Listen to the article
UK Political Parties Diverge on Social Media Regulation as “Fake News” Concerns Grow
Press freedom, long considered a cornerstone of healthy democracy, faces new challenges in the digital age as political parties propose varying approaches to regulating social media and combating misinformation. With the 2017 UK general election underway, party manifestos reveal significant differences in how they would address these issues.
When Prime Minister Theresa May called the snap election on April 18, social media quickly filled with familiar campaign hashtags like #coalitionofchaos, Brexit-inspired #CrushTheSaboteurs, and the anti-Conservative #LetJuneBeTheEndOfMay. However, the newly released manifestos suggest this may be the last UK election where “anything goes” online.
The Conservative manifesto takes a notably interventionist approach to digital regulation, asserting “we will choose how technology forms our future” and proposing legislative measures “to protect the reliability and objectivity of information” online. While short on implementation details, this stance aligns with recent efforts by technology platforms to address misinformation.
By contrast, Labour and Liberal Democrat manifestos make more general statements about maintaining the “open internet” and “protecting personal privacy,” without the Conservative’s explicit regulatory rhetoric.
The parallels to early automobile regulation are striking. Just as the motor car revolution eventually required driving tests, the highway code, and traffic signals, social media has evolved from a trivial pastime into a global phenomenon influencing all aspects of modern life—seemingly prompting similar regulatory responses.
This focus on regulation comes amid growing concern about “fake news.” Earlier this year, the all-party Culture, Media and Sport Commons Select Committee launched an inquiry into the phenomenon, receiving more than 70 written statements from stakeholders including Google, Facebook, major broadcasters, and academic institutions.
Contributors offered varying definitions of “fake news,” from the BBC’s emphasis on “false information deliberately circulated by hoax news sites” to the Royal Statistical Society’s inclusion of “news which misuses statistics to reach incorrect conclusions.” The News Media Association described it as “a form of abuse against news sources someone doesn’t agree with.”
While technology companies detailed their algorithmic approaches to addressing misinformation, none supported immediate government regulation. Most contributors emphasized the importance of digital literacy education and praised free tools like Indiana University’s Hoaxy, which helps detect and monitor misinformation. Facebook recently hired 3,000 additional content checkers and published guidelines detailing its efforts to combat the problem.
The influence of social media in political campaigns continues to grow. With Facebook approaching 2 billion monthly active users, BuzzFeed News reported that Labour’s manifesto was shared 63,000 times on the platform within a week of launch, compared to just 17,000 shares for the Conservative manifesto. Jeremy Corbyn’s official page has 930,000 likes, significantly outpacing Theresa May’s 380,000.
The Conservative approach appears inconsistent across different media types. While proposing strict social media regulation, they simultaneously pledge to water down press regulation by dropping part 2 of the Leveson Inquiry and repealing Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013. As academic Paul Bernal noted, “The Daily Mail will have more freedom than blogging platforms, Facebook, and Twitter—and you can draw your own conclusions from that.”
Prime Minister May has been touring local newspaper offices supporting the News Media Association’s “Fighting Fake News” campaign. Speaking to the Sussex Express, she warned that “people need to recognize that you can’t trust everything you see on social media.”
The Conservative proposal has drawn comparisons to German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s plan to criminalize the publishing of fake news. Critics suggest it could represent the beginning of comprehensive online censorship in the UK.
As the election approaches, the question remains: how should democracies best address online misinformation? The options range from self-regulation by technology companies to improved digital literacy education to direct government intervention. The challenge lies in finding the right balance—too little action may allow misinformation to flourish, while too much could enable governments to impose perspectives that serve powerful interests rather than the public good.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
16 Comments
Interesting to see how political parties are approaching social media regulation. Maintaining the balance between free speech and tackling misinformation is a delicate challenge.
Agreed, it’s a complex issue without easy solutions. The parties’ different approaches reflect the ongoing debate on how best to address these concerns.
As a concerned citizen, I hope the parties can find ways to tackle misinformation without compromising core democratic principles like freedom of expression. This will be a key issue to follow.
Well said. Maintaining an open and vibrant public discourse online is essential, even as we grapple with the challenges of the digital age.
As a voter, I’m curious to see how the parties’ social media plans would actually work in practice. The details will be important in evaluating their effectiveness and impact.
Agreed, the devil is in the details. It will be important to closely scrutinize the proposed policies and their potential unintended consequences.
I wonder how the parties’ social media regulation plans would impact the ability of citizens to engage in political discourse online. Preserving open dialogue is crucial.
That’s a valid concern. Any regulations should be carefully balanced to address misinformation without stifling legitimate political debate and exchange of ideas.
The growing problem of ‘fake news’ is concerning, but heavy-handed government intervention in online speech could backfire. Voters will need to weigh the tradeoffs carefully.
Agreed, it’s a delicate balance. Effective solutions will require input from a range of stakeholders to ensure the right approach is taken.
Regulating social media is a complex challenge with no easy answers. I’m curious to see how the parties’ proposed approaches evolve as the campaign progresses.
Absolutely. It will be important to closely monitor how these policy proposals are received and refined over time.
The Conservative manifesto’s focus on ‘protecting the reliability and objectivity of information’ online is intriguing, but the details will be crucial. Transparency and public input will be key.
Agreed, the implementation details will be critical. Any policies should undergo rigorous public scrutiny to ensure they strike the right balance.
The Conservative proposal for legislative measures to ‘protect the reliability and objectivity of information’ online raises some concerns about potential overreach. Careful implementation will be crucial.
You raise a fair point. Regulating online content is a slippery slope, and any policies must be well-crafted to avoid infringing on legitimate free expression.