Politics
Poll: Many California voters get their info from social media, even if they don't trust it
In California, where a ballot often contains pages of candidates and ballot measures, most voters rely on the state-provided guide for election information, a new poll has found. But with so much at stake, Californians also seek out information from a variety of other channels — including social media, despite many saying it is an unreliable source.
UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies found that 58% of voters turn to the official voter guides, 40% to newspapers or magazines, 39% to search engines such as Google and 32% to social media sources for their election research. YouTube is the most frequently cited social media source for election-related news, followed by Facebook, Instagram, X (formerly known as Twitter) and TikTok, according to the report.
Yet despite their affinity for these apps, 60% of voters who get election-related news from all social media sources say they believe misinformation on those very sources is a major problem. An additional 22% say it is a minor problem.
“Over 80% of Californians who get their news from social media worry that what they are seeing is not truthful or accurate. Our information ecosystems are in danger, and everyone knows it,” Jonathan Mehta Stein, executive director of California Common Cause, said in a statement. “These enormously powerful technologies that shape so much of our lives and our democratic conversation ought to be governed by a wider range of stakeholders —including government, civil society and industry — so they operate in our collective interest.”
The poll found that older voters are more likely to rely on official and traditional sources for their information — such as the voter guide, newspapers and television — while young people tend toward social media, search engines like Google and their family and friends.
Instagram is the most popular social media choice for young voters. The poll found that 44% of 18- to 29-year-olds use the app to get election-related news, followed by 41% on YouTube and 37% TikTok. Only 15% of 50- to 64-year-olds and 6% of those 65 and older use Instagram for the same purpose.
The poll zeroed in on TikTok, which the U.S. government has recently scrutinized for its association with the Chinese government. In April, President Biden signed a law that would ban the app in the U.S. unless an American company took ownership. The news quickly raised ire among young Americans who frequently use TikTok. The IGS poll found that 59% of 18- to 29-year-olds report scrolling TikTok. Black Californians use the app more than other ethnic groups — 58% followed by Latinos at 51%.
Jacquelyn Mason, interim executive director at Media Democracy Fund, said the deterioration of local and ethnic outlets, plus the way online platforms “deprioritize news as political,” push people to less reliable sources for information.
“This really altogether leaves mainly POC, immigrant and non-English speakers to search for information about their interests and communities on social media, which leaves them very prone to be exposed to more mis- and disinformation,” she said.
“If we care about ensuring voters from all communities have access to information they need and information they trust during this election, then we have to interrupt disinformation campaigns and inoculate people against them. We know that disinformation campaigns are targeting communities of color so foundations have to invest in those communities to help them push back,” said Josh Stearns, senior director of the Public Square Program at Democracy Fund, in a statement.
“Technology platforms have a huge role to play, but until they get serious about combating disinformation, the best solutions are people powered — organizers, journalists, trusted messengers,” he added.
Californians overwhelmingly support the looming U.S. ban on TikTok — 57%, the poll found. But support drops to 23% among those who use TikTok very often.
“[Non-users] are supportive of pretty much what the government is doing, because they worry about the issues that are there,” DiCamillo said. “That the Chinese government could be using algorithms to shape what people see, or they could be accessing significant amounts of personal information. And there are concerns — legitimate concerns — about them, at least among California voters.”
The poll, which was funded by the Evelyn and Walter Haas Jr. Fund, surveyed 5,095 registered voters throughout California in English, Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese and Korean.
Politics
Trump signs order to protect Venezuela oil revenue held in US accounts
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
President Donald Trump has signed an executive order blocking U.S. courts from seizing Venezuelan oil revenues held in American Treasury accounts.
The order states that court action against the funds would undermine U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
President Donald Trump is pictured signing two executive orders on Sept. 19, 2025, establishing the “Trump Gold Card” and introducing a $100,000 fee for H-1B visas. He signed another executive order recently protecting oil revenue. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
Trump signed the order on Friday, the same day that he met with nearly two dozen top oil and gas executives at the White House.
The president said American energy companies will invest $100 billion to rebuild Venezuela’s “rotting” oil infrastructure and push production to record levels following the capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro.
The U.S. has moved aggressively to take control of Venezuela’s oil future following the collapse of the Maduro regime.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Politics
Column: Some leaders will do anything to cling to positions of power
One of the most important political stories in American history — one that is particularly germane to our current, tumultuous time — unfolded in Los Angeles some 65 years ago.
Sen. John F. Kennedy, a Catholic, had just received his party’s nomination for president and in turn he shunned the desires of his most liberal supporters by choosing a conservative out of Texas as his running mate. He did so in large part to address concerns that his faith would somehow usurp his oath to uphold the Constitution. The last time the Democrats nominated a Catholic — New York Gov. Al Smith in 1928 — he lost in a landslide, so folks were more than a little jittery about Kennedy’s chances.
