Why social media watchdogs are necessary to battle disinformation and polarisation of society

Americans are increasingly split into two distinct political factions, each driven by contrasting worldviews vying for supremacy in today’s America. Image: Shutterstock

In 2024, the world is set to witness a record-breaking election surge, with over two billion voters across fifty countries heading to the polls. In the wake of the world’s largest elections concluding in India, the United States, an economic powerhouse, is preparing for its presidential elections amidst growing polarisation. Americans are increasingly split into two distinct political factions, each driven by contrasting worldviews vying for supremacy in today’s America. This polarisation of societies reflects a widening gap between people’s beliefs and perspectives, pushing them to extremes and reducing the middle ground for constructive dialogue.

The latest Vanderbilt Unity Index reveals a growing trend toward greater polarisation in the country, while other reports show that Democrats and Republicans are more ideologically divided than ever. This comes amid a heightened recognition of the challenges posed by polarisation within the political landscape. In this context, disinformation, or false information intentionally spread through social networks to deceive people, often for political purposes, plays a crucial role, with political parties strategically emphasising ideological differences to mobilise voters. Recent elections in the UK and France have been rife with disinformation, mainly targeting individual politicians with artificial intelligence’s potential to amplify disinformation through deepfakes emerging as a significant threat to democratic and fair elections. The US elections have faced similar challenges, as demonstrated by a fake video of Senate candidate Kari Lake, manipulated audio of President Joe Biden, and AI-generated images misrepresenting Donald Trump.

In response to these threats, we are witnessing a concerted effort to address the twin issues of polarisation and disinformation, recognising their potential to sway public opinion. Policymakers and other authorities are actively implementing strategies to counter disinformation, leveraging fact-checking tools, and promoting media literacy. For instance, the recently introduced European Union’s AI Act emphasises transparency as a key principle. It mandates that creators of deepfakes must clearly disclose that their content is artificial and explain the process behind its creation. This rule aims to help people identify AI-generated content, thereby reducing the risk of manipulation through disinformation. In response to the threat posed by deepfakes, over 20 US states have enacted regulations against their use in elections. However, the Federal Election Commission has yet to implement any restrictions, and related bills in Congress remain stalled. Simultaneously, initiatives to bridge ideological divides are underway, emphasising the importance of fostering a more united and informed electorate. As we navigate the complexities of modern communication, the focus on combating both disinformation and polarisation underscores a commitment to preserving the democratic fabric of nations. This places the 2024 election season at a crucial juncture where the dynamics of online communications will play a pivotal role in influencing countries’ political trajectories.

Decoding the dynamics of political disinformation and polarisation

Recognising the rising significance of online communication in political discussions, a research team from IIM Kozhikode, comprising the authors of this article, conducted a global study. We explored the impact of political disinformation and the monitoring of online discussions, which involves tactics such as social media surveillance. The focus was on societies susceptible to polarisation. Utilising data from the annual reports of the Digital Society project, a division of the V-Dem Institute at the University of Gothenburg’s Department of Political Science in Sweden, we conducted a comprehensive analysis across 177 nations. The aim was to grasp how these countries monitor communication in the digital realm and address issues related to political disinformation. The findings highlighted the evident influence of disinformation in fueling polarisation within societies. Notably, the findings offered a balanced perspective on social media monitoring, recognising it as a potentially crucial measure to combat the threat of disinformation and polarisation. 

How to read these charts? The values represent estimates derived from the V-Dem measurement model. The estimates for “Monitoring of social media activities” and “Disinformation by foreign governments” have been inverted to enhance interpretability. For instance, greater values on the chart for “Monitoring of social media activities” reflect higher levels of social media surveillance in the country.