vox--2020-08-11--How Trump’s mail voting sabotage could result in an election night nightmare

Imagine this election night scenario : With a decisive number of mail ballots yet to be tallied , President Donald Trump enjoys a narrow lead over Joe Biden .
But before all the votes can be counted — a process that could take days — Trump declares victory , citing purported irregularities with mail-in votes .
You can even picture Trump insisting that the preliminary election night tally must stand as final with a tweet that reads similarly to this one he posted in November 2018 , when Florida ’ s US Senate and gubernatorial elections were still undecided : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sort of authoritarian power grab happening here in the United States , but it ’ s a scenario that election experts are worried about .
“ That is my nightmare scenario , ” said Paul Gronke , professor of political science at Reed College in Portland and director of the Early Voting Information Center .
“ We got ta slow down .
Trump ’ s gon na be tweeting , the media , you , all of your counterparts , have to slow down .
Because he ’ ll claim victory , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and fraud , lawyers will be climbing into airplanes and arriving in all these small jurisdictions , and it will be not good.
” Gronke ’ s concern was echoed by Ari Berman , a senior reporter at Mother Jones and author of Give Us the Ballot : The Modern Struggle for Voting Rights in America .
“ Trump is still trying to tell his voters that they should vote in person , and Democrats are telling their voters that they should vote by mail , ” Berman said .
“ And mail @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballots .
So you could very much have a situation where the initial returns make it seems like Republicans are way up , because the mail ballots that are largely cast by Democrats haven ’ t been counted yet.
” “ If you had a situation where Republicans are up and Democrats take the lead based on mail ballots , even if that ’ s a totally normal situation , Trump is absolutely going to try to weaponize that , and claim it ’ s evidence of some sort of voter fraud or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Winners , of course , don ’ t usually whine about the rules while a contest is ongoing .
But Trump has been trailing Biden , the presumptive Democratic nominee , in polls for months .
And with the interlocking public health and economic crises stemming from the coronavirus not trending in a positive direction , using the levers of state power to delegitimize election results would be a desperation play .
“ You know , you could have a case where this election won ’ t be decided on the evening of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Jonathan Swan in an interview that aired on HBO last week .
Asked why that ’ s a problem — after all , there ’ s no rule that elections have to be decided on election night — Trump said , “ lots of things will happen during that period of time ; especially when you have tight margins , lots of things going to happen.
” Then , during a media availability on Sunday , Trump claimed that Democrats are using mail ballots to try and “ steal an election.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ so often the case with Trump — those comments are actually projection .
Despite what Trump would have you believe , mail-in election fraud isn ’ t really a thing Since the coronavirus pandemic began to seriously disrupt American life in March , Trump has been conspiracy-mongering about mail voting , tweeting things like it ’ ll result in a “ CORRUPT ELECTION ” and the “ SCANDAL OF OUR TIMES.
” In a remarkable July 30 tweet , Trump went as far as to suggest that the election should be delayed until @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In reality , voter fraud of all forms is extremely rare , and that ’ s especially the case with mail voting .
As the Brennan Center detailed earlier this year ( emphasis theirs ) : Trump has repeatedly cited episodes of attempted fraud on behalf of Republican Mark Harris in a North Carolina congressional race in 2018 and more recently in New Jersey as evidence there ’ s good reason to be worried .
But as Berman explained to me , there ’ s an irony in Trump citing instances where attempted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ When you do absentee ballot fraud , or voter fraud in general , on a scale large enough to influence an election , you get caught because it ’ s obvious you ’ re cheating , ” Berman said .
“ There ’ s lots of procedures in place to protect mail voting .
Every mail ballot has its own ID number , for example .
So there are lots of things you can do to protect the system , and if you try to game the system one way or another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the attention of election officials and authorities , and they ’ re going to be able to invalidate those ballots.
” Trump , however , is less interested in reports of actual fraud than he is creating the appearance of fraud .
And that ’ s where his dismantling of the Postal Service comes in .
The USPS is designated with safeguarding mail-in ballots — and it ’ s facing some unique challenges Louis DeJoy , a Trump megadonor , became postmaster general in June .
Since he took over , he ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States Postal Service ( USPS ) , leading critics to wonder if he ’ s working to hamper the institution , which , of course , is tasked with collecting ballots from voters and getting them to polling locations in a timely manner .
After operational changes implemented under DeJoy ’ s leadership , mail carriers are no longer receiving overtime pay , resulting in service slowdowns .
And while Trump has been bashing the USPS for years , the move to kneecap the Post Office just ahead of an election in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to vote by mail because of a pandemic reeks of an effort to sow chaos — and perhaps provide Trump with a pretext to challenge the results of the election that , according to current polls , he ’ s more likely to lose than win .
During a recent Fox & Friends interview , Trump was asked to respond to Hillary Clinton ’ s accusation that he ’ s trying to sabotage the Post Office ahead of November ’ s election .
Notably , he didn ’ t deny it .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for 40 years has had big problems , ” Trump said .
“ And they ’ re not equipped to handle a governor where they say , ‘ millions of ballots , by the way , will be posted in a couple weeks .
Gear up.
’ You can ’ t do that .
It doesn ’ t work that way.
” ( The Postal Service has said it has “ ample capacity ” to handle mail ballots . )
Gronke characterized Trump ’ s hampering of USPS as an effort “ to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ They ’ re really gon na try this ?
I mean , this is pretty blatant , ” he told Vox .
“ In some ways , for me , this is worse than the Trump attacks [ on mail voting ] , which is just sort of — he ’ s flailing .
But this could really be harmful.
” “ I think all of the changes at the Post Office — delaying mail , cutting overtime — can lead to mail ballots being delayed , and that also is an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote by mail , ” Berman told Vox .
“ So I ’ m less concerned about the rhetoric , and I ’ m more concerned about the tangible thing that Trump and his allies are doing to try to make it harder to vote by mail , and to try to make it harder for votes to be counted.
” Even congressional Republicans — especially those representing rural areas in which people rely on the Postal Service for everything for medications to clothing — are uneasy with Trump ’ s detrimental changes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Rep. Greg Gianforte ( R-MT ) wrote a letter to DeJoy saying that “ delaying mail service is unacceptable .
Do not continue down this road.
” “ This action , if not rescinded , will negatively impact mail delivery for Montanans and unacceptably increase the risk of late prescriptions , commercial products or bill delivery , ” added another Montana Republican , Sen. Steve Daines .
Those letters came the same day as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said the changes “ threaten the timely delivery @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , paychecks for workers and absentee ballots for voters — that is essential to millions of Americans.
” The USPS is very popular — it regularly tops the list of Americans ’ favorite government agencies .
Trump , however , is doing whatever he thinks necessary to maximize his chances of staying in power past next January .
The backdrop to all this is the coronavirus pandemic , which continues to rage out of control in large swaths of the country and makes it risky to vote at polling places that under normal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lines .
But instead of embracing methods of voting that will keep people safe , Trump views voter suppression stemming from the pandemic as useful to his cause .
Republicans have suddenly gone to war with mail-in voting Despite what Trump ’ s comments might lead you to believe , Republicans have a long history of doing just fine in systems that have lots of mail voting .
Deep-red Utah , for instance , is one of five states that already conduct elections almost entirely by mail .
Republicans in swing states like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of success with absentee voting .
But Trump , for whatever reason , has long been convinced that mail voting is bad for him .
In April , for instance , he tweeted ( falsely ) that mail voting has “ tremendous potential for voter fraud ” and “ for whatever reason , doesn ’ t work out well for Republicans.
” ( Studies on vote-by-mail have shown no such partisan advantage . )
While Trump is wrong about whether mail-in voting favors Democrats in general , he appears to be correct in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for him this election cycle .
According to Emerson College polling conducted late last month , a whopping 76 percent of voters who plan to vote by mail plan to vote for Joe Biden .
