THE International Risk Reportpublished in January at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, explains that misinformation and disinformation can undermine the legitimacy of governments in democratic countries. For these countries, it is one of the most important risks to manage.
Between now and next year, millions of citizens will go to the polls. When we can no longer distinguish between falsehoods and facts that can be verified using known and transparent methods, trust in democratic processes is seriously compromised. Validated and verified information is a crucial ingredient of the essential trust in democratic processes. But there is now more profit to be made in circulating junk information than in investing in validated information.
The ability of online platforms to generate and spread falsehoods puts democratic processes at risk. So what can be done? It is unrealistic to simply ban disinformation. Instead, we must find ways to appropriately regulate the flow of information on the Internet.
When it comes to strengthening laws to impose requirements on online platforms, some argue that this is necessarily a threat to freedom of expression. They forget that freedom of expression is never absolute and is subject to limitations. This leads them to oppose any measure that limits the right to profit from the dissemination and circulation of false information.
On the other hand, there are demands to impose on social media platforms responsibilities similar to those of traditional media for any false information that circulates in their spaces. We forget that these online spaces have different characteristics from those of traditional media. We cannot impose the same duties on them.
Others, more naively, believe that public awareness and education would be enough to overcome practices that run on disinformation. We act as if it were only a matter of individual vigilance.
Constitutional protection of expressive freedoms leaves little room for public authorities to prohibit the dissemination of “false” or “misleading” statements. The fight against disinformation must instead involve strengthening the capacity to demand accountability from those who control connected spaces. In these virtual spaces, information circulates according to commercial calculations that constantly measure what attracts users’ attention.
Aiming for profitable falsehood
The fight against fake news must target the processes, based on algorithms and artificial intelligence, by which information is “pushed” or offered to individuals. Social networks and other online platforms use devices for calculating the attention of individuals. These business models provide many opportunities for those who spread false or misleading information. This is where laws must be directed.
To date, sharing platforms and social networks that profit from exploiting the attention of connected individuals are not subject to real accountability obligations. Laws should impose obligations on online platforms that monetize the attention of connected individuals.
It is not enough to exhaust ourselves by chasing down false information piecemeal. We need to equip the connected environment with a framework through which the public and independent authorities can demand accountability. The public must be able to see to what extent online platforms are doing what is necessary to prevent and stop manipulation and abusive practices.
Such rules should require transparency in the functioning of algorithmic mechanisms for selecting and exchanging information. This is to ensure that the technical processes that determine the information people receive and see operate fairly and that the risks of manipulation are known and controlled.
Citizens and public authorities must be able to investigate and demand accountability from companies that generate revenue with the various processes of processing and calculating the attention of masses of connected individuals. The task is obviously titanic.
Controlling the risks of disinformation requires upgrading the intervention capacities of citizens and public authorities in the operating processes of connected spaces. To be able to play their role, States have a lot of catching up to do. They must equip themselves with the relevant expertise and invest to make their intervention mechanisms effective.