This is the final part of the three-part series on ‘rise of misinformation and astroturfing‘ as a part of the Justicemakers’ Writer’s Training Program, run in partnership with Agami and Ashoka’s Law For All Initiative. The first and second parts can be found here and here.
The birth of a new medium is always a tectonic event for society, for better and for worse. With the printing press, we saw the democratisation of access to information, but we also witnessed the press catalysing the rise of witch-hunting.
While there has been an exponential decentralisation in terms of information gate-keeping and the concentration of power with the internet, it has tagged along with its issues.
In less than a decade, the internet has taken us from the Arab Spring and SOPA to the Rohingya genocide, Brexit, and whatever you want to call the Trump years – A trend that clearly demonstrates the evolution of the internet from a global citizens’ space spurring revolutions, challenging traditional authoritarian sources of power to the state actors catching up with digital realm and using it to further clamp down on civil liberty.
The effects of authoritarian and malicious agents catching up and exploiting the potential of the digital world have been quite evident in the Indian context as well.
With the information boom, trust in traditional media and institutions is decreasing; some even like to say that we are heading into a post-truth world. Misinformation/Disinformation campaigns are rampant, and astroturfing political support is the norm; social media platforms once meant to connect the world are now facilitating genocides. The internet is threatening the very existence of democracies worldwide, as we’ve seen time and time again.
Are We Upto The Challenge?
All the attempts of policymakers, that is, if any, are primarily focused on regulating online platforms in a bid to “control” the monster they see the internet as. They call for holding platforms accountable and increasing state oversight over them.
While holding platforms responsible for their actions and forcing them to act is essential, it is the same political forces– that want to “regulate platforms” – behind the exploitation of online tools and platforms for causing harm. In such circumstances, it is difficult to trust the state machinery not to further its own political ambitions and restrict fundamental rights of access and speech. The IT Rules 2020 are a great example of this.
How do we deal with misinformation/disinformation through WhatsApp forwards?
GOI says to put an end to end-to-end encryption, enabling traceability of message origins.
How do we deal with misinformation on public social media platforms?
GOI says threatens the social media platforms with excessive censorship and moderation by putting up an extreme compliance regime.
The IT Rules 2020 are unconstitutional and beyond the scope of the Union’s powers. They are already being challenged across courts in India, with the Bombay and Madras HC issuing a stay on specific provisions of the rules.
Beyond that, the very question of regulating speech is complex.
Rohin Garg, Policy Counsel at the Internet Freedom Foundation points out how the fundamental issue is deciding where to draw the line, “And therein lies the issue: evaluating which thoughts ‘deserve’ censorship is a question of political power and cultural hegemony.
The interplay of these two determines the boundaries of free speech.” In order to ensure there is no abuse of such powers, he suggests the role of policy should stress transparency, that is:
– Whenever the right to free speech is curbed, high standards of free speech are adhered to: notices are sent to those whose rights are curbed, the ground upon which such rights are curbed is laid down in a straight-forward and democratic manner
– A robust grievance redressal mechanism: Those whose right to free speech is curbed are to be provided with an efficient and open mechanism for addressing unfair violations of their rights.
A Different Approach: The Nordics Have Got It Right
You are in Finland ( tada!) You walk into a secondary school (don’t do that, though, don’t just walk into a school); you come across kids learning how pictures can be manipulated in the art class. In maths, they learn how stats can be used to front narratives and deceive. In history, they learn how popular propaganda campaigns were designed. Along with experts and civil society organisations, the Finnish government has developed an incredible media literacy curriculum that prepares its citizens right up from primary school to survive in the digital world. The students are learning how to spot click baits and how to check for biases. They are equipped with skills that allow them to fact-check anything they come across on the internet, helping them develop critical thinking and turning them into a digitally literate citizenry.
Critically, Not Cynically
Kari Kivinen, who spearheads the information literacy programs in one such school, cautions against how we must draw the line between cynicism and criticism, ”They[kids] must be able to approach it critically. Not cynically – we don’t want them to think everyone lies – but critically.”
In the 2010s, after having faced the brunt of increasing disinformation campaigns backed by the Russian government, the tiny country of Finland (where you are standing right now) decided to take matters more seriously. Thus came the decision to focus on media literacy in school education. Today Finland stands at the top of the Media Literacy Index, making it one of the most capable countries to deal with misinformation campaigns.
While comparing a country like India to Finland is unfair given the high trust, and literacy rates clubbed with a monolith culture against a diverse culture with low literacy levels and trust in the institutions, there are still many valuable lessons to be learned. And rightly so, many countries are already lined up at the gates of this tiny nation, trying to learn more about Finland’s experience in dealing with misinformation.
I don’t believe India’s current dispensation of power would like to help its citizens develop critical thinking. Otherwise, how else would they continue being in power?
Taking Matters Into Our Own Hands: The Community Approach
Countless reports have confirmed that during the 2016 US Presidential Elections, there were significant disinformation campaigns disproportionately targeting the Black and LatinX communities.
In the face of the 2020 Elections, a network of decentralised communities came together intending to disrupt and dismantle such manipulation/disinformation efforts that target POC communities, with rapid real-time response. Disinfo Defense League, they call themselves. Partnering with misinformation experts, organisers, advocates, and researchers across the country, the network works in real-time to combat the harms of racialised disinformation with multilingual audio-visual resources, memes, webinars and toolkits.
With over 200 grassroots communities, DDL mobilises minority communities across the United States, equipping them to better deal with disinformation, making it an excellent case of how sustainable community efforts are essential and significant for creating a healthier information/discourse ecosystem in the long run.
No Fuse Conductors
Whether it is the small insignificant act of mindlessly sharing a WhatsApp forward or a strategically organised radical misinformation campaign. Whether it’s the platform algorithms rewarding hate and hate mongers or erosion of trust in traditional media, as challenges to democracy and trust mount, with no “fuse conductor” solutions around to magically take care of these issues. The age of information needs a citizenry capable of navigating these challenges and those that await.