By contrast , 65 percent of those planning to vote in person say they ’ ll vote for Trump .
A normal politician ’ s response to those numbers might be to work harder to appeal to voters who plan to vote by mail .
Trump , however , is no normal politician .
“ I think he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but that more Democrats are going to vote by mail than Republicans , ” Berman said .
“ I think that ’ s [ the Trump campaign ’ s ] big concern , because they had no problems with people voting by mail in 2012 , or 2008 , or any of the previous elections in which Republicans voted by mail and encouraged their own people to do so.
” Trump ’ s message to states trying to make it as safe as possible for people to vote during a pandemic : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Trump campaign has also been filing lawsuits against states like Nevada , where officials are expanding mail voting systems ahead of November ’ s election .
After Nevada Gov .
Steve Sisolak ( D ) recently signed legislation to automatically provide all Nevada voters with a ballot in the mail , Trump responded with a tweet absurdly describing the legislation as “ an illegal late night coup , ” adding , “ See you in court !
” Indeed , Trump ’ s lawyers quickly filed a lawsuit seeking to block the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Millhiser explained , the suit ’ s argument is a mess — but that doesn ’ t mean it won ’ t gain traction in federal courts dominated by Republicans : The Nevada lawsuit illustrates the Trump campaign ’ s broader strategy .
CNN quoted an unnamed senior Trump campaign official who said “ the game plan is to fight [ new mail-in voting laws ] at every turn , ” and reported that the Republican National Committee plans to devote as much as $ 20 million to contest “ voting laws and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ potentially damaging to the President ’ s prospects of winning.
” “ We ’ re not going to have election night in the traditional sense ” Amber McReynolds , CEO of the advocacy group Vote at Home , told Vox that one thing states can do to preempt the nightmare scenario of Trump prematurely declaring victory is pass laws allowing for the processing of mail ballots before Election Day .
“ There are still some states that have outdated policies and laws around that issue .
Michigan , Wisconsin , Pennsylvania , Maryland @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t allow processing until Election Day , which is why they ’ re delayed , ” McReynolds said .
“ So we ’ ve been working on various states to expand the timeline ahead of Election Day , so that , frankly , election officials aren ’ t so stressed with resources trying to get that work done.
” But McReynolds added that Trump ’ s degradation of the USPS will likely present problems no matter what state legislatures do between now and November .
“ I ’ m very concerned , frankly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of mail ballots , ” she said .
“ The election process itself relies heavily on the USPS .
So there ’ s required ballot issue notices , required poll worker notices , poll place notices , voter registration requirements — there ’ s all kinds of election notices that are required under federal and state law , and that ’ s really what ’ s going to be impacted if the Post Office gets destroyed.
” Berman said part of the challenge is mental .
In the age of the coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that we can always know winners and losers on election night .
“ We ’ re not going to have election night in the traditional sense , and I think all the major institutions in the country should start preparing for that right now and informing people right now that it might take a little bit longer because of an unprecedented pandemic to count the ballots , and there ’ s nothing wrong with that , there ’ s nothing illegal about it , there ’ s nothing rigged about it , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just how it ’ s gon na be .
And it ’ s more important to get it right than get it quick.
” Will you become our 20,000th supporter ?
When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions , we weren ’ t sure how it would go .
Today , we ’ re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in .
The reason is both lovely and surprising : Readers told us that they contribute both because they value @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people can access it , too .
We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy .
That ’ s never been more important than today , during a public health crisis , racial justice protests , a recession , and a presidential election .
But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive , and advertising alone won ’ t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will help keep Vox free @ @ @ @ @ @ @ little as $ 3 .

Imagine this election night scenario: With a decisive number of mail ballots yet to be tallied, President Donald Trump enjoys a narrow lead over Joe Biden. But before all the votes can be counted — a process that could take days — Trump declares victory, citing purported irregularities with mail-in votes.
You can even picture Trump insisting that the preliminary election night tally must stand as final with a tweet that reads similarly to this one he posted in November 2018, when Florida’s US Senate and gubernatorial elections were still undecided:
The Florida Election should be called in favor of Rick Scott and Ron DeSantis in that large numbers of new ballots showed up out of nowhere, and many ballots are missing or forged. An honest vote count is no longer possible-ballots massively infected. Must go with Election Night! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 12, 2018
It might be hard to fathom that sort of authoritarian power grab happening here in the United States, but it’s a scenario that election experts are worried about.
“That is my nightmare scenario,” said Paul Gronke, professor of political science at Reed College in Portland and director of the Early Voting Information Center. “We gotta slow down. Trump’s gonna be tweeting, the media, you, all of your counterparts, have to slow down. Because he’ll claim victory, or he’ll start to claim malfeasance and fraud, lawyers will be climbing into airplanes and arriving in all these small jurisdictions, and it will be not good.”
Gronke’s concern was echoed by Ari Berman, a senior reporter at Mother Jones and author of Give Us the Ballot: The Modern Struggle for Voting Rights in America.
“Trump is still trying to tell his voters that they should vote in person, and Democrats are telling their voters that they should vote by mail,” Berman said. “And mail ballots take longer to count then in-person ballots. So you could very much have a situation where the initial returns make it seems like Republicans are way up, because the mail ballots that are largely cast by Democrats haven’t been counted yet.”
“If you had a situation where Republicans are up and Democrats take the lead based on mail ballots, even if that’s a totally normal situation, Trump is absolutely going to try to weaponize that, and claim it’s evidence of some sort of voter fraud or rigged election,” he warned.
Winners, of course, don’t usually whine about the rules while a contest is ongoing. But Trump has been trailing Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee, in polls for months. And with the interlocking public health and economic crises stemming from the coronavirus not trending in a positive direction, using the levers of state power to delegitimize election results would be a desperation play.
“You know, you could have a case where this election won’t be decided on the evening of November 3,” Trump told Axios’s Jonathan Swan in an interview that aired on HBO last week. Asked why that’s a problem — after all, there’s no rule that elections have to be decided on election night — Trump said, “lots of things will happen during that period of time; especially when you have tight margins, lots of things going to happen.”
Then, during a media availability on Sunday, Trump claimed that Democrats are using mail ballots to try and “steal an election.”
Trump is preemptively laying the groundwork to challenge a loss to Joe Biden by accusing the Democrats of trying to "steal an election" with mail voting pic.twitter.com/l9bdYrN2r7 — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 10, 2020
Experts worry that — as is so often the case with Trump — those comments are actually projection.
Despite what Trump would have you believe, mail-in election fraud isn’t really a thing
Since the coronavirus pandemic began to seriously disrupt American life in March, Trump has been conspiracy-mongering about mail voting, tweeting things like it’ll result in a “CORRUPT ELECTION” and the “SCANDAL OF OUR TIMES.” In a remarkable July 30 tweet, Trump went as far as to suggest that the election should be delayed until people can safely vote in person.
With Universal Mail-In Voting (not Absentee Voting, which is good), 2020 will be the most INACCURATE & FRAUDULENT Election in history. It will be a great embarrassment to the USA. Delay the Election until people can properly, securely and safely vote??? — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 30, 2020
In reality, voter fraud of all forms is extremely rare, and that’s especially the case with mail voting. As the Brennan Center detailed earlier this year (emphasis theirs):
None of the five states that hold their elections primarily by mail has had any voter fraud scandals since making that change. As the New York Times editorial board notes, “states that use vote-by-mail have encountered essentially zero fraud: Oregon, the pioneer in this area, has sent out more than 100 million mail-in ballots since 2000, and has documented only about a dozen cases of proven fraud.” Rounded to the seventh decimal point, that’s 0.0000001 percent of all votes cast. An exhaustive investigative journalism analysis of all known voter fraud cases identified only 491 cases of absentee ballot fraud from 2000 to 2012. As election law professor Richard L. Hasen notes, during that period “literally billions of votes were cast.” While mail ballots are more susceptible to fraud than in-person voting, it is still more likely for an American to be struck by lightning than to commit mail voting fraud.
Trump has repeatedly cited episodes of attempted fraud on behalf of Republican Mark Harris in a North Carolina congressional race in 2018 and more recently in New Jersey as evidence there’s good reason to be worried. But as Berman explained to me, there’s an irony in Trump citing instances where attempted fraud was detected and ultimately unsuccessful.
“When you do absentee ballot fraud, or voter fraud in general, on a scale large enough to influence an election, you get caught because it’s obvious you’re cheating,” Berman said. “There’s lots of procedures in place to protect mail voting. Every mail ballot has its own ID number, for example. So there are lots of things you can do to protect the system, and if you try to game the system one way or another, that’s gonna catch the attention of election officials and authorities, and they’re going to be able to invalidate those ballots.”
Trump, however, is less interested in reports of actual fraud than he is creating the appearance of fraud. And that’s where his dismantling of the Postal Service comes in.
The USPS is designated with safeguarding mail-in ballots — and it’s facing some unique challenges
Louis DeJoy, a Trump megadonor, became postmaster general in June. Since he took over, he’s done some dramatic restructuring of the United States Postal Service (USPS), leading critics to wonder if he’s working to hamper the institution, which, of course, is tasked with collecting ballots from voters and getting them to polling locations in a timely manner.
After operational changes implemented under DeJoy’s leadership, mail carriers are no longer receiving overtime pay, resulting in service slowdowns. And while Trump has been bashing the USPS for years, the move to kneecap the Post Office just ahead of an election in which unprecedented numbers of voters will try to vote by mail because of a pandemic reeks of an effort to sow chaos — and perhaps provide Trump with a pretext to challenge the results of the election that, according to current polls, he’s more likely to lose than win.
During a recent Fox & Friends interview, Trump was asked to respond to Hillary Clinton’s accusation that he’s trying to sabotage the Post Office ahead of November’s election. Notably, he didn’t deny it.
“As you know, the Postal Service for 40 years has had big problems,” Trump said. “And they’re not equipped to handle a governor where they say, ‘millions of ballots, by the way, will be posted in a couple weeks. Gear up.’ You can’t do that. It doesn’t work that way.” (The Postal Service has said it has “ample capacity” to handle mail ballots.)
Asked on Fox & Friends about Hillary Clinton accusing him of sabotaging the Postal Service, Trump immediately pivots to bashing Clinton and never denies that that's what he's up to pic.twitter.com/zlEMwXxquw — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 5, 2020
Gronke characterized Trump’s hampering of USPS as an effort “to fundamentally undermine the core of democracy.”
“They’re really gonna try this? I mean, this is pretty blatant,” he told Vox. “In some ways, for me, this is worse than the Trump attacks [on mail voting], which is just sort of — he’s flailing. But this could really be harmful.”
Gronke’s sentiment was echoed by Ari Berman.
“I think all of the changes at the Post Office — delaying mail, cutting overtime — can lead to mail ballots being delayed, and that also is an effort by the Trump administration to fight vote by mail,” Berman told Vox. “So I’m less concerned about the rhetoric, and I’m more concerned about the tangible thing that Trump and his allies are doing to try to make it harder to vote by mail, and to try to make it harder for votes to be counted.”
Even congressional Republicans — especially those representing rural areas in which people rely on the Postal Service for everything for medications to clothing — are uneasy with Trump’s detrimental changes to the Postal Service. Last Thursday, Rep. Greg Gianforte (R-MT) wrote a letter to DeJoy saying that “delaying mail service is unacceptable. Do not continue down this road.”
“This action, if not rescinded, will negatively impact mail delivery for Montanans and unacceptably increase the risk of late prescriptions, commercial products or bill delivery,” added another Montana Republican, Sen. Steve Daines.
Those letters came the same day as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said the changes “threaten the timely delivery of mail — including medicines for seniors, paychecks for workers and absentee ballots for voters — that is essential to millions of Americans.”
The USPS is very popular — it regularly tops the list of Americans’ favorite government agencies. Trump, however, is doing whatever he thinks necessary to maximize his chances of staying in power past next January.
The backdrop to all this is the coronavirus pandemic, which continues to rage out of control in large swaths of the country and makes it risky to vote at polling places that under normal circumstances can be crowded and feature long lines. But instead of embracing methods of voting that will keep people safe, Trump views voter suppression stemming from the pandemic as useful to his cause.
Republicans have suddenly gone to war with mail-in voting
Despite what Trump’s comments might lead you to believe, Republicans have a long history of doing just fine in systems that have lots of mail voting. Deep-red Utah, for instance, is one of five states that already conduct elections almost entirely by mail. Republicans in swing states like Florida and Wisconsin have also had lots of success with absentee voting.
But Trump, for whatever reason, has long been convinced that mail voting is bad for him. In April, for instance, he tweeted (falsely) that mail voting has “tremendous potential for voter fraud” and “for whatever reason, doesn’t work out well for Republicans.” (Studies on vote-by-mail have shown no such partisan advantage.)
Republicans should fight very hard when it comes to state wide mail-in voting. Democrats are clamoring for it. Tremendous potential for voter fraud, and for whatever reason, doesn’t work out well for Republicans. @foxandfriends — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 8, 2020
While Trump is wrong about whether mail-in voting favors Democrats in general, he appears to be correct in believing that mail voting could be bad for him this election cycle. According to Emerson College polling conducted late last month, a whopping 76 percent of voters who plan to vote by mail plan to vote for Joe Biden. By contrast, 65 percent of those planning to vote in person say they’ll vote for Trump.
A normal politician’s response to those numbers might be to work harder to appeal to voters who plan to vote by mail. Trump, however, is no normal politician.
“I think he’s concerned not about mail voting, but that more Democrats are going to vote by mail than Republicans,” Berman said. “I think that’s [the Trump campaign’s] big concern, because they had no problems with people voting by mail in 2012, or 2008, or any of the previous elections in which Republicans voted by mail and encouraged their own people to do so.”
Trump’s message to states trying to make it as safe as possible for people to vote during a pandemic: “See you in court!”
The Trump campaign has also been filing lawsuits against states like Nevada, where officials are expanding mail voting systems ahead of November’s election.
After Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak (D) recently signed legislation to automatically provide all Nevada voters with a ballot in the mail, Trump responded with a tweet absurdly describing the legislation as “an illegal late night coup,” adding, “See you in court!”
In an illegal late night coup, Nevada’s clubhouse Governor made it impossible for Republicans to win the state. Post Office could never handle the Traffic of Mail-In Votes without preparation. Using Covid to steal the state. See you in Court! https://t.co/cNSPINgCY7 — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 3, 2020
Indeed, Trump’s lawyers quickly filed a lawsuit seeking to block the new law. As my colleague Ian Millhiser explained, the suit’s argument is a mess — but that doesn’t mean it won’t gain traction in federal courts dominated by Republicans:
Their legal complaint in Donald J. Trump for President v. Cegavske is not a model of careful legal argumentation. It claims, for example, that AB4 changed Nevada law to allow mailed-in ballots without postmarks to be counted so long as they arrive within three days of Election Day. In fact, Nevada law already allowed such ballots to be counted. An entire section of the complaint focuses on the fact that AB4 was enacted “on a weekend vote” — the state House approved the bill on a Friday, but the Senate passed it on a Sunday — without explaining how the day of the bill’s passage was relevant to its legality.
The Nevada lawsuit illustrates the Trump campaign’s broader strategy. CNN quoted an unnamed senior Trump campaign official who said “the game plan is to fight [new mail-in voting laws] at every turn,” and reported that the Republican National Committee plans to devote as much as $20 million to contest “voting laws and policies that they view as unconstitutional and potentially damaging to the President’s prospects of winning.”
