As Swedish political parties struggle to form a coalition government, a growing body of research shows that social networks likely helped produce the election results that led to the impasse, and the confusion was not the result of foreign interference, but rather homegrown abuse of digital media.
Sweden, like the Netherlands and Germany last year, is going through the longest period without a government in the history of its democracy. The latest election took place on Sept. 9, but no party received enough votes to wield power and all attempts to form a governing coalition have failed so far.
On Wednesday last week, the parliament rejected an attempt by Ulf Kristersson, leader of the center-right Moderate Party, to form a minority Cabinet that would have had to rely on the support of the ultranationalist Sweden Democrats to make important decisions. Nor can Sweden’s biggest party, the Social Democrats, led by Acting Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Lofven, cobble together a majority.
Now, Annie Loof of the Center Party, which only won 9 percent of the vote, could attempt to form a coalition; her idea is to bring the Social Democrats and the Moderate Party together, even though they have shown no desire to unite.
Sweden’s electoral rules give the speaker of the parliament four shots at picking a potential prime minister. If it does not work out, a new election is held. That is a probable outcome now, but polls show the vote is likely to be inconclusive again.
The deadlock could have its origins in the growing role of the Internet in elections everywhere. Swedish Internet Foundation data showed that this year’s election campaign was the first during which an overwhelming majority of Swedes got their news online.
Despite a high degree of media literacy and relatively low trust in news shared on social media, the unprecedented fracturing of Swedish society was likely helped along by a phenomenon the Oxford Internet Institute described in a report published in September:
The proportion of “junk news” shared on social media in Sweden during the election campaign was the highest of all recent European elections and second only to the US presidential election of 2016.
Deliberately misleading content accounted for 22 percent of all links shared with political hashtags. There was one link to “junk news” shared for every two links to mainstream media publications.
Sweden had prepared to fight off a Russian propaganda and disinformation campaign. It trained officials in spotting “influence operations” and distributed millions of booklets to households, but the Oxford Internet Institute said eight of the top 10 “junk news” sources during the campaign were Swedish and “Russian sources comprised less than 1 percent of the total number of URLs shared in the data sample.”
Many of the fakes promoted anti-immigrant narratives favoring the Sweden Democrats, a party that has no willing coalition partners.
Sweden has recently taken in more immigrants as a proportion of population than any other country, and a more recent report from the London-based Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) and the London School of Economics’ (LSE) Institute of Global Affairs described an international campaign to paint the country as a hellish place of no-go zones and rampaging Muslim migrants.
“The concerted international smear campaign against Sweden, portraying it as a country in crisis, verging on civil and ethnic war, is perhaps unmatched by any other far-right smear campaign in its longevity and consistency,” wrote the report’s authors, who include two of the most prominent experts on Russian disinformation, Peter Pomerantsev and Anne Applebaum.
They attribute the smear campaign to the international alt-right, based in the US, the UK, Hungary, the Netherlands and elsewhere, as well as the Russian government-controlled media, but the campaign does not appear to be directed at Swedish voters.
The ISD-LSE report found little evidence of foreign-coordinated efforts to spread disinformation targeting Swedes before the election. There were no international outlets among the top 20 domains linked to Twitter discussions using election-related hashtags.
The Sweden Democrats tried to get their voters agitated over alleged fraud, but in this campaign, “coordination was very much driven from Swedish sources,” the report said.
The reasons for the lack of international coordination efforts seen on the scale of previous elections in France, the US, Germany and Italy are unclear.
First and foremost it is important to recognize the limited capacity of international groups to embark on campaigns in Swedish.
Moreover, while Sweden is a prominent figure in the conversation topics of the international far right, it might still remain a relatively unknown political environment for most outside Scandinavia, and interest in or understanding of the Swedish political systems and its election audience is still relatively limited.
If this conclusion is correct and even Russia, with large resources to devote to international propaganda and a clear interest in keeping Sweden from drifting toward NATO, has not made a visible effort to influence the Swedish election, then it is possible and even likely that social network-driven foreign interference is only a symptom. The social networks themselves as conduits for junk news, whether foreign-made or domestically concocted, are the disease.
Sweden takes media literacy extremely seriously and even teaches high-school students to detect fake news. If the findings of the Oxford Internet Institute are anything to go by, this approach has not brought instant success.
People still enjoy sharing fakes and their political outlook is contaminated by malicious, divisive, manipulative stories that spread on the social networks, despite the highly publicized efforts of companies such as Facebook, Google and Twitter to stop their circulation.
Recent studies in Germany and the US have linked the prevalence of social media to hate crimes.
It is logical to extend these findings to political polarization and fracturing. Sweden’s political deadlock could be at least in part caused by the prevalence of social networks: Last year, 53 percent of Swedish Internet users, or 50 percent of the country’s total population, were on Facebook daily. This year, according to the Swedish Internet Foundation, Facebook activity has begun dropping off.
Whether political polarization is likely to recede with it is a worthy subject for further research.
Leonid Bershidsky is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering European politics and business. He was the founding editor of the Russian business daily Vedomosti and founded the opinion Web site Slon.ru.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers