Listen to the article
Global South Faces Western-Biased Approaches to Combat Misinformation
Misinformation and disinformation represent the most significant global risk according to the World Economic Forum’s 2025 report—ranking above extreme weather events and armed conflicts. However, efforts to combat these threats in the Global South are hampered by a critical imbalance: policies are primarily based on evidence from the United States and Europe, with little consideration for the unique circumstances of developing nations.
A new report from the Observatory on Information and Democracy titled “Information Ecosystems and Troubled Democracy” highlights this problematic bias and offers potential solutions for policymakers and stakeholders. The report reveals how current approaches fail to account for the diverse social, cultural, and political landscapes across the Global South.
One fundamental oversight is that misinformation in many developing regions often spreads offline, where internet connectivity remains limited and many citizens still rely on traditional news media. Policies that focus exclusively on online content moderation ignore this reality, leaving significant gaps in protection.
Trust in news media also varies dramatically across regions. According to 2024 research from the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, trust levels stand at 30% in Argentina and 43% in Brazil (both declining), compared to 32% in the United States, 69% in Finland, and 64% in Kenya (increasing). These disparities reflect fundamentally different information ecosystems that require tailored approaches.
Power asymmetries between Big Tech companies, governments, and individuals in the Global South create additional complications. Digital governance models developed for Western contexts are being exported to developing nations through aid, cooperation, and trade agreements. When adopted without adaptation, these models can produce harmful unintended consequences.
A particularly troubling trend is how legislation designed to moderate online content can be weaponized against government critics. Countries like Nigeria and several nations across Asia have seen purported anti-misinformation laws used to suppress legitimate voices and close civic spaces. This misapplication is exacerbated by the aggressive promotion of AI tools by both US and Chinese tech companies in Global South markets.
For effective policy responses, Global South nations must resist becoming passive recipients of Western governance models. Instead, policymakers need to develop approaches that reflect the diverse experiences of harm in their specific regions and address the structural factors at play. This requires a deliberate effort to decolonize research in this field.
Despite the growing dominance of Big Tech, spaces for resistance and alternatives remain. Civil society organizations are supporting community and municipal collaborations to develop digital platforms with localized content moderation rules. They’re also working to secure funding for public-interest news media and advocating for decentralized digital infrastructures that prioritize accurate information over data monetization.
Citizens and their representatives must be able to contest the design, function, and even existence of commercial social media platforms and their AI tools. Practical resistance tactics include individual self-defense measures like using VPNs and encrypted messaging for internet users, but also broader initiatives to redistribute power away from Big Tech and undemocratic governments toward local communities.
The report’s authors argue that addressing misinformation and disinformation effectively in the Global South requires acknowledging the biased evidence base currently informing policy and developing more contextually appropriate solutions. This means moving beyond the assumption that approaches that work in Boston or Berlin will be equally effective in Bogotá or Bangkok.
As misinformation continues to threaten democracies worldwide, the need for diverse, culturally informed research and policy has never been more urgent.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
14 Comments
This is an important reminder that misinformation is a complex, multifaceted issue that requires nuanced, context-specific solutions. Overlooking the realities of the Global South is a serious blind spot that needs to be addressed.
The report’s findings highlight the need for a more inclusive, globally representative approach to combating misinformation. Relying too heavily on Western-centric data and frameworks risks perpetuating harmful biases.
Agreed. Bringing in more diverse perspectives and local insights is critical to developing holistic, effective strategies to tackle this challenge across different regions and communities.
It’s refreshing to see a report that recognizes the need to move beyond a Western-centric view on misinformation. Adapting strategies to local information ecosystems is key to making real progress.
Absolutely. A one-size-fits-all approach simply won’t work. This report underscores the importance of tailoring interventions to the unique social, cultural, and political landscapes of different regions.
This report highlights an important blind spot in current misinformation research and policy. Recognizing the diversity of information landscapes globally is critical for crafting effective, equitable solutions.
The report makes a strong case for why we need to move beyond a Western-centric approach to misinformation. Incorporating insights from the Global South is essential for developing interventions that are relevant and impactful on the ground.
Absolutely. A one-size-fits-all solution is simply not going to work. Tailoring strategies to local information ecosystems and power dynamics is key to making real progress in this space.
Kudos to the Observatory on Information and Democracy for highlighting this crucial blind spot. Misinformation is a global challenge, but the specific drivers and dynamics can vary greatly by region and context.
Addressing regional biases in misinformation research is a crucial step to develop effective solutions. The report highlights how current approaches often overlook the unique circumstances of the Global South, where offline media still plays a major role.
You’re right, policies that focus solely on online content moderation miss a big piece of the puzzle in many developing regions. A more holistic, context-specific approach is needed.
This is an important issue that deserves more attention. Misinformation can have severe consequences, and we need to ensure our efforts to combat it are grounded in an understanding of diverse local realities.
Agreed. Relying too heavily on evidence and frameworks from the West risks perpetuating biases and blind spots. Incorporating insights from the Global South is critical for developing truly effective solutions.
This is a timely and important report. Addressing the Western bias in misinformation research is a crucial step towards creating truly global solutions that serve the needs of all communities, not just the Global North.