“We’re not going to have election night in the traditional sense”
Amber McReynolds, CEO of the advocacy group Vote at Home, told Vox that one thing states can do to preempt the nightmare scenario of Trump prematurely declaring victory is pass laws allowing for the processing of mail ballots before Election Day.
“There are still some states that have outdated policies and laws around that issue. Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Maryland, New York, all don’t allow processing until Election Day, which is why they’re delayed,” McReynolds said. “So we’ve been working on various states to expand the timeline ahead of Election Day, so that, frankly, election officials aren’t so stressed with resources trying to get that work done.”
But McReynolds added that Trump’s degradation of the USPS will likely present problems no matter what state legislatures do between now and November.
“I’m very concerned, frankly, and it’s not just because of mail ballots,” she said. “The election process itself relies heavily on the USPS. So there’s required ballot issue notices, required poll worker notices, poll place notices, voter registration requirements — there’s all kinds of election notices that are required under federal and state law, and that’s really what’s going to be impacted if the Post Office gets destroyed.”
Berman said part of the challenge is mental. In the age of the coronavirus, people need to drop the assumption that we can always know winners and losers on election night.
“We’re not going to have election night in the traditional sense, and I think all the major institutions in the country should start preparing for that right now and informing people right now that it might take a little bit longer because of an unprecedented pandemic to count the ballots, and there’s nothing wrong with that, there’s nothing illegal about it, there’s nothing rigged about it,” he said. “That’s just how it’s gonna be. And it’s more important to get it right than get it quick.”
Will you become our 20,000th supporter? When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions, we weren’t sure how it would go. Today, we’re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in. The reason is both lovely and surprising: Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it, too. We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy. That’s never been more important than today, during a public health crisis, racial justice protests, a recession, and a presidential election. But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive, and advertising alone won’t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will help keep Vox free for all. Contribute today from as little as $3.


vox--2020-08-12--How social justice slideshows took over Instagram

In 1971 , to the backdrop of a funky jazz rhythm , musician and poet Gil Scott-Heron declared that “ the revolution will not be televised.
” In 2020 , however , it ’ s possible that the threads of revolution would be found on Instagram — its message distributed through wide chunky typefaces and bold gradient graphics that preface a mini informative slideshow .
Online activism , coupled with in-person organizing , reached a zenith in June , as daily Black Lives Matter protests erupted across the country .
Instagram , once an apolitical din , reflected that change @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even for celebrities and influencers , who tend to exist unfazed by current events — to skip over politics and resume regular programming .
The escapist days of uninterrupted brunch photos and filtered selfies have been replaced by protest photos and black squares .
For a brief moment , it seemed as though people , whether they have 150 followers or 150,000 , were hyper-aware of what they should or should not post .
The unexpected solution to this posting ambivalence came in the form of bite-sized squares of information .
The 10-image @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , has been repurposed by activists , independent artists , advocacy groups , and well-meaning individuals as a means to educate and inform the masses , one slide at a time .
Consider it something like PowerPoint activism .
Over the past few months , these slides have migrated their way into my Explore page or been reposted on Stories of my friends and followers ; in fact , these posts became so popular that I encountered similar designs and sentiments across multiple Stories .
The most striking graphics stood out in my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Once upon a time , the carousel was predominantly used for things like relationship reveals or photo outtakes ( you know , photos that look good but not that good to be the featured image ) .
But in a time of social unrest , these text-based slideshow graphics have found new resonance and an eager audience on the platform , which has been notorious for prioritizing still images over text .
If you search hard enough , there ’ s bound to be a post , explainer , or guide that advocates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of and likely with tens of thousands of “ likes ” and engagements .
Defunding the police .
How to protest virtually .
Mail-in voting .
Lists upon lists of Black-owned businesses , community fridges , and ways you can help besides posting on Instagram .
Turkey ’ s concerning femicide rate .
The crisis that ’ s afflicting Lebanon .
The slideshows are bold and eye-catching , and they feature colorful gradients , large serif fonts , pastel backgrounds , and playful illustrations — design choices intended to pause a user ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the text .
How do activism slideshows go viral on Instagram ?
By co-opting popular design aesthetics from brands .
Getting users to stop and click through is a challenge , not just on Instagram but for any carousel plugin on the Internet , said New York-based graphic designer Eric Hu .
“ Anyone who works in web or digital product design will tell you that the carousel is one of the least successful formats to share information , since users rarely go onto the next slide , ” he told me .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ global design director for Nike Sportswear , had spent two weeks in June collaborating with two other artists to piece together copy , art , and design for a carousel on police abolition ( he purposefully included a clear indication to swipe left on the first graphic ) .
The artists sought to subvert Instagram ’ s algorithmic tendency to prioritize photographs by merging images of flowers and nature with informative text .
“ Instagram is a very predictable platform , ” Hu explained .
“ Everyone gets the same 10 squares , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the biggest difference .
Instagram privileges certain content , like attractive people , vacation photos , and graphics with inspirational messages .
But now , you ’ re seeing a lot of infographics trying to Trojan horse these tropes to trick the algorithm.
” The way Hu describes it , in spite of the massive interest toward social justice slideshows , Instagram ’ s algorithm “ actively fights against it.
” Still , while he ’ s only created four advocacy-adjacent graphics since May , those posts have received thousands more likes than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ uploads of his professional design work and personal life .
The political urgency of this current moment may have contributed to soaring levels of engagement toward posts like Hu ’ s , which has led to certain accounts ( usually those of a progressive or educational slant ) seeing unexpected and exponential growth .
Jess , the New York-based creator behind the So You Want to Talk About account , which parses progressive politics , had accumulated a sizable following of about 10,000 in early June .
By August , she ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of thousands of daily “ likes ” from organic engagement .
Jess , who works as a marketing consultant for her day job , said the branding inspiration for her account — which features bright colors and bubbly fonts — came from the deluge of inspirational graphics popular among millennial women .
When Jess launched @ soyouwanttotalkabout in February , she gravitated toward bolder colors like mustard yellow , olive , and coral for her posts ’ backgrounds , but eventually settled on a more subdued palette of creamy pinks , yellows , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ content packaging are similar to brands that speak to corporate-minded , girl-boss feminists .
“ I ’ m trying to appeal to the apolitical people , the ones who ’ d rather stay out of it and enjoy , like , mimosa pictures , ” Jess added .
“ I ’ m also trying to reach women my age , millennials who aren ’ t participating in the conversation because they don ’ t know where to start.
” In addition to growing interest toward social justice content , there ’ s a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that earn them virality — an element I struggled to put my finger on .
The fonts and colors of these guides aren ’ t necessarily similar , but there ’ s an inexplicable familiarity to these posts , making them approachable and extremely shareable when they first floated across my Instagram feeds in late May .
Hu noticed that successful graphics tend to be heavily over-designed , featuring whimsical , colorful , and even “ grotesque ” typefaces and illustrations .
“ From a design perspective , they ’ re pretty horrible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Instagrammable graphic that the platform favors , ” he said .
And what Instagram favors , coincidentally , has been used for years among many millennial-facing , direct-to-consumer brands .
From a design perspective , the brands got there first : Think of advertisements and Instagram posts for products from Casper ( mattresses ) , Buffy ( bedding ) , Tend ( dentistry ) , Glossier ( beauty ) , and Kin Euphorics ( booze ) .
“ A lot of this stuff , you can swap the text out for anything , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ message , ” Hu added .
“ There isn ’ t much of a relationship between content and aesthetics ; if anything , the content is just interchangeable like an ad , for better or for worse.
” He later direct-messaged me a slew of corporate made-for-Instagram advertisements , and sure enough , the parallels are shocking and potentially problematic when considering how integral design is in “ selling ” consumers a product , a vision , or even an ideology .
