Disinformation fighting models : from restrictions to cooperation

45% światowej populacji korzysta z mediów społecznościowych, z czego sam Facebook gromadzi aż 2,4 mld aktywnych w skali miesiąca użytkowników. Z narzędzi służących pierwotnie zawieraniu i podtrzymywaniu znajomości platformy społecznościowe stały się potężnym elementem wpływu politycznego, w szczególności w zakresie łatwego i masowego rozprzestrzeniania zmanipulowanych treści. W niniejszym artykule zostaje podjęta analiza działań ukierunkowanych na walkę z dezinformacją w sieci, zwłaszcza w odniesieniu do kierunku przyjętego przez Unię Europejską przed wyborami do Parlamentu Europejskiego w 2019 r., w kontekście nie tylko ich efektywności, ale także implikacji dla jakości systemu politycznego i wolności wypowiedzi.

Almost 45% of global population use social media, and Facebook alone accumulates up to 2.4 billion active users per month. From the tools used to initiate and maintain contact between people, social platforms have become a powerful element of political influence in particular in the field of easy and mass spread of manipulated content. The global campaign against disinformation and fake news on the Internet, which has been ongoing for several years, raises questions about its potential danger which can lead to limiting the freedom of expression. The purpose of this paper is to analyze activities undertaken in this field by various entities, in particular in relation to the actions adopted by the European Union before the elections to the European Parliament in 2019. By analyzing those complex actions, one can conclude that in comparision with the strict law implemented by France or Germany, European Union went for more cooperative strategy regarding social media platforms. Since the popularization of the Internet many scholars and commentators of public life were bringing high hopes with its potential to improve and give a new quality to democracy. The emanations of these approaches are the projects of teledemocracy, e-government or e-participation. The concepts related to the positive impact of the Internet on democracy were associated with its possibility to accelerate the exchange of information between politicians and citizens. It was also emphasized that the inclusive nature of the Internet would open space for public debate and increase citizens' involvement in political decision-making. However, social media turned out to be a tool enabling both immediate access to a global audience and precise selection of the target group thanks to the use of microtargeting, which is of great importance for conducting contemporary election campaigns, development of social movements and organization or hybrid wars - key element of which is spreading disinformation. This multi-faceted potential put social media as a powerful tool which can be effectively used for positive and negative purposes, like in the case of Cambridge Analytica when data from over 87 million accounts of Facebook users were used to precisely targeted political messages. The term that in recent years - both in public and scientific debate - has become the "key word" to describe the processes of intentional manipulation on the Internet is fake news. Attempts to define this concept most often referred to untrue and fabricated content that is disseminated in a viral to serve specific goals - usually financial, ideological and political. The very first problem with this phenomenon is its definition which is often shaped in a purely instrumental way. The fight against fake news often takes the form of pursuing political interests and significantly erodes the freedom of speech due to the adoption of restrictive laws and the implementation of tools designed to cover the surveillance over citizens. The Freedom of the NET 2018 Report indicated that not only China, which remains the leader in the use of artificial intelligence and facial recognition mechanisms to create a system creating total control over residents, but also other countries had been using mechanisms based on this technology. Among them we can find, for example, Germany. What is more, China is keen on sharing experiences with the use of her version of digital authoritarianism, organizing seminars for media representatives and authorities from other countries. Data shared by Facebook also indicates that social networking is becoming an important source of information for governments. While in 2013 the global number of requests for access to user data from the authorities was approximately 53.7 thousand in 2018 it increased by almost 300%. Previous and not always successful experiences of each countries in fighting with fake news prompted European policy makers to take coordinated and planned actions before the European Parliament elections in May 2019. Unlike the earlier examples of binding legal acts, the European Union has opted for soft law in the form of communicates and codes of good practices that brought the first results by publishing information on the sources of financing political ads. The European Commission announced also that in the first quarter of 2019 Facebook removed 2.19 billion fake accounts (representing 91% of the number of active users per month), and Twitter 77 million. It is possible to effectively combat disinformation and fake news but this battle will not be neither easy nor fast. In such a dynamically changing environment it is not difficult to be two steps behind the latest manipulation techniques that take advantage of the significant possibilities of the Internet. The best example is the so-called deepfake which uses artificial intelligence to create fake movies, photos and sound recordings. It is also worth remembering that according to the many actions taken already by social platforms to limit the spread of fake news, their main profit is mass clicking which can be achieved especially by highly emotional content. Despite publishing data on political advertising expenditure, Facebook still allows very precise targeting using sometimes very sensitive data as wedding anniversary, having a child or (in the case of US users) responding to given political content political. In addition, there is always a threat that fight against disinformation can transform itself in camouflaged censorship, surveillance and restriction of basic human right - freedom of expression. It seems, therefore, that we necessary need changes in the functioning of social media platforms towards greater transparency of their activity but on the other hand media education must remain the crucial course of action, which gradually can improve the quality of political communication on the Internet.