By John Q. Hosedrinker 
A recent update to X, formerly Twitter, now displays the country of origin for user accounts, revealing that many accounts promoting MAGA ideologies and American political content are based outside the United States. Accounts with significant followings, often promoting America First agendas, were found to originate from countries in Africa, Asia, and Europe. This discovery has sparked considerable discussion and concern about the authenticity of online content and potential foreign influence. While some accounts have deleted their profiles following this revelation, the feature is expected to be refined with further updates.
Read the original article here
Full list of MAGA accounts on X exposed as being based outside US is a revelation that’s, frankly, not that shocking if you’ve been paying attention. It seems that X, formerly Twitter, has begun to show the country of origin for user accounts, and what’s popped up is a noticeable number of accounts pushing the MAGA agenda are actually based in countries far from the United States. This isn’t just about bots, although those are certainly a factor. It points to a more organized effort, potentially funded by entities with interests that don’t align with the U.S.’s, to influence American political discourse.
It’s pretty clear that these accounts aren’t all operated by real people. Many are just posting streams of memes and political content without any semblance of real-life persona. They’re designed to be engaging, and they often succeed in getting people riled up and arguing. You see it everywhere – on threads, Facebook, Reddit, you name it. The constant barrage of pro-MAGA takes, often from accounts with massive followings, is a deliberate strategy. And it works, which is why there are so many of them.
The immediate question that comes to mind is: who’s paying for this? And the answer is likely a multitude of actors. Foreign intelligence agencies looking to sow discord, individuals trying to make money by exploiting the platform’s engagement-based payment model, and perhaps even domestic players looking to mask their influence. The common thread is that these accounts aren’t just organic voices; they’re strategically deployed to amplify certain narratives and manipulate public opinion.
The exposure of these accounts’ locations is a start, but it’s just the tip of the iceberg. The “full list” of accounts Newsweek supposedly compiled seems surprisingly short. One might wonder if they even scratched the surface. The real challenge is addressing the underlying issues: the platforms that allow this behavior to flourish, the financial incentives that drive it, and the audience that’s being targeted.
One of the more interesting dynamics at play is the engagement itself. While some argue that the best strategy is to ignore these accounts and let their content die in a vacuum, others take the bait, and engage. While that can be frustrating, the hope is that others reading their arguments will see through it.
It’s also worth recognizing that technology plays a crucial role in obscuring origins. VPNs and other tools make it easy to hide a user’s true location. And, as we’ve seen, even the platforms themselves can be complicit, either by turning a blind eye or actively encouraging this kind of activity for the sake of ad revenue.
The whole situation shines a light on how vulnerable we are to manipulation in the digital age. It’s a reminder that not everything is as it seems online, and that critical thinking and media literacy are more important than ever. We’re in an environment where bots and foreign actors are working together to amplify certain narratives, and the more they engage with each other, the more likely they are to reach the real human users still inside the system.