“ There isn ’ t much of a relationship between content @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brands — that are latching onto the movement to create a social justice message that emphasizes consumer care — are creating and re-posting these guides themselves .
For example , CHNGE is a streetwear brand by entrepreneur Jacob Castaldi that promotes itself as ethical and sustainable .
Its Instagram page emulates that of a progressive advocacy organization , with posts on allyship , police defunding , climate change , and international issues .
And while the brand only appears to be selling social justice-adjacent , Black Lives Matter apparel for donations to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sign of the steady corporatization of progressive politics — adopted by everyone from independent labels like CHNGE to Nike to the NBA .
This branding reveals itself to be nefarious , then , when it links the anti-capitalist ideology held by activists that have led the Black Lives Matter movement to global prominence to the corporations themselves .
Activist-minded creators have raised concerns about the packaging of modern political messaging .
Historically , artists haven ’ t shied away from the political ; if anything , some have sought to subvert or degrade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attempt to disrupt and craft a new visual language for their own movements .
On a platform like Instagram , however , playing against the rules might not necessarily be rewarding , even if it does make a stronger statement of one ’ s politics .
By borrowing the stylistic elements popular within the capitalist sphere , creators are co-opting them for a greater , arguably more moral cause .
Coincidental or not , creators are applying this millennialesque visual language to their work , which makes it easy for savvy brands ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ style ) to jump on and pervert the movement by using it to further their own corporate mission .
Then there ’ s the question of whether it ’ s even appropriate to aestheticize these human rights-related issues .
As corporations and individuals become attuned to the widespread adoption of memes and certain creative aesthetics in online spaces , they could further be used to “ commodify tragedy and obfuscate revolutionary messages , ” wrote the Instagram creator @ disintegration.loops , later referencing how Breonna Taylor ’ s death has devolved into a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t appear to be made with malicious intent , nor are they actively harming anyone , but some are worried about the long-term neutralizing effect of making advocacy more digestible and consumable for a large audience .
Slideshows usually advocate for progressive causes , but the potential for misinformation still exists In a recent Instagram post , Eve Ewing , a writer and sociologist who ’ s done research on racism and social inequality , used a template from the design app Canva to encourage users to be conscious of information @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this can be a helpful teaching tool , but some of the ‘ racial justice explainer ’ posts that go viral grossly oversimplify complex ideas in harmful or misleading ways or flat-out misstate facts , ” reads the post .
“ [ They ] are not attributed to any transparent person , people , or organization who can be held accountable for errors and draw on the work of scholars and activists who go uncredited.
” Ewing ’ s use of the Canva app to deliver her message is smartly paradoxical and highlights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ knowledge — can easily craft an infographic or explainer through these accessible design platforms .
Information , then , can easily be shared countless times — regardless of whether it ’ s been fact-checked , properly sourced , or proofread — with little or no accountability .
Take Canva ’ s peach-colored template , for example , which features the oversized serif font Ovo .
The template , which has existed on Canva since March 2019 , has been exported for personal use nearly 200,000 times , according to public relations manager Mitch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the template has become notably popular among Instagram users seeking to craft social justice slideshows , featuring topics like “ non-optical allyship , ” Turkey ’ s femicide rates , African American Vernacular English ( AAVE ) , and how anti-Semitism should be factored in when discussing anti-racist ideology .
The success of these posts reveal how a slideshow — if it abides by certain design conventions familiar to Instagram and its users — might have a greater chance of achieving virality .
To designers like Hu and people familiar with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the possibility that these artsy , aesthetic slideshows could devolve into something malicious shouldn ’ t be discounted .
In his newsletter Medialyte , media reporter Mark Stenberg described this phenomenon as the “ Facebook-ification of Instagram , ” drawing parallels between the frenzy of 2016 Facebook and 2020 Instagram : “ Both exist in a time of political upheaval , which has spurred users into using them as a platform for spreading political messages .
Both allow users to post and share just about anything , ” Stenberg wrote .
“ Both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ both are owned by Facebook.
” In March , Instagram declared that it would adjust its moderation standards in line with Facebook ’ s to combat the spread of fake news related to the coronavirus pandemic .
This announcement , however , came months after reported claims about how the platform has failed to curb the spread of anti-vax content and other conspiracy theories .
Plus , due to its visual and highly shareable nature , tracking down misinformation on Instagram can be a more difficult task than on Facebook ; it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discern false or misleading content in an image rather than text .
The problem is , the format of the mini slideshow has become so ubiquitous that independent creators are using them as a creative outlet , a political megaphone , or a means to build their brand .
“ I would spend , on average , anywhere from two to six hours to do basic research and design the graphic , ” Jess of @ soyouwanttotalkabout told me when I asked her about maintaining a reputable feed .
“ I think what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because I was including sources at the bottom of every slide .
I ’ m glad to see more people doing that now , but I mainly try to source from .edu or .org websites , or even the actual US government.
” Almost all of the posts I ’ ve encountered appear to exist with the intention of helping and informing , not deceiving the users who come across their content .
Most didn ’ t anticipate the skyrocketing levels of engagement : A popular mini-guide on using trans-inclusive language with over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a user with only 1,200 followers .
Many creators acknowledge that posting on social media itself is an inherently performative act ; yet , the scale and scope of Instagram ’ s reach make it irresistible , especially during a time when coalition-building and encouraging solidarity is crucial .
The intent , identity of the creator , and accuracy of these guides matter a great deal , but more often than not , that nuance is lost on the average Instagram user — flattened into a quick share or repost with a hasty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Will you become our 20,000th supporter ?
When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions , we weren ’ t sure how it would go .
Today , we ’ re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in .
The reason is both lovely and surprising : Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it , too .
We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s never been more important than today , during a public health crisis , racial justice protests , a recession , and a presidential election .
But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive , and advertising alone won ’ t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will help keep Vox free for all .
Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

In 1971, to the backdrop of a funky jazz rhythm, musician and poet Gil Scott-Heron declared that “the revolution will not be televised.” In 2020, however, it’s possible that the threads of revolution would be found on Instagram — its message distributed through wide chunky typefaces and bold gradient graphics that preface a mini informative slideshow.
Online activism, coupled with in-person organizing, reached a zenith in June, as daily Black Lives Matter protests erupted across the country. Instagram, once an apolitical din, reflected that change. It no longer felt appropriate — even for celebrities and influencers, who tend to exist unfazed by current events — to skip over politics and resume regular programming. The escapist days of uninterrupted brunch photos and filtered selfies have been replaced by protest photos and black squares. For a brief moment, it seemed as though people, whether they have 150 followers or 150,000, were hyper-aware of what they should or should not post.
The unexpected solution to this posting ambivalence came in the form of bite-sized squares of information. The 10-image carousel, which Instagram launched in 2017, has been repurposed by activists, independent artists, advocacy groups, and well-meaning individuals as a means to educate and inform the masses, one slide at a time. Consider it something like PowerPoint activism. Over the past few months, these slides have migrated their way into my Explore page or been reposted on Stories of my friends and followers; in fact, these posts became so popular that I encountered similar designs and sentiments across multiple Stories. The most striking graphics stood out in my feeds, almost like an advertisement.
Once upon a time, the carousel was predominantly used for things like relationship reveals or photo outtakes (you know, photos that look good but not that good to be the featured image). But in a time of social unrest, these text-based slideshow graphics have found new resonance and an eager audience on the platform, which has been notorious for prioritizing still images over text.
If you search hard enough, there’s bound to be a post, explainer, or guide that advocates for virtually any cause you can think of and likely with tens of thousands of “likes” and engagements. Defunding the police. How to protest virtually. Mail-in voting. Lists upon lists of Black-owned businesses, community fridges, and ways you can help besides posting on Instagram. Turkey’s concerning femicide rate. The crisis that’s afflicting Lebanon. The slideshows are bold and eye-catching, and they feature colorful gradients, large serif fonts, pastel backgrounds, and playful illustrations — design choices intended to pause a user’s scroll and prompt them to read the text.
