Can governments be fact-checkers?

In the Global Risks Report 2024 by the World Economic Forum, disinformation has been identified as the top global risk facing the global community. The ever-increasing global digital penetration, along with the proliferation of social media, has not only brought with it increased global concern for online information disorders like misinformation and disinformation, but has also spurred the global community into mitigating and countering the existent and potential harms of such phenomena.  

One of the more established countermeasures adopted globally to tackle and contain the risks of disinformation has been the advent of online and social media fact-checking. In fact, it can be surmised that fact-checking is expected to become increasingly popular and highly relevant in the next few years. 

Until now, fact-checking activities have been confined to the realm of tech companies, civil society organisations, and academia. However, along with democratic countries like India, Brazil, and various European nations, many other countries have either initiated government-led fact-checking organisations or are in the process of undertaking such enterprises. 

With these initiatives taking root, questions arise: how feasible are these state- and government-backed initiatives, and are they going to be an effective solution to stop the dissemination of fake news?
 
The term fact-checking is usually used to denote the work of online information verification and authentication, and while the activity is not a new phenomenon, the professionalisation and institutionalisation of this activity are, especially in the pandemic and post-pandemic periods. Nowadays, there are a lot of professional fact-checking organisations working actively around the world. 

Moreover, with the growing concerns about the potential threat posed by disinformation to national security, stability, and social cohesion, it is not surprising to see that there has been an uptick in government- and state-led initiatives on fact-checking. 

While the rate of growth in recent times seems to have slowed down, the preceding growth of fact-checking organisations over previous years, especially at a time when