Quantumrun

IMAGE CREDIT:

iStock

Anti-disinformation laws: Governments intensify crackdowns on misinformation

Misleading content spreads and prospers worldwide; governments develop legislation to hold misinformation sources accountable.

Author:
Author name
Quantumrun Foresight
December 13, 2022

Insight summary

As fake news wreaks havoc on elections, incites violence, and promotes false health advice governments are investigating different methods to reduce and stop the spread of misinformation. However, legislation and repercussions must navigate the thin line between regulations and censorship. The long-term implications of anti-disinformation laws could include divisive global policies and increased fines and litigation on Big Tech.

Anti-disinformation laws context

Governments worldwide are increasingly using anti-disinformation laws to combat the spread of fake news. In 2018, Malaysia became one of the first countries to pass a law that punishes social media users or digital publication employees for spreading fake news. Penalties include a USD $123,000 fine and a possible prison sentence of up to six years.

In 2021, the Australian government declared its plans to establish regulations that will give its media watchdog, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), increased regulatory power over Big Tech companies that don’t meet the Voluntary Code of Practice for Disinformation. These policies result from an ACMA report, which discovered that 82 percent of Australians consumed misleading content about COVID-19 over the past 18 months.

Such legislation highlights how governments are intensifying their efforts to make fake news peddlers accountable for the grave consequences of their actions. However, while most agree that stricter laws are needed to control the spread of fake news, other critics argue that these laws may be a stepping stone to censorship. Some countries like the US and the Philippines think banning fake news on social media violates free speech and is unconstitutional. Nevertheless, it is anticipated that there may be more divisive anti-disinformation laws in the future as politicians seek re-elections and governments struggle to hold credibility.

Disruptive impact

While anti-disinformation policies are much needed, critics wonder who gets to gatekeep information and decide what is “true”? In Malaysia, some legal community members argue that there are enough laws that cover penalties for fake news in the first place. In addition, terminologies and definitions of fake news and how representatives will analyze them are unclear.

Meanwhile, Australia’s anti-disinformation efforts were made possible by the Big Tech lobby group’s introduction of a Voluntary Code of Practice for Disinformation in 2021. In this Code, Facebook, Google, Twitter, and Microsoft detailed how they plan to prevent the spread of disinformation on their platforms, including providing annual transparency reports. However, many Big Tech firms could not control the spread of fake content and false information about the pandemic or the Russia-Ukraine war in their digital ecosystems, even with self-regulation.

Meanwhile, in Europe, major online platforms, emerging and specialized platforms, players in the advertising industry, fact-checkers, and research and civil society organizations delivered an updated Voluntary Code of Practice for Disinformation in June 2022, following the European Commission’s guidance released in May 2021. Signatories agreed to take action against disinformation campaigns, including:

demonetizing the dissemination of disinformation,

enforcing transparency of political advertising,

empowering users, and

enhancing cooperation with fact-checkers.

The signatories must establish a Transparency Center, which will provide the public with an easy-to-understand summary of the measures they have taken to implement their pledges. Signatories were required to implement the Code within six months.

Implications of anti-disinformation laws

Wider implications of anti-disinformation laws may include:

An increase in divisive legislation worldwide against misinformation and fake news. Many countries may have ongoing debates on which laws border censorship.

Some political parties and country leaders using these anti-disinformation laws as leverage to preserve their power and influence.

Civil rights and lobby groups protesting against anti-disinformation laws, viewing them as unconstitutional.

More tech firms being penalized for failing to commit to their Codes of Practice Against Disinformation.

Big Tech increases hiring of regulatory experts to investigate possible loopholes of Codes of Practice Against Disinformation.

Enhanced scrutiny on tech firms by governments leading to stricter compliance requirements and increased operational costs.

Consumers demanding greater transparency and accountability in content moderation, influencing platform policies and user trust.

Global collaboration among policymakers to establish universal standards for combating misinformation, impacting international relations and trade agreements.