How do activism slideshows go viral on Instagram? By co-opting popular design aesthetics from brands.
Getting users to stop and click through is a challenge, not just on Instagram but for any carousel plugin on the Internet, said New York-based graphic designer Eric Hu. “Anyone who works in web or digital product design will tell you that the carousel is one of the least successful formats to share information, since users rarely go onto the next slide,” he told me.
Hu, who previously worked as the global design director for Nike Sportswear, had spent two weeks in June collaborating with two other artists to piece together copy, art, and design for a carousel on police abolition (he purposefully included a clear indication to swipe left on the first graphic). The artists sought to subvert Instagram’s algorithmic tendency to prioritize photographs by merging images of flowers and nature with informative text.
“Instagram is a very predictable platform,” Hu explained. “Everyone gets the same 10 squares, but how you fill it in makes the biggest difference. Instagram privileges certain content, like attractive people, vacation photos, and graphics with inspirational messages. But now, you’re seeing a lot of infographics trying to Trojan horse these tropes to trick the algorithm.”
The way Hu describes it, in spite of the massive interest toward social justice slideshows, Instagram’s algorithm “actively fights against it.” Still, while he’s only created four advocacy-adjacent graphics since May, those posts have received thousands more likes than his previous content, which was mostly uploads of his professional design work and personal life. The political urgency of this current moment may have contributed to soaring levels of engagement toward posts like Hu’s, which has led to certain accounts (usually those of a progressive or educational slant) seeing unexpected and exponential growth.
Jess, the New York-based creator behind the So You Want to Talk About account, which parses progressive politics, had accumulated a sizable following of about 10,000 in early June. By August, she’s reached a million followers, receiving tens of thousands of daily “likes” from organic engagement.
Jess, who works as a marketing consultant for her day job, said the branding inspiration for her account — which features bright colors and bubbly fonts — came from the deluge of inspirational graphics popular among millennial women. When Jess launched @soyouwanttotalkabout in February, she gravitated toward bolder colors like mustard yellow, olive, and coral for her posts’ backgrounds, but eventually settled on a more subdued palette of creamy pinks, yellows, and blues. Her overall strategy and content packaging are similar to brands that speak to corporate-minded, girl-boss feminists.
“I’m trying to appeal to the apolitical people, the ones who’d rather stay out of it and enjoy, like, mimosa pictures,” Jess added. “I’m also trying to reach women my age, millennials who aren’t participating in the conversation because they don’t know where to start.”
In addition to growing interest toward social justice content, there’s a unique stylistic uniformity among these activism slideshows that earn them virality — an element I struggled to put my finger on. The fonts and colors of these guides aren’t necessarily similar, but there’s an inexplicable familiarity to these posts, making them approachable and extremely shareable when they first floated across my Instagram feeds in late May. Hu noticed that successful graphics tend to be heavily over-designed, featuring whimsical, colorful, and even “grotesque” typefaces and illustrations.
“From a design perspective, they’re pretty horrible, but it is that type of Instagrammable graphic that the platform favors,” he said. And what Instagram favors, coincidentally, has been used for years among many millennial-facing, direct-to-consumer brands. Design-wise, the brands got there first: Think of advertisements and Instagram posts for products from Casper (mattresses), Buffy (bedding), Tend (dentistry), Glossier (beauty), and Kin Euphorics (booze).
“A lot of this stuff, you can swap the text out for anything, and it’ll completely change the message,” Hu added. “There isn’t much of a relationship between content and aesthetics; if anything, the content is just interchangeable like an ad, for better or for worse.” He later direct-messaged me a slew of corporate made-for-Instagram advertisements, and sure enough, the parallels are shocking and potentially problematic when considering how integral design is in “selling” consumers a product, a vision, or even an ideology.
“There isn’t much of a relationship between content and aesthetics”
In some cases, brands — that are latching onto the movement to create a social justice message that emphasizes consumer care — are creating and re-posting these guides themselves. For example, CHNGE is a streetwear brand by entrepreneur Jacob Castaldi that promotes itself as ethical and sustainable. Its Instagram page emulates that of a progressive advocacy organization, with posts on allyship, police defunding, climate change, and international issues. And while the brand only appears to be selling social justice-adjacent, Black Lives Matter apparel for donations to the movement, it’s a telling sign of the steady corporatization of progressive politics — adopted by everyone from independent labels like CHNGE to Nike to the NBA. This branding reveals itself to be nefarious, then, when it links the anti-capitalist ideology held by activists that have led the Black Lives Matter movement to global prominence to the corporations themselves.
Activist-minded creators have raised concerns about the packaging of modern political messaging. Historically, artists haven’t shied away from the political; if anything, some have sought to subvert or degrade corporate aesthetics and design choices in an attempt to disrupt and craft a new visual language for their own movements. On a platform like Instagram, however, playing against the rules might not necessarily be rewarding, even if it does make a stronger statement of one’s politics. By borrowing the stylistic elements popular within the capitalist sphere, creators are co-opting them for a greater, arguably more moral cause.
Coincidental or not, creators are applying this millennialesque visual language to their work, which makes it easy for savvy brands (or anyone who can replicate that design style) to jump on and pervert the movement by using it to further their own corporate mission. Then there’s the question of whether it’s even appropriate to aestheticize these human rights-related issues. As corporations and individuals become attuned to the widespread adoption of memes and certain creative aesthetics in online spaces, they could further be used to “commodify tragedy and obfuscate revolutionary messages,” wrote the Instagram creator @disintegration.loops, later referencing how Breonna Taylor’s death has devolved into a meme.
Most of these activism slideshows don’t appear to be made with malicious intent, nor are they actively harming anyone, but some are worried about the long-term neutralizing effect of making advocacy more digestible and consumable for a large audience.
Slideshows usually advocate for legitimate causes, but the potential for misinformation still exists
In a recent Instagram post, Eve Ewing, a writer and sociologist who’s done research on racism and social inequality, used a template from the design app Canva to encourage users to be conscious of information consumed on Instagram. “Graphics like this can be a helpful teaching tool, but some of the ‘racial justice explainer’ posts that go viral grossly oversimplify complex ideas in harmful or misleading ways or flat-out misstate facts,” reads the post. “[They] are not attributed to any transparent person, people, or organization who can be held accountable for errors and draw on the work of scholars and activists who go uncredited.”
Ewing’s use of the Canva app to deliver her message is smartly paradoxical and highlights how anyone — even with minimal design knowledge — can easily craft an infographic or explainer through these accessible design platforms. Information, then, can easily be shared countless times — regardless of whether it’s been fact-checked, properly sourced, or proofread — with little or no accountability. Take Canva’s peach-colored template, for example, which features the oversized serif font Ovo. The template, which has existed on Canva since March 2019, has been exported for personal use nearly 200,000 times, according to public relations manager Mitch Holmes.
Over the past few months, the template has become notably popular among Instagram users seeking to craft social justice slideshows, featuring topics like “non-optical allyship,” Turkey’s femicide rates, African American Vernacular English (AAVE), and how anti-Semitism should be factored in when discussing anti-racist ideology. The success of these posts reveal how a slideshow — if it abides by certain design conventions familiar to Instagram and its users — might have a greater chance of achieving virality.
