Social Media Giants Urged to Address Darker Implications of Misinformation Crisis

Social media platforms have begun sharing insights into how they’re used during elections, launching initiatives to foster civil debate and encourage voter participation. However, research reveals concerning patterns in how misinformation spread during the 2016 US presidential election.

Researchers from Oxford University have found that the distribution of “junk news” – extremist, sensationalist, or conspiratorial content masquerading as legitimate reporting – wasn’t uniform across the country. Instead, it concentrated in six swing states where Donald Trump’s victory margin was less than 2%: Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Using location data from Twitter users, the Oxford team created an index to track polarizing content distribution nationwide. Their findings revealed two critical insights: first, Twitter users were exposed to more misinformation and polarizing content than professionally produced news; second, users in swing states shared significantly more polarizing political content than those in uncontested states, even when adjusting for population size.

“There is such a significant volume of misinformation flowing over social media that it is difficult to imagine voters in the US are equipped with what they need to make good decisions,” the researchers concluded. The situation raises serious questions about whether voters in these critical battleground states received the reliable information necessary for informed decision-making.

The researchers conducted similar analysis during a German election and found a healthier ratio – one piece of junk news for every four stories from professional news organizations. They attribute this partly to Germany’s higher education levels and public financing for professional news outlets. Nevertheless, even this lower level of misinformation caused significant concern among German voters and politicians.

The long-term implications for democracy may be even more troubling. Social networks risk becoming increasingly fragmented if supporters of losing candidates disconnect from supporters of winning ones. Additionally, politicians who benefit from junk news may continue to generate it and potentially rely on it when making policy decisions.

The researchers express particular concern about junk news becoming a vehicle for “junk science,” with misinformation campaigns targeting scientific consensus on issues like climate change, smoking’s link to cancer, and childhood vaccination benefits. The Oxford team’s next project aims to identify who orchestrates campaigns designed to persuade political leaders to ignore scientific recommendations.

Developing comprehensive solutions remains challenging, partly due to fundamental shifts in the news business model and generational differences in news consumption. However, researchers believe voluntary initiatives from social media companies are no longer sufficient, and some form of public policy oversight has become necessary.

“Facebook and Twitter don’t generate junk news but they do serve it up to us,” the researchers note. “We must hold social media companies responsible for serving misinformation to voters, but also help them do better.”

Several potential solutions could address these issues without restricting political speech. In the U.S., the Uniform Commercial Code could be leveraged to make both advertisers and platforms adhere to basic anti-spam and truth-in-advertising rules. More broadly, paid political content on social media should require clear disclosures, with bots declaring their sponsors and advertisements identifying their backers.

The researchers recommend requiring social media platforms to file all political advertising and political bot networks with election officials, and that automated accounts should be clearly identified to users.

While most people don’t primarily use social media for political purposes, these platforms become crucial information sources in the days preceding major elections or referendums. The researchers conclude that how social media companies design for deliberation has become essential to democracy’s future success.