When Paris’s Notre-Dame Cathedral caught fire on April 15, it was only a matter of minutes before conspiracy theories were swirling across social media.
Some were from far-right accounts and outlets desperate to blame the blaze on some kind of Islamist attack. As the inferno was broadcast worldwide, Web sites such as US-based Infowars pushed out reams of unverified and often false information, speculation and rhetoric.
“The West has fallen,” right-wing documentary filmmaker Mike Cernovich tweeted.
Illustration: Mountain People
According to the EU’s specialist disinformation monitoring unit, these messages were then further picked up, amplified and spread by a host of Russian-linked accounts, platforms and automated trolls.
They added new, often deeply implausible theories. As well as blaming Islamists, some suggested France’s yellow vest protesters might be responsible. Others suggested unlikely Ukrainian links to the fire, while one — completely without evidence — speculated that the pope himself would call for a mosque to be built on the medieval cathedral’s ruins.
The latter claim came from the Web site of the Kremlin-supporting Tsargrad TV — which pushes a relentlessly nationalist pro-Russian Orthodox Church line highly supportive of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Its sheer implausibility points to a growing trend in the growing ideological battles on social media and the Internet in which the truth can appear increasingly irrelevant.
How to handle this — and whether, when, how and if to exploit it — is a growing challenge for almost every country.
In the aftermath of last weekend’s Easter bombings that killed more than 250, Sri Lanka imposed an outright — if not always effective — block on multiple social media, including Facebook, WhatsApp and Snapchat.
That followed widespread condemnation of social media after the New Zealand mosque shooting the previous month, when unedited footage streamed by the gunman was widely distributed.
How effective such restrictions are remains in question. They might be counterproductive, simply adding to the air of crisis. In Sri Lanka, many users were able to find ways around the block, not least to reassure friends and family they were safe. By activating a function whereby users could mark themselves unharmed after attacks and disasters, the tech firm might have contributed to the ban’s failure, whether willingly or not.
Such draconian action can also simply reinforce the narrative that a government has something to hide — particularly in Sri Lanka’s case, where warnings of an imminent attack from other intelligence services might have been ignored.
What does appear clear is that the Internet and social media have become something of a cesspool for hatred and conspiracy, and that powerful forces wish to use that to their advantage. What is equally clear is that those who wish to stop them have yet to find a strategy that truly works.
Getting moderators to review and remove potentially harmful content has been the preferred route of many platforms, but it is often a losing battle, people involved in the process have said.
Newspaper comment sections can remain full of racist, misogynist and similar comments, as can Facebook, despite hiring an army of often poorly paid contractors to remove material that it claims breaches its ever-evolving terms of use.
Those who have done the job describe it as an unending nightmare of pornography, violence – including beheadings, child abuse and more — along with sexist, racist and brutally misogynist rants. Contractors are timed to make fast decisions and report horrific mental health issues in consequence. Without them, even more of that material would doubtless reach a wider audience — but even stopping that would only tackle the tip of the iceberg.
These problems are not new. Sectarian, racist and divisive language and rumor have long been a potent tool for populists, xenophobes and anyone else seeking to foster division, fear and distrust to entrench their own control. In many locations — for example, the Indian subcontinent — things used to be much worse.
In 1983, a much smaller attack by Tamil Tiger rebels on government troops triggered massive ethnic riots against Tamils in the capital, killing hundreds and jump-starting a quarter-century-long war.
India’s Sikhs suffered similar attacks the next year following the assassination of then-Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Much worse communal violence was orchestrated during India’s 1947 partition by radio, leaflet and rumor, long before the advent of the Internet.
The effect of social media can be rapid — but it can also be slower and even more insidious. In private Facebook and WhatsApp groups, truth often does not matter, and conversations and memes can swiftly prove self-reinforcing.
In Western politics, that increasingly includes Islamaphobia, anti-Semitism or both, often couched as part of a wider backlash against liberal multicultural elites and norms.
This is a world created by modern technology and political frustration, particularly among the perceived “losers” of globalization, but it is a situation that some actors in particular — Russia, the far right and Islamist groups such as the Islamic State — have learned to exploit.
A study this year by the NATO Strategic Indications Centre of Excellence found that a majority of the accounts on Russian social media site VK that were trolling against Western military activity in Eastern Europe were automated and robotic.
Such tools are increasingly for sale. A separate report by the same center identified an increasingly lucrative black market in often illegal social media manipulation software, data and other products, allowing users to buy “likes,” comments, ads and fake personas.
Many are easy to spot — but improved artificial intelligence and machine learning might soon make that more difficult.
Perhaps the best pointer on how to tackle this comes from the Christchurch mosque massacre in New Zealand. While still criticizing social media, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Arden spent most of her time on more practical solutions — introducing gun control and pushing forward a more inclusive vision of the country that blunted the attacker’s message.
Whether that will be enough is another question. If the West ever genuinely falls, it is as likely to do so through social media-fueled bigotry, division and deceit as any physical attack.
Peter Apps is a columnist who writes on international affairs, globalization and conflict, and is the founder and executive director of the Project for Study of the 21st Century think tank. The opinions expressed here are those of the author.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under