In an era where digital data manipulation is easy, misinformation is spreading across social media platforms with unrivalled virulence. This deluge of false information has become a pressing issue globally, but perhaps nowhere more so than during the fragile period of elections. The role of social media platforms in preventing the circulation of election misinformation is now more critical than ever, and many are looking expectantly towards these giants to provide a solution.
Election periods are particularly vulnerable to misinformation campaigns. Often, these can range from half-truths that feed into political rhetoric to flat-out lies targeted at polarizing voting communities. In response to this increasing threat and the growing concern among users, responsibility has fanned out from governments and citizens to social media platforms themselves. The question is not whether social media can play a part in preventing election misinformation but how effectively it can play its role.
A noticeable shift has been identified in the perception of social media’s duty in political discourse. Previously, platforms like Facebook and Twitter saw themselves comfortably as neutral hosts of user content. However, as their reach has grown, and their impact on global society has become more pronounced in recent years, these platforms have been forced to acknowledge their role as gatekeepers of the public’s information intake.
The shift from passive host to active gatekeeper hasn’t been free of contention, as it not only challenges the boundaries outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a U.S legal shield act that has provided tech companies with immunity from most liability for material posted by users, but also subjects the platforms to harsh public scrutiny as they grapple with this new role.
Recognizing these challenges, many of these platforms have taken significant proactive steps towards addressing election misinformation. This is because they understand their user bases’ role in the democratic process and want to protect that. From identifying and providing warnings on false and misleading content to banning political ads, and collaborating with independent fact-checkers, social media housings are tweaking their modus operandi.
Take Facebook, for instance. The social media behemoth came under severe scrutiny during the U.S. 2016 election when it was accused of being a popular hub for spreading false information. In the face of intensifying criticism, the platform implemented new policies to curb the widespread dissemination of election misinformation. These included banning ads that debunked voting methods and incorporated artificial intelligence tools to detect and remove false information.
Twitter, too, showed its zero-tolerance policy towards misinformation during the U.S. Presidential elections last year. It flagged and hid posts promoting misinformation and established guidelines that prohibited spreading false claims about election results. Twitter, unlike its rivals, also stopped accepting political ads before the November 2020 election.
Google, another digital leviathan, has similarly stepped up efforts identifying reliable sources in its algorithm to promote quality news and data while using a mix of artificial intelligence and human moderators to intercept and reduce the spread of false narratives due to the scalability of the issue.
While these efforts demonstrate a commitment from big tech to fight the tide of misinformation, they are far from perfect. Experts suggest that more needs to be done, including greater transparency around decision-making processes and protocols implemented to deal with misinformation. The development and continued use of AI tools can create more scalable solutions to the issue, while fostering partnerships with external watchdogs and fact-checkers can help validate these operations.
In conclusion, social media platforms have an enormous role to play in preventing the dissemination of election misinformation. While progress is being made, the journey towards a misinformation-free platform is long, complicated and littered with opposition. However, the path is chosen and there is no turning back. Although social media companies experience a baptism of fire, they continue to innovate, evolve, and make tough decisions to ensure the safeguarding of democratic processes worldwide.
Sources:
1. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230
2. Facebook’s Policies against Election Misinformation: https://about.fb.com/news/2020/09/additional-steps-to-protect-the-us-elections/
3. Twitter’s approach to handling misinformation: https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/an-update-on-our-continued-misinformation-work.html
4. Google’s fight against misinformation: https://blog.google/technology/health/our-work-keep-internet-safe-and-protect-election/