To designers like Hu and people familiar with the nature of misinformation on social media, the possibility that these artsy, aesthetic slideshows could devolve into something malicious shouldn’t be discounted. In his newsletter Medialyte, media reporter Mark Stenberg described this phenomenon as the “Facebook-ification of Instagram,” drawing parallels between the frenzy of 2016 Facebook and 2020 Instagram: “Both exist in a time of political upheaval, which has spurred users into using them as a platform for spreading political messages. Both allow users to post and share just about anything,” Stenberg wrote. “Both live and breathe user engagement. And both are owned by Facebook.”
i know people praise instagram for those cute info cards where people can get their social justice fix in bitesized chunks, and yes they are useful, but don't let that be the only info you consume, they should be launchpads for your own reading/fact-checking — Bolu Babalola (@BeeBabs) August 4, 2020
In March, Instagram declared that it would adjust its moderation standards in line with Facebook’s to combat the spread of fake news related to the coronavirus pandemic. This announcement, however, came months after reported claims about how the platform has failed to curb the spread of anti-vax content and other conspiracy theories. Plus, due to its visual and highly shareable nature, tracking down misinformation on Instagram can be a more difficult task than on Facebook; it’s harder to train an algorithm to discern false or misleading content in an image rather than text.
The problem is, the format of the mini slideshow has become so ubiquitous that independent creators are using them as a creative outlet, a political megaphone, or a means to build their brand. “I would spend, on average, anywhere from two to six hours to do basic research and design the graphic,” Jess of @soyouwanttotalkabout told me when I asked her about maintaining a reputable feed. “I think what I did stood out in the beginning because I was including sources at the bottom of every slide. I’m glad to see more people doing that now, but I mainly try to source from .edu or .org websites, or even the actual US government.”
Almost all of the posts I’ve encountered appear to exist with the intention of helping and informing, not deceiving the users who come across their content. Most didn’t anticipate the skyrocketing levels of engagement: A popular mini-guide on using trans-inclusive language with over 43,000 “likes” was created by a user with only 1,200 followers. Many creators acknowledge that posting on social media itself is an inherently performative act; yet, the scale and scope of Instagram’s reach make it irresistible, especially during a time when coalition-building and encouraging solidarity is crucial. The intent, identity of the creator, and accuracy of these guides matter a great deal, but more often than not, that nuance is lost on the average Instagram user — flattened into a quick share or repost with a hasty tag as they scroll on and on.
Will you become our 20,000th supporter? When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions, we weren’t sure how it would go. Today, we’re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in. The reason is both lovely and surprising: Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it, too. We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy. That’s never been more important than today, during a public health crisis, racial justice protests, a recession, and a presidential election. But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive, and advertising alone won’t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will help keep Vox free for all. Contribute today from as little as $3.


vox--2020-08-12--Netflix soured the live-action remake of Avatar: The Last Airbender, its showrunners say

In a rare public fallout for Netflix , the creators of the platform ’ s highly anticipated , live-action adaptation of Avatar : The Last Airbender , the acclaimed Nickelodeon cartoon , have walked away from the project .
Avatar : The Last Airbender ’ s full run became available on Netflix this past June , attracting a huge audience and reigniting the 2000s cartoon ’ s popularity .
But in separate posts published to their respective blogs and Instagrams , Avatar franchise creators Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko said they were no longer involved with the previously announced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ differences .
“ When Netflix brought me on board to run this series alongside Mike two years ago , ” Konietzko wrote in his Instagram post , “ they made a very public promise to support our vision .
Unfortunately , there was no follow-through on that promise .
... [ T ] he general handling of the project created what I felt was a negative and unsupportive environment.
” “ I realized I couldn ’ t control the creative direction of the series , but I could control how I responded , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ So , I chose to leave the project.
” Netflix responded in an emailed statement , noting that the production would continue with Nickelodeon still attached .
“ We have complete respect and admiration for Michael and Bryan and the story that they created in the Avatar animated series .
Although they have chosen to depart the live action project , we are confident in the creative team and their adaptation.
” Both creators described the move as “ a difficult decision ” but stated they ’ d lost confidence that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ show .
This comes almost two years after Netflix announced the live-action reboot of the series , eliciting a huge response .
Despite its brief run , which ended more than a decade ago , Avatar fans remain loyal — and that Netflix had gotten the series ’ creators involved seemed to give them confidence in the project .
That may no longer be the case .
It ’ s rare for Netflix to have such a public breakup with the creators of one of their high-profile productions , let alone creators whose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well-established franchise the project is part of .
More surprising is that Netflix has been enjoying tremendous success with the Avatar community this year .
The recent release of Airbender on the platform — making it more accessible to viewers than it has been in years — saw the show trending in the Netflix Top 10 list for weeks .
The Netflix debut has seemingly affirmed the show ’ s popularity while introducing it to wide swaths of new fans .
Airbender ’ s follow-up , Legend of Korra , also arrives on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ timing makes the announcement of DiMartino and Konietzko ’ s departure from the live-action series all the more curious — despite Netflix offering a home for the franchise , Airbender ’ s future with the streaming platform is now under new scrutiny .
It also leaves the fate of the live-action series upended in a way that ’ s distressingly familiar to Avatar fans .
It ’ s certainly not the first time the franchise has found itself in a precarious position when live-action is involved .
Netflix ’ s highly anticipated live-action @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sour taste of a notorious flop Over its beloved three-season run , Nickelodeon ’ s Avatar : The Last Airbender ( 2005–08 ) became a true game-changer .
Set in a fantasy world mainly based on Asian cultures , Airbender was acclaimed for its sensitive multicultural storytelling , which revolved around a team of “ benders ” — people who can manipulate the four elements — using their powers to stop an aggressive , militarized nation from its violent conquest of neighboring countries .
In addition to carefully avoiding harmful Orientalist tropes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its various cultural allegories as distinct .
And with a pre-planned , three-season story arc , it got to deeply invest in both its world-building and characters over time , allowing it to evolve organically to a deeply satisfying conclusion .
People who love Airbender really , really love Airbender .
But over the years , the Peabody award-winning show has had its setbacks .
The most infamous of these is Paramount ’ s disastrous live-action film adaptation .
Directed by M. Night Shyamalan , the film had one of the most toxic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent memory .
Fans staged protests lasting well over a year due to the film ’ s muddying of the careful cultural origins of the show ’ s original world-building and its casting of white actors in ethnic roles — a practice that became known as racebending .
When it was released in June of 2010 , Shyamalan ’ s finished product turned out to be a giant artistic embarrassment , a critically panned and high-profile flop that significantly tarnished the director ’ s career .
It also left a stain on Airbender @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and longtime fans alike .
The fate of the film might have decisively ended any attempts to turn the animated Airbender into a live-action anything .
But when Netflix announced the live-action series adaptation in 2018 , many fans were curious and excited to see what a faithful adaptation of the show could accomplish — especially with the creators ’ involvement , unlike the hands-off approach DiMartino and Konietzko took with Shyamalan ’ s film .
The news has dismayed fans , many of whom are now questioning whether they even want another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ show without the creators at the helm .
After all , the movie already showed us that Konietzko and DiMartino ’ s original vision — an anime-influenced story with sophisticated themes and slow , satisfying character arcs — could be jettisoned completely if the project fell into the wrong hands .
Capturing the spirit of Airbender appears to require a sensitive touch ; from the sounds of the creators ’ posts , it doesn ’ t sound like Netflix quite has that .
Fans have been eager for the show to overcome the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 has indeed felt like a major revival for the franchise .
The Legend of Korra is a much more divisive follow-up , but it , too , is poised for a cultural resurgence once it debuts on Netflix on August 14 .
With Airbender back in the spotlight , the timing was right for a reappraisal of Korra — but now Korra ’ s Netflix debut may be overshadowed by its creators ’ own exit from the live-action series .
Still , DiMartino and Konietzko stressed that this isn ’ t the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in it .
And the Netflix live-action adaptation still seems to be happening .
And as strange as it is for Netflix to be parting ways with such high-profile creators , it ’ s not like Netflix doesn ’ t have a proven track record when it comes to reimagining popular franchises from other media — just look at its wildly popular live-action adaptation of The Witcher , or the recent reboot of The Babysitter ’ s Club .
