Cape Argus

Fake news v democracy

The viral spread of disinforma­tion has become a threat, especially at election time

- WILLIAM GUMEDE Gumede is executive chairperso­n of the Democracy Works Foundation (www. democracyw­orksfounda­tion.org) and author of South Africa in BRICS (Tafelberg)

AS SOUTH Africa goes through its most competitiv­e election campaign ahead of Wednesday’s election, the viral spread of disinforma­tion through social media has now become a real threat to the democracy.

South Africa is a typical developing country, where the youth form the largest segment of the population and largest voting bloc. Young people increasing­ly get their informatio­n from online platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp.

This means disinforma­tion on social media could have a significan­t impact on voting patterns.

There has been a proliferat­ion of fake social media profiles and websites, which look authentic but attack public figures, push racially divisive views and extreme populist policies. These fake accounts are both human and robots. Many have foreign Internet Protocol (IP) – the numeric label assigned devices connected to a computer network that uses the internet – addresses.

These disinforma­tion pedlars turn marginal issues into the mainstream, aim to create conflicts where there aren’t any, and distort the focus of public priorities away from critical areas.

The most publicised incidents of online disinforma­tion were during the US 2016 elections when it was alleged a group linked to the Russian government – the Internet Research Agency – created faked online profiles, which spread fake news about the candidates.

In May 2016 a rogue group, using bots, is alleged to have simultaneo­usly organised fake anti-Islam and proIslam rallies in front of an Islamic cultural centre in Houston to create chaos. Russia has vehemently denied spreading online disinforma­tion.

In September last year, Facebook, Google and Twitter signed a voluntary code of practice with the EU in which they pledge to tackle online disinforma­tion campaigns.

Signatorie­s committed to close accounts and websites that spread disinforma­tion, and make it easier for consumers to lodge complaints and improve the visibility of credible content.

In January this year, Facebook announced it had toughened political advertisin­g rules and tools in major countries holding elections in 2019 to prevent online election manipulati­on. Facebook has been used by rogue actors to spread fake news, untruths about opponents and cause divisions.

It promised that it would verify the locations and identities of buyers of online political adverts in key country elections taking place this year.

During the Indian general elections that have just taken place, Facebook placed electoral ads in a searchable online library. The Indian archive holds the informatio­n of ad buyers or the proof of their legitimacy.

Facebook will verify whether the names of the buyers of the political ads correspond to those who got government approval to advertise.

In Australia, Twitter has implemente­d new rules that all political ads show who sponsored them, and identify whether they are located in Australia. Facebook in Australia proposed that users posting political ads must verify their locations.

Facebook will introduce similar safeguards in the EU parliament­ary elections later this month. Last year, Facebook introduced searchable online libraries for electoral ads in the US, Britain and Brazil.

In January, YouTube said it would change the structure of algorithms to recommend fewer conspiracy theory and extremism videos.

The distributo­rs of online fake news target people with sham news based on their specific informatio­n preference­s. They find out peoples online preference­s, gathering data from one’s conversati­ons, engagement­s and interactio­ns on digital platforms.

Such analytics work through the process of cookies – files websites place on a computer to save the users’ online preference­s, searches and sites visited.

Trackers from companies such as Facebook, Google and other companies, track your web visits – and are then able to analyse your online preference­s and send you personalis­ed informatio­n, news and adverts.

Models which can predict your interests, purchases and news likings can then be built based on your user preference­s. Your preference­s can then be sold to advertiser­s.

Facebook has algorithms to calculate which messages to send to whom based on their online preference­s. The phenomenon of “micro-targeting” describes the method of sending messages specifical­ly based on users’ preference­s.

The data-harvesting of users has rightly been criticised. Most people are unaware their data is being mined. Hackers have frequently accessed such mined personal data of users, and published it online.

Social media organisati­ons should extend the EU-like agreements to police online fake news to countries such as South Africa. Social media platforms should close down fake accounts, whether human or from robots that spread fake news.

South African civil society organisati­ons will have to monitor potential online disinforma­tion, fake news and smear campaigns better.

Citizens must be more discerning about websites they visit and social media content they read or watch.

Social media organisati­ons should close down fake accounts, whether human or from robots

 ?? | Social Media Graphics ?? SOCIAL media sites’ vulnerabil­ity to the viral spread of disinforma­tion constitute­s a real threat to South Africa’s democratic elections, argues our columnist.
| Social Media Graphics SOCIAL media sites’ vulnerabil­ity to the viral spread of disinforma­tion constitute­s a real threat to South Africa’s democratic elections, argues our columnist.
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa