THE FACT OF THE MATTER
BY PAUL HOPKINS
Once, we had lies, damn lies – and statistics. Now, we have Fake News – and misinformation.
‘Fake news’ is closely associated with politics and that can unhelpfully narrow the focus of the issue. ‘False information’ is preferable, as it can refer to disinformation covering topics such as health, environmental and economic across all platforms.
Lots of things we read on social media may seem true but often are not. False information is stories created to deliberately misinform or deceive readers – created to either influence people’s views or push a political agenda.
Nearly a third of Irish people claim there are “hidden efforts” to destroy or marginalise certain groups of people through political policies, according to a poll for The Electoral Commission, while a fifth of people say viruses are being deliberately disseminated to infect certain populations.
False information is not new: however, it has become prevalent since 2017. Traditionally we got our news from trusted sources, journalists required to follow strict codes of practice. However, the internet has enabled a whole new way to publish, share and consume information and news with very little regulation or editorial standards. With many getting news from social media, often it can be difficult to tell what is credible or not. Information overload and a general lack of understanding about how the internet works have also contributed to an increase in fake news.
The coming of Covid saw a rise in misinformation – in China, Italy, the UK and particularly in the US, where Donald Trump at first denied there was any pandemic and then started raving about very questionable remedies. After he lost the 2020 election, he began a narrative that the election had been rigged. His daft deliberations were aided by Fox News and other alt-right news outlets.
In England suspected supporters of the far-right English Defence League have violently clashed with police in many areas after a peaceful vigil in Southport, despite pleas for calm from the stabbing victims’ families. The violence was due to lies and propaganda spread on social media about the identity of the alleged attacker.
Axel Rudakubana, 18 this week, has been charged in Southport with three murders and 10 attempted murders. Online platforms were quickly flooded with false information about the perpetrator’s identity. At the time, police had only confirmed he was born in Cardiff. But many posts included an incorrect name, and claimed he was a Muslim asylum seeker who had arrived in the UK via a small boat in 2023. However, journalists traced the source of this misinformation to Russian-linked website Channel 3 Now which appears to share AI-generated content. An estimated 27 million posts claimed the attacker was Muslim, a migrant or a refugee – far fewer denouncing the speculation.
To what extent are such posts to blame for the violence?
We have seen violence here in recent months over asylum seekers arriving in Ireland. Is the Government somewhat culpable in not being forthcoming on how and where they plan to house the refugees?
Within days of Kamala Harris’s ascent, Donal Trump was calling her “crazy”, “nuts” and “dumb” – an auto-response that even his supporters at the back might be starting to say is a generic line of attack. Trump’s surrogates, meanwhile, floundered in similar style. When John Kennedy, a Republican senator for Louisiana, referred to Harris on Fox News as “a bit of a ding-dong” – American for silly woman – the remark was so embarrassing that even the Fox host felt obliged to push back.
These attacks will inevitably narrow and personalise. But on the evidence of the first weeks of Harris’s candidacy, the Republican machine is struggling to find a workable way to undermine her. Inevitably, it will resort to fake news about her, as it did with Barack Obama’s origins and other related matters, and with Joe Biden.
So what can be done?
Simple interventions to reduce the spread of misinformation can shift peoples’ attention towards accuracy and help them become more discerning about the veracity of the information they share on social media, according to new research led by Professor Erwin H. Schell at the Rand Institute in the US. That, to me, sounds easier said than done, as we are increasingly inundated with misinformation
That said, last week’s new EU AI Act is the world’s first comprehensive legal framework for artificial intelligence (AI). It aims to address the risks and opportunities of AI for health, safety, fundamental rights, democracy, and rule of law.
Hopefully, it’s a step in the right direction – and the first of many.
