essay will be archived in the WPS News Archives at Amazon.

References (APA)

Bradshaw, S., & Howard, P. N. (2019). The global organization of social media disinformation campaigns. Oxford Internet Institute. https://www.oii.ox.ac.uk

Reuters. (2023). Twitter dismantled election integrity safeguards. https://www.reuters.com

Twitter, Inc. (2021). Information operations transparency report. https://transparency.twitter.com

Discover more from WPS News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.