“I am fully aware of the fact that the Democratic Party, by nominating someone of my faith, has taken on what many regard as a new and hazardous risk,” Kennedy told the crowd at the Memorial Coliseum. “But I look at it this way: The Democratic Party has once again placed its confidence in the American people, and in their ability to render a free, fair judgment.”
The most important part of the story is what happened before Kennedy gave that acceptance speech.
While his faith made party leaders nervous, they were downright afraid of the impact a civil rights protest during the Democratic National Convention could have on November’s election. This was 1960. The year began with Black college students challenging segregation with lunch counter sit-ins across the Deep South, and by spring the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee had formed. The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was not the organizer of the protest at the convention, but he planned to be there, guaranteeing media attention. To try to prevent this whole scene, the most powerful Black man in Congress was sent to stop him.
The Rev. Adam Clayton Powell Jr. was also a warrior for civil rights, but the House representative preferred the legislative approach, where backroom deals were quietly made and his power most concentrated. He and King wanted the same things for Black people. But Powell — who was first elected to Congress in 1944, the same year King enrolled at Morehouse College at the age of 15 — was threatened by the younger man’s growing influence. He was also concerned that his inability to stop the protest at the convention would harm his chance to become chairman of a House committee.
And so Powell — the son of a preacher, and himself a Baptist preacher in Harlem — told King that if he didn’t cancel, Powell would tell journalists a lie that King was having a homosexual affair with his mentor, Bayard Rustin. King stuck to his plan and led a protest — even though such a rumor would not only have harmed King, but also would have undermined the credibility of the entire civil rights movement. Remember, this was 1960. Before the March on Washington, before passage of the Voting Rights Act, before the dismantling of the very Jim Crow laws Powell had vowed to dismantle when first running for office.
That threat, my friends, is the most important part of the story.
It’s not that Powell didn’t want the best for the country. It’s just that he wanted to be seen as the one doing it and was willing to derail the good stemming from the civil rights movement to secure his own place in power. There have always been people willing to make such trade-offs. Sometimes they dress up their intentions with scriptures to make it more palatable; other times they play on our darkest fears. They do not care how many people get hurt in the process, even if it’s the same people they profess to care for.
That was true in Los Angeles in 1960.
That was true in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, 2021.
That is true in the streets of America today.
Whether we are talking about an older pastor who is threatened by the growing influence of a younger voice or a president clinging to office after losing an election: To remain king, some men are willing to burn the entire kingdom down.
YouTube: @LZGrandersonShow
Politics
Federal judge blocks Trump from cutting childcare funds to Democratic states over fraud concerns
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A federal judge Friday temporarily blocked the Trump administration from stopping subsidies on childcare programs in five states, including Minnesota, amid allegations of fraud.
U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, a Biden appointee, didn’t rule on the legality of the funding freeze, but said the states had met the legal threshold to maintain the “status quo” on funding for at least two weeks while arguments continue.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said it would withhold funds for programs in five Democratic states over fraud concerns.
The programs include the Child Care and Development Fund, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, and the Social Services Block Grant, all of which help needy families.
USDA IMMEDIATELY SUSPENDS ALL FEDERAL FUNDING TO MINNESOTA AMID FRAUD INVESTIGATION
On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said it would withhold funds for programs in five Democratic states over fraud concerns. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)
“Families who rely on childcare and family assistance programs deserve confidence that these resources are used lawfully and for their intended purpose,” HHS Deputy Secretary Jim O’Neill said in a statement on Tuesday.
The states, which include California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York, argued in court filings that the federal government didn’t have the legal right to end the funds and that the new policy is creating “operational chaos” in the states.
U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian at his nomination hearing in 2022. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
In total, the states said they receive more than $10 billion in federal funding for the programs.
HHS said it had “reason to believe” that the programs were offering funds to people in the country illegally.
‘TIP OF THE ICEBERG’: SENATE REPUBLICANS PRESS GOV WALZ OVER MINNESOTA FRAUD SCANDAL
The table above shows the five states and their social safety net funding for various programs which are being withheld by the Trump administration over allegations of fraud. (AP Digital Embed)
New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is leading the lawsuit, called the ruling a “critical victory for families whose lives have been upended by this administration’s cruelty.”
New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is leading the lawsuit, called the ruling a “critical victory for families whose lives have been upended by this administration’s cruelty.” (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Fox News Digital has reached out to HHS for comment.
-
Detroit, MI1 week ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Technology4 days agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Dallas, TX6 days agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Dallas, TX2 days agoAnti-ICE protest outside Dallas City Hall follows deadly shooting in Minneapolis
-
Delaware2 days agoMERR responds to dead humpback whale washed up near Bethany Beach
-
Iowa4 days agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Health7 days agoViral New Year reset routine is helping people adopt healthier habits
-
Nebraska4 days agoOregon State LB transfer Dexter Foster commits to Nebraska