The study found that social media platforms did not live up to their election integrity pledges. Content labeling didn't stop misinformation as political advertising amplified it.
The study found that hours after voting ended, the social media platforms were awash with misinformation on candidates that were purported to have won the elections. The platforms seemed to be partisan because of the spotty labeling of posts calling the elections ahead of the official announcement.
Facebook failed majorly on this front by not having any visible labels during the elections, which allowed the spread of propaganda, like claims of the kidnapping and arrest of a prominent politician. The original post claimed that a prominent politician was kidnapped and arrested.
The days after the federal election in the country were not good. We needed platforms to fulfill their promises of being trustworthy. The places of conspiracy, rumor, and false claims of victory were the opposite of what the study found. There were failures during the German elections.
This is particularly disappointing since the platform promised before the election. In just a matter of hours after the polls closed, it became clear that the resources and cultural context of social media were not enough to moderate election information.
Elon Musk’s Twitter already looks grim for the LGBTQ community
Prior to the elections, these platforms issued statements on measures they were taking in the lead up to the election.
There is a need to study how labeling as solution can be applied in markets where the trust level of institutions is low.
The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) released the results of the general election to the public in order to be transparent.
The results of the polls conducted by media houses, parties of main presidential candidates, and individual citizens caused confusion and anxiety nationwide.
There were wild and false claims of winning candidates in online spaces where a lot of misinformation was thriving.
When it was too late, platforms implemented interventions. More time and effort is required to counter misinformation in countries where results have been challenged in court in the past.
There is political advertising.
According to the study, politicians were able to advertise 48 hours to the election day, breaking a law that requires campaigns to stop two days before the polls. It found that individuals could still buy ads, and that Meta applied less stringent rules than in the US.
Meta said it did not allow the use of premature election results and announcements in ads.
It said that none of the ads had any warnings on them.
Seven ads might not be considered to be dangerous. If the platform couldn't identify offending content in what was supposed to be its most controlled environment, then questions should be raised of whether there is any safety net on the platform at all.
Meta doesn't insist on advertisers to ensure they comply with the relevant electoral laws, but does have measures in place to make sure they are transparent.
Tools to make political ads more transparent were one of the measures we implemented to keep people safe and informed during the election. Advertisers must ensure they comply with the relevant electoral laws in the country they want to issue ads in, according to the Meta spokesman.
Mozilla wants the platforms to be transparent on the actions they take on their systems to uncover what works in stemming dis- and misinformation, and to initiate interventions early enough before elections are held and after the results have been declared.
Verdict on continuation of Meta’s prosecution in Kenya to be made early next year
All Rights Reserved © 2024
