This week, La República, one of Colombia’s most important economic and financial newspapers, published the latest article by the president of ATREVIA, Núria Vilanova, titled “Disinformation: the other war of the century.” The geopolitical upheaval provoked by the war in Ukraine forces us to reflect on the heightened risk of the new digital ecosystem: disinformation, manipulation, and its effects on public opinion. A joint study on hate speech, carried out last year in Spain by Oxfam International, Maldita, and ATREVIA, explains the elements to understanding this phenomenon.
“Let’s start from the beginning: two out of three respondents (67%) are concerned about the impact disinformation has in real-life situations, and one out of two (54%) say that there is so much disinformation in society that “I don’t believe anything anymore.” A 55.3% say that the information they receive does not cause them to change their political or social opinion (55.3%), and 50.3% say that they never access, or at most once a week, news from media, organizations, or people who do not share their opinion.
Thus, despite receiving more information than ever before, half of society claims to lack credibility. This is even more alarming considering that only one in three people (32.3%) feel capable of differentiating between what is real and what is a lie. Up to 78% are unaware of the risks of manipulating images or videos on social networks.
This is a worrying diagnosis, and we have two options: to limit freedom of expression on social networks or to educate citizens about how to make informed use of these sources of information.
As a first step, we can encourage the creation of safe information spaces and establish social norms that make it difficult for unauthorized behavior in other shared spaces to be allowed on social networks. All of us – individuals, companies, and institutions – must assume responsibility for what we communicate, and the public opinion generated by the messages we broadcast. This is especially critical, seeing that the circulation of these statements provokes, on many occasions, polarized emotional states.
Although we cannot prevent attempts at manipulation and disinformation, we can try to decipher these dynamics, the narratives upon which they are built, and the feelings they generate in those who accept them. Four indicators help assess these effects.
- Permeability of narratives or different versions of the same event. For example, while much of the world speaks of Putin’s war, for Russia, the military action is justified by the ‘Nazification’ of Ukraine.
- Centrality, that is, the extent to which the narrative spreads among people, making it essential to study the broadcasting sources and their dissemination.
- Credibility, which refers to the proven fact that the more a news item is repeated, the more people believe it to be true.
- Influence, which is the exercise of linking the narrative, such as the need to send humanitarian aid to Ukraine, with the reality of how many people are actually doing it.
Applying this methodology makes it possible to build strategies that will help reduce disinformation and manipulation. However, the facts are that the European Union has disconnected Sputnik or Russia Today broadcasts, while Russia has cut off access to several social networks, such as Facebook, and bans the presence of international media.
In short, controlling the narrative and public opinion has always been an essential weapon in all wars. However, in the 21st century, fighting manipulation and disinformation is taking place on a new front: social networks”.
Click here to read the full article originally published in La República.
