Fact check: Zuckerberg spent 400 million to get Biden elected in 2020...

1. Summary of the results

The original statement is misleading in its characterization of Zuckerberg's spending. While the amount is roughly correct ($419 million, not $400 million), it was not spent to "get Biden elected" ^[1]. Instead, these funds were distributed as grants to election offices through nonprofits like the Center for Tech and Civic Life to help manage voting during the COVID-19 pandemic ^[2]. The money went to nearly 2,500 counties across 49 states ^[1], and importantly, these donations did not violate any campaign finance laws ^[2].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Several crucial pieces of context are missing from the original statement:

• The grants were distributed to every jurisdiction that applied, including many Republican areas, with no partisan criteria in the application process ^[3]
• The funding was critical for preventing an "election meltdown" during the pandemic, helping counties process mail ballots and set up additional voting infrastructure ^[4]
• Multiple lawsuits challenging these grants were unsuccessful, with courts finding no legal prohibition against such funding ^[5]
• More jurisdictions that received funding historically voted Republican ^[1]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The statement reflects a broader debate with multiple perspectives:

• Critics' perspective: Some Republican officials argue this was a "carefully orchestrated attempt" to influence election outcomes ^[1]. Critics suggest the donations created a structural bias favoring Democrats by focusing on counties where Democrats thought they could be competitive ^[6].
• Defenders' perspective: Election officials from both Republican and Democratic areas confirmed the funds were used for necessary election administration expenses ^[3]. The grants helped provide essential equipment, protective gear, and mail voting logistics during unprecedented pandemic circumstances ^[2].
• Who benefits from these narratives:
• Those pushing the "election interference" narrative benefit from undermining trust in the 2020 election results
• Election officials and voters benefited from the actual grants through improved election infrastructure
• Social media platforms and political groups benefit from the ongoing controversy and engagement it generates

It's important to note that while there can be legitimate debate about private funding of election operations, no evidence suggests votes were invented or changed ^[6].