Hanging by A Thread : How Social Media Systematically Titillates the Public at the Expense of Truth
This essay was written for International Security Studies Final
“We gather stones, never knowing what they’ll mean. Some to throw, some to make diamond rings” cries Taylor Swift in her Folklore album.
By writing these lyrics, Ms. Swift might accidentally illustrate the perfect picture of how falsehoods almost always beat out the truth on social media, piercing further, faster, and deeper than accurate information. We might think it is probably the platform’s fault, as they do not do enough measurement to tackle the deluge of misinformation. Other actors we usually blame are bots, trolls, and cyber troops run by either the government or parties with specific vested interests to manipulate public opinion through symbols. Enter Soroush Vosoughi et. al, a group of data scientists that beg to differ. Their publication in Science claims that the catastrophe is not caused by bots only. It might have something to do with human nature (Vosoughi, Roy & Aral, 2018).
Vosoughi et al. found that the bots are not ones to blame since they amplified true stories as much as they amplified false ones. Also, users who share accurate information have more followers, and send more tweets, than fake-news sharers. These fact-guided users have also been on Twitter for longer, and they are more likely to be verified (Meyer, 2018). Falsehoods spread despite these different variables, not because of them. In hindsight, inaccuracies prosper because humans with aroused emotion are more likely to spread it. Considering its size and scope, it seems impossible to stop the tides and identify various actors who have poured resources to maximize their use simultaneously.
False information being featured online is often novel, laced with negativity. Hence, it creates a sense of urgency to share the bits with others. Humans pay extra attention to new “threats” and will grow increasingly alarmed if it inflicts “harm”. To understand the situation further, we have to go south. The vast majority of false information shared on social media during Brazil’s 2019 presidential election favored right-winged Jair Bolsonaro. Up to 48% of social media items containing externally verified falsehoods mentioned a fictional plot to fraudulently manipulate the electronic ballot with the emphasis on casting suspicion on the democratic process (Avelar, 2019). This so-called news paints the political system and mainstream media as duplicitous, thus the public has to do something about it, preferably by bandwagoning Bolsonaro’s anti-establishment rhetoric. As Ms. Swift pointed out earlier, Brazilians did gather “news”, then started to throw rocks at any dissenting opinion, whilst Bolsonaro’s campaign used the same momentum as their most shining and valuable asset, the diamond rings. By weaponizing online sentiment, actors can manufacture consensus in a matter of seconds.
As for the platforms, they too have done some amount of work. Few days leading up to Brazil’s 2019 presidential election, both Facebook and WhatsApp — Brazil’s social media giants in which two-thirds of the population use it — expanded their security team, cooperated with fact-checking agencies and formed a special division filled by engineers, legal teams, and data experts to carry out the hard task on combating online falsehoods. It also deactivated 100.000 users identified as hoax breeders and disbursed large funds for a marketing campaign entitled “Share Facts, Not Rumors” with elite officials as its ambassadors (Hasan, 2018). The same measurement had been carried out in Indonesia as well, with Google and a coalition of respected press spearheaded the agenda in the 2019’s presidential election (Coca, 2018). Yet, it did not affect much. Falsehoods still proliferate and spread across social media lines.
To be able to explore the antidote options, we first need to ask ourselves (1) who gets to set the standard of violations? (2) what qualifies as violations? and if both have been set in stone (3) what will the consequences be? All these measurements will pivot the discussion to the most fundamental debate (4) who will carry the regulatory burden from start to finish?
One can claim that the government should leave the fight against misinformation to third parties due to a fear that many in civil society and the press have — that this power can be used, if in the wrong hands, to suppress free speech. Although, at the other end of the spectrum, third parties consisting of a coalition between platforms and press have a high risk of being hijacked with wide-ranging corporate interests as well. Aside from the regulatory actors’ issues, the scope of the regulation is worth keeping an eye on, as platforms exist globally, concurrently binding law exists within state borders. States — if indeed want to take a more assertive stance — will have to seek enough leverage and bargaining power to confront international platforms on their law supremacy.
Social media falsehoods might seem to live on screens only, yet at the same time, it’s having real-world repercussions. These platforms can be used as a means to suppress fundamental human rights, discredit political opponents, and drown out dissenting opinions. That is why all these considerations are worth scrutinizing.
References
Avelar, D. (2019). WhatsApp fake news during Brazil election ‘favoured Bolsonaro’. Retrieved 27 June 2021, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/30/whatsapp-fake-news-brazil-election-favoured-jair-bolsonaro-analysis-suggests
Coca, N. (2018). Will ‘Fake News’ Determine Indonesia’s Next President?. Retrieved 27 June 2021, from https://thediplomat.com/2018/11/will-fake-news-determine-indonesias-next-president/
Hasan, A. (2018). Jualan Isu Komunis & Hoaks WhatsApp, Bolsonaro Menang Pemilu Brazil — Tirto.ID. Retrieved 27 June 2021, from https://tirto.id/jualan-isu-komunis-hoaks-whatsapp-bolsonaro-menang-pemilu-brazil-c8U9
Meyer, R. (2018). The Grim Conclusions of the Largest-Ever Study of Fake News. Retrieved 27 June 2021, from https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/03/largest-study-ever-fake-news-mit-twitter/555104/
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151. doi: 10.1126/science.aap9559