Plus , whenever a deeply beloved series is adapted , remade , or rebooted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off at least some hardcore fans , regardless of quality .
“ And who knows ?
Netflix ’ s live-action adaptation of Avatar has the potential to be good .
It might turn out to be a show many of you end up enjoying , ” DiMartino wrote .
“ But what I can be certain about is that whatever version ends up on-screen , it will not be what Bryan and I had envisioned or intended to make.
” Will you become our 20,000th supporter ?
When the economy took a downturn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ readers for financial contributions , we weren ’ t sure how it would go .
Today , we ’ re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in .
The reason is both lovely and surprising : Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it , too .
We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy .
That ’ s never been more important than today , during a public health crisis , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a presidential election .
But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive , and advertising alone won ’ t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will help keep Vox free for all .
Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

In a rare public fallout for Netflix, the creators of the platform’s highly anticipated, live-action adaptation of Avatar: The Last Airbender, the acclaimed Nickelodeon cartoon, have walked away from the project.
Avatar: The Last Airbender’s full run became available on Netflix this past June, attracting a huge audience and reigniting the 2000s cartoon’s popularity. But in separate posts published to their respective blogs and Instagrams, Avatar franchise creators Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko said they were no longer involved with the previously announced Netflix remake, due to prolonged creative differences.
“When Netflix brought me on board to run this series alongside Mike two years ago,” Konietzko wrote in his Instagram post, “they made a very public promise to support our vision. Unfortunately, there was no follow-through on that promise. ... [T]he general handling of the project created what I felt was a negative and unsupportive environment.”
“I realized I couldn’t control the creative direction of the series, but I could control how I responded,” DiMartino added on his own website. “So, I chose to leave the project.”
Netflix responded in an emailed statement, noting that the production would continue with Nickelodeon still attached. “We have complete respect and admiration for Michael and Bryan and the story that they created in the Avatar animated series. Although they have chosen to depart the live action project, we are confident in the creative team and their adaptation.”
Both creators described the move as “a difficult decision” but stated they’d lost confidence that Netflix would honor their vision for the show. This comes almost two years after Netflix announced the live-action reboot of the series, eliciting a huge response. Despite its brief run, which ended more than a decade ago, Avatar fans remain loyal — and that Netflix had gotten the series’ creators involved seemed to give them confidence in the project.
That may no longer be the case. It’s rare for Netflix to have such a public breakup with the creators of one of their high-profile productions, let alone creators whose names are synonymous with the beloved, well-established franchise the project is part of. More surprising is that Netflix has been enjoying tremendous success with the Avatar community this year. The recent release of Airbender on the platform — making it more accessible to viewers than it has been in years — saw the show trending in the Netflix Top 10 list for weeks. The Netflix debut has seemingly affirmed the show’s popularity while introducing it to wide swaths of new fans.
Airbender’s follow-up, Legend of Korra, also arrives on the platform later this week. That timing makes the announcement of DiMartino and Konietzko’s departure from the live-action series all the more curious — despite Netflix offering a home for the franchise, Airbender’s future with the streaming platform is now under new scrutiny.
It also leaves the fate of the live-action series upended in a way that’s distressingly familiar to Avatar fans. It’s certainly not the first time the franchise has found itself in a precarious position when live-action is involved.
Netflix’s highly anticipated live-action Airbender reboot was supposed to wipe away the sour taste of a notorious flop
Over its beloved three-season run, Nickelodeon’s Avatar: The Last Airbender (2005–08) became a true game-changer. Set in a fantasy world mainly based on Asian cultures, Airbender was acclaimed for its sensitive multicultural storytelling, which revolved around a team of “benders” — people who can manipulate the four elements — using their powers to stop an aggressive, militarized nation from its violent conquest of neighboring countries. In addition to carefully avoiding harmful Orientalist tropes, the show took pains to depict its various cultural allegories as distinct. And with a pre-planned, three-season story arc, it got to deeply invest in both its world-building and characters over time, allowing it to evolve organically to a deeply satisfying conclusion.
People who love Airbender really, really love Airbender. But over the years, the Peabody award-winning show has had its setbacks. The most infamous of these is Paramount’s disastrous live-action film adaptation. Directed by M. Night Shyamalan, the film had one of the most toxic, embattled, and notorious productions in recent memory. Fans staged protests lasting well over a year due to the film’s muddying of the careful cultural origins of the show’s original world-building and its casting of white actors in ethnic roles — a practice that became known as racebending.
When it was released in June of 2010, Shyamalan’s finished product turned out to be a giant artistic embarrassment, a critically panned and high-profile flop that significantly tarnished the director’s career. It also left a stain on Airbender’s legacy, turning off newcomers and longtime fans alike.
The fate of the film might have decisively ended any attempts to turn the animated Airbender into a live-action anything. But when Netflix announced the live-action series adaptation in 2018, many fans were curious and excited to see what a faithful adaptation of the show could accomplish — especially with the creators’ involvement, unlike the hands-off approach DiMartino and Konietzko took with Shyamalan’s film.
A reimagined, live-action “Avatar: The Last Airbender” series is coming to Netflix!
(ᴄᴏɴᴄᴇᴘᴛ ᴀʀᴛ ʙʏ Jᴏʜɴ Sᴛᴀᴜʙ) pic.twitter.com/YsMoE4UguV — Netflix Queue (@netflixqueue) September 18, 2018
The news has dismayed fans, many of whom are now questioning whether they even want another attempt at a live-action interpretation of the show without the creators at the helm. After all, the movie already showed us that Konietzko and DiMartino’s original vision — an anime-influenced story with sophisticated themes and slow, satisfying character arcs — could be jettisoned completely if the project fell into the wrong hands. Capturing the spirit of Airbender appears to require a sensitive touch; from the sounds of the creators’ posts, it doesn’t sound like Netflix quite has that.
Well, this is terrible news for all my fellow Avatar: The Last Airbender fans… https://t.co/Jsm8HxPn1G — Eric Goldman (@TheEricGoldman) August 12, 2020
I try not to have extreme fan-girl takes on things but I can tell you I am now ZERO percent interested in whatever live-action AVATAR nonsense it is Netflix is trying to make. https://t.co/uLFxAUC302 — Joanna Robinson (@jowrotethis) August 12, 2020
Fans have been eager for the show to overcome the ignominy of the terrible movie, and 2020 has indeed felt like a major revival for the franchise. The Legend of Korra is a much more divisive follow-up, but it, too, is poised for a cultural resurgence once it debuts on Netflix on August 14. With Airbender back in the spotlight, the timing was right for a reappraisal of Korra — but now Korra’s Netflix debut may be overshadowed by its creators’ own exit from the live-action series.
Still, DiMartino and Konietzko stressed that this isn’t the end of the franchise or their involvement in it. And the Netflix live-action adaptation still seems to be happening. And as strange as it is for Netflix to be parting ways with such high-profile creators, it’s not like Netflix doesn’t have a proven track record when it comes to reimagining popular franchises from other media — just look at its wildly popular live-action adaptation of The Witcher, or the recent reboot of The Babysitter’s Club. Plus, whenever a deeply beloved series is adapted, remade, or rebooted, it’s bound to put off at least some hardcore fans, regardless of quality.
“And who knows? Netflix’s live-action adaptation of Avatar has the potential to be good. It might turn out to be a show many of you end up enjoying,” DiMartino wrote. “But what I can be certain about is that whatever version ends up on-screen, it will not be what Bryan and I had envisioned or intended to make.”
Will you become our 20,000th supporter? When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions, we weren’t sure how it would go. Today, we’re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in. The reason is both lovely and surprising: Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it, too. We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy. That’s never been more important than today, during a public health crisis, racial justice protests, a recession, and a presidential election. But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive, and advertising alone won’t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will help keep Vox free for all. Contribute today from as little as $3.