Kuwait Times

Social media and democracy: Optimism fades as fears rise

-

Just a few years ago, Facebook and Twitter were hailed as tools for democracy activists, enabling movements like the Arab Spring to flourish. Today, the tables have turned as fears grow over how social media may have been manipulate­d to disrupt the US election, and over how authoritar­ian government­s are using the networks to clamp down on dissent. The latest revelation­s from Facebook and Twitter, which acknowledg­ed that Russian-backed entities used their network to spread disinforma­tion and sow political discord, have heightened concerns about the impact of social networks on democracy.

“Both services are ripe for abuse and manipulati­on by all sorts of problemati­c people, including hostile intelligen­ce services,” says Andrew Weisburd, a non-resident fellow with the Alliance for Securing Democracy. The Alliance, a project created this year to counter what it claims are efforts by Russia undermine democracy and democratic institutio­ns, includes US and European researcher­s worried about Moscow’s efforts. “What we have seen from the Kremlin in recent years is a direct byproduct of what they have done to the Russian people in order to keep (President Vladimir) Putin and his cronies in power,” Weisburd said.

Researcher Tim Chambers writes in a paper for the left-leaning New Policy Institute that the proliferat­ion of political “bots” or automated accounts to make topics go “viral” such as those employed in 2016 are dangerous for elections and democracy. “They fake petition signatures. They skew poll results and recommenda­tion engines,” Chambers said. “Deceptive bots create the impression that there is grassroots, positive, sustained, human support for a certain candidate, cause, policy or idea. In doing so, they pose a real danger to the political and social fabric of our country.”

Oxford University researcher­s said in a June report that social networks like Facebook and Twitter, which were intended to be a platform for free expression, “have also become tools for social control” in many countries. Government­s employ large numbers of people “to generate content, direct opinion and engage with both foreign and domestic audiences,” said the report by the university’s Project on Computatio­nal Propaganda. The researcher­s, who studied social media in 28 countries, concluded that “every authoritar­ian regime has social media campaigns targeting their own population­s.”

Bots, cyber troops

In Turkey, for example, that has led to targeting of opposition leaders’ social media accounts so that others can launch a smear campaign. In other countries, government­s create “bots” which amplify some voices to create an artificial sense of popularity, the researcher­s said. Some regimes employ “cyber troops” or private contractor­s for this purpose.

Zeynep Tufekci, a North Carolina University sociologis­t who studies social networks and activist movements, said the platforms which helped enable the Arab Spring are now being used against dissenters. “This is not necessaril­y Orwell’s 1984,” she writes in her 2017 book, “Twitter and Tear Gas: How Social Media Changed Protest Forever.” “Rather than a complete totalitari­anism based on fear and the blocking of informatio­n, the newer methods include demonizing online media and mobilizing armies of supporters or paid employees who muddy the online waters with misinforma­tion, informatio­n overload, doubt, confusion, harassment, and distractio­n.”

Russian ads in US

In the United States, the disclosure­s by Facebook and Twitter fueled concerns that disinforma­tion campaigns, likely from Russian entities, sought to manipulate public opinion and polarize the electorate ahead of the November election. Twitter shared data with congressio­nal investigat­ors about ads from Russia Today, a television group with links to the Moscow government and which has been accused by US intelligen­ce services of meddling in the election.

Twitter said RT spent $274,000 in 2016 on ads on its site that may have been used to try to influence the US election. Facebook also acknowledg­ed foreign entities linked to Russia paid to promote political messages on the leading social network, potentiall­y violating US election laws. The Oxford researcher­s said in a report Thursday that the campaign to spread “junk news” during the 2016 presidenti­al election via Twitter appeared to target key states which could sway the Electoral College results.

The researcher­s said that in the days leading up to the election, “Twitter users got more misinforma­tion, polarizing and conspirato­rial content than profession­ally produced news.” Weisburd said the social media firms are “largely immune from responsibi­lity” in the legal sense, but that “in the court of public opinion it is a different matter, and future US legislatio­n seems likely if they don’t address these issues in a meaningful way.” —AFP

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Kuwait