How is Social Media Affecting the (Dis)Information Crisis?

We are living in a world whose most spectacular feature is connectivity. More than 60 percent of the world’s population is on social media. Consequently, people are constantly exposed to global influences that are hard to process and information that is hard to verify. The volume of information flow leaves users increasingly vulnerable to manipulations that can trigger counterproductive reactions locally as well as globally.

Benefits and Risks of Connectivity

Social media and evolving technologies like generative AI have many benefits. They help amplify the voices of various underrepresented or suppressed social groups, streamline e-governance projects shaping accessibility of services for citizens, stimulate global commerce, and keep people politically aware. However, the growing flow of diverse, accessible information with unchecked factual accuracy promoted by various influencers with huge audiences or by artificial intelligence leveraged by irresponsible governments is causing polarization and social disharmony, destabilizing societies, and jeopardizing commerce and public health.

Threat to Democracy

The choice between freedom of speech and (dis)information control is a moral dilemma. While people in democratic societies are ready to partly give up their freedoms to prevent harm posed by malicious content, it is still hardly possible to control every aspect of information flow because of its sheer speed and volume. Enforcement mechanisms for fact checking are politicized and difficult to implement. Politicians are inclined to influence the volume of certain content depending on their interests and ideological preferences.

Cyber misinformation attacks by autocratic governments through social media are another threat to the stability of democratic countries. Deepfake videos disseminated on the web, such as those used in Russa’s attempt to disrupt the election campaign in the United States, become viral and do harm to society and polity. Open societies are struggling to balance information security and freedom of speech, putting democracies in peril.

Tool of Autocracies

The tools of connectivity help authoritarian leaders to survive in power longer and reduce the chances for democratization. Besides, in autocratic regimes, social media restrictions are a way of tightening digital repression that lowers the risks for protests, complementing other strategies that sustain autocratic governance. Disinformation and fake news also stimulate the “rally around the leader” effect and increase the evolving authoritarian digital influence, shaping public perception about the benevolence of repressive leaders.

Health Hazard and Security Risk for All

Mis/disinformation produced by technologies including AI can be multidimensional. Yet, in most cases, it is dangerous for the health and security of the people, regardless of the regime. Health hacks not backed by science, combined with advice from fake experts that gets spread on social media, prompt the dissemination of conspiracy theories and hesitance to life-saving vaccines. Moreover, misleading videos spread on Telegram and other social platforms fuel tensions between different groups, such as was the case with antisemitic attacks against Israeli supporters during a football game in the Dutch capital. Ultimately, new ways of imitating voices, creating photos, and clipping videos all add to misinformation superspreader content that will likely affect people’s well-being even more in the coming years.

Net Assessment

In this age of generative AI, it is important to remember that the implication of (dis)information is profound and multifaceted. It provides opportunities for the optimization of the information flow, enabling more effective governance. At the same time, it poses the risks for advanced propagation of misinformation and public manipulation techniques eroding democratic societies and threatening people’s well-being under autocratic regimes.

Policy makers have their work cut out. Even as they invest in technologies to enhance the quality of governance, they will also have to remain open to the risks emanating from disinformation. They must factor in the costs of information security and promote local news sources, emphasize media literacy, make fact-checking a habit, prioritize data security, and be prepared to launch rapid counter-messaging campaigns.