New investors, the statement "46% of today's volume was short sales" wasn’t in the source file. The most recent short interest is < 1% of the OS and the most recent failure-to-deliver (naked short) # is a measly 338 shares. IMHO interpreting short volume as actual short sales is incorrect. This is what FINRA, the exact same source which you used to post the #, said.
"Thank you for contacting FINRA’s Office of the Ombudsman. Regarding your question, it would be incorrect to assume that short sales comprise 32% of the total volume on that trading day for IPIX. FINRA publishes the daily short sale volume pursuant to an SEC mandate; however, there are various trading anomalies that result in the reported short sale volume often being exaggerated. Thus, the true total short sales volume may be significantly lower than the volume that is reported. Third parties sometimes ignore this and try to claim the ratio is valid to further their own objectives."
MMs mark shares short temporarily to execute trades and they are almost always covered in the same day, therefore the actual short % is much lower than the # suggests. If the short volume indicates actual naked shorting, would the criminals be stupid enough to leave incriminating evidence in the FINRA file?
You can also check out these two posts for some detailed explanations.
“In a “naked” short sale, the seller does not borrow or arrange to borrow the securities in time to make delivery to the buyer within the standard two-day settlement period. As a result, the seller fails to deliver securities to the buyer when delivery is due (known as a ”failure to deliver” or “fail”).”
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
