After Russia invaded Ukraine, some young Americans created scam Instagram accounts that shared videos and photos about the unfolding events. Pretending to be journalists on the ground, they attracted millions of followers and profited from the ads placed on their pages before they were taken down. It was not an isolated incident; the opportunity to monetize by misleading is the basis of a massive fake news market.
Fabricated content on the Internet is monetized through a complex, decentralized network that involves actors ranging from major tech companies to small-scale TikTok creators. To understand how the system works, consider an example from the 2016 presidential election in the US.
In the months leading up to the election, young people in the Macedonian village of Veles produced fake news stories promoting the themes and positions of then-Republican candidate Donald Trump’s campaign. These writers mixed misinformation with real news to persuade readers about their stories’ veracity. They then posted the stories to right-wing Web sites and generated traffic by linking the stories to social media platforms. As traffic grew, the stories attracted ad placements sold by big tech companies, generating revenue.
By connecting ad placement to traffic, companies like Twitter, Facebook, and Google are facilitators of the fake news market. However, they are only part of the overall system. Ad tech companies are responsible for the environment that funds fake news.
In a 2019 study of the US ad tech industry, researchers concluded that the online advertising ecosystem encourages the promotion of fake news through its use of intermediaries. Advertisers rarely know where their ads end up, so major companies like tech firms, airlines and retailers indirectly fund fake news Web sites. And the market’s decentralized nature means these brands face no consequences if their ads run on sites that promote misinformation.
Public relations and marketing companies also play a role in expanding the market by offering money to celebrities to spread fake news. Over the past two years, marketing agencies have sought YouTubers and other social media influencers to spread misinformation about COVID-19, particularly among young people.
Ad blockers can reduce the effect of fake news by limiting the number of people who see a promotion for a fake news story. However, growing use of ad blockers also damages legitimate news Web sites that rely on advertising for revenue.
Much of the fake news market operates behind the scenes, so its overall size is not known with certainty. An analysis by NewsGuard and Comscore estimates that publishers of misinformation earn US$2.6 billion annually from big brands through advertising companies, and the GDI estimated that disinformation Web sites brought in US$250 million in advertising revenue in 2019.
The easiest way to combat the spread of fake news is to prevent it from generating income. Revcontent, a global leader in online content marketing, has announced that it would demonetize content rated as false by at least two international fact-checking organizations. This kind of intervention would have a more significant impact if it is adopted by big tech companies.
Exposing the networks that sustain this market is another way to confront the problem. The watchdog group Check My Ads has helped to pioneer this approach. Earlier this year, research from Check My Ads led Google to remove some accounts that promoted misinformation about COVID-19 from its AdSense platform. A freely accessible database tracing funding sources would be an important tool in the fight against the misinformation market.
There is a strong argument that governments should tax platforms on the revenue they generate from fake news, but such a plan would be difficult to implement without a compelling definition of the targeted content.
Section 230 of the US Civil Code, which protects online platforms from liability for content published by third-party actors, further complicates the task of regulating the circulation of fake news.
The fake news market depends on the exchange of online attention for money. An effective strategy to combat it must reset this equation. While governments devise legal measures to hold content creators and marketers accountable for disseminating fake news, ordinary people also must take responsibility for their role in spreading misinformation.
The best way to push market-driven companies and influencers to be more engaged with the content they promote is to stop buying what they are selling.
Mohamed Suliman is a senior disinformation researcher at the Northeastern University Civic AI Lab.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS