Conspiracy theories have been around for a long time. They have, for years, been spread in small circles, where they fester and rise to prominence every now and then. The first time that I really saw social media have an influence on a conspiracy theory was around the 9/11 tragedy. YouTube videos started to emerge spreading the idea that it was a planned event by US insurgents or a cabal of some sorts, and not just a foreign terrorist attack. I saw videos getting millions of views based on fictional theories and the cherry-picking facts to focus on.
Now, Facebook groups form and millions of people join them. That’s worse than a video, because Facebook groups are not just about watching a single video, but about creating a continual stream of propaganda that feeds the beliefs of a growing community. As seen in this NPR article:
Social media groups have quickly sprung up in the days since voting stopped, to spread disinformation about supposed cheating on the part of election officials, and in some cases organize in-person protests.
“This is the most intense online disinformation event in U.S. history and the pace of what we have found has only accelerated since [Election Day],” said Alex Stamos, director of the Stanford Internet Observatory and Facebook’s former chief security officer.
Meanwhile, as I write this, Twitter has put this notice:
On 9 of the last 10 tweets of the sitting President. This notification links to the following statement:
It’s good to see that social media companies are stepping in to try to combat the spread of dangerous propaganda/fake news/lies. Counter to this is the argument of, ‘Who gets to decide what is true and what is not? Is this itself a form of censorship?’
I think there are definitive lines that can be drawn and social media sites do need to act. For example, when an idiot like Alex Jones decides to call a school shooting fake and declare that parents of dead children are actors, he deserves to be silenced on social media. The line is simple: fake and false claims (especially by people of influence) should be immediately flagged, or removed. Immediately.
One of the challenges of dealing with fake news and miss-information is that arguments against it are a win for the propaganda spreaders. The moment a credible person argues the point(s) they either legitimize the value of the opposing points as something worth arguing, or they feed into the conspiracy that they are hiding the truth, or they are widening the platform by bringing attention to it. It’s a losing scenario even if the argument of the credible person is factually sound.
When lies can spread so easily, when they can build momentum, and develop communities around them, they become very dangerous. Especially when the slick videos and arguments are well designed to ‘sell’ ideas, using the same convincing strategies that advertisers have honed for years, to sell products… but these strategies are being used to sell ideas that polarize opinions, anger and enrage, and ultimately brainwash people.
We are living in an era when social media is being used to undermine social cohesion. Lies travel fast and build momentum. Truth won’t slow this down without putting a few walls in the way. We can debate about what those walls look like, but we can’t wait until those walls are perfect before we start putting them up. Kudos to Twitter for doing what they are doing!
Brilliant piece. I was just having this exact conversation last night. The question of “Who gets to determine truth?” is a loaded one.
I agree. Who decides, and also how much is policed? The flip side of censoring false information is cancel culture. Both can be deeply concerning for very different reasons. That said, outright unsubstantiated lies need to be slowed down in an environment where lies spread so much faster than truth.