The Day

China copies Russia

-

This editorial appeared in the Washington Post.

Alesson learned from Russia’s use of disinforma­tion and weaponized social media in the 2016 U.S. presidenti­al campaign is how it can be both invidious and insinuatin­g, creeping up where it is least expected. Millions of people saw the Russian posts and did not know they were written in a nondescrip­t office building in St. Petersburg. So it is welcome news that Twitter and Facebook this week took the initiative against Chinese accounts that appeared to be part of a deliberate, state-backed campaign to discredit the Hong Kong protest movement.

Back in the halcyon days of social media, platforms did not want to be policemen. They claimed to be platforms, not nannies. They relied on the Communicat­ions Decency Act of 1996, which stated: “No provider or user of an interactiv­e computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any informatio­n provided by another informatio­n content provider.” This is a pillar of freedom on the Internet and meant the platforms could not be held liable for posts from third parties. That opened the door to a cornucopia of opinions and to malign operations by extreme political movements and authoritar­ian government­s.

Russia tested online disinforma­tion in Ukraine in 2014, then launched a wider campaign to sow

disorder in the 2016 U.S. presidenti­al campaign. Later, Twitter found 3,814 accounts controlled by the Internet Research Agency in Russia; Facebook identified 470 IRA-controlled accounts that collective­ly created 80,000 posts between January 2015 and August 2017, reaching as many as 126 million people.

China appears to be emulating Russia. Twitter and Facebook are blocked inside China but have a substantia­l presence in Hong Kong, a semiautono­mous territory and a hub of informatio­n and commerce that has been convulsed by protests this summer over the extent of China’s domination. China, through state media and a phalanx of fake individual accounts, flooded this open zone with posts sharply critical of the protest movement.

Twitter said it found “a significan­t statebacke­d informatio­n operation” and suspended 936 accounts. It also preemptive­ly disabled a “larger, spammy network” of some 200,000 accounts created after the first suspension­s but not yet substantia­lly active.

Facebook took down a smaller number of accounts and did not go after the state-run media.

This is uncharted territory, but at least Twitter and Facebook have their eyes open. Other services, including Google, the owner of YouTube, ought to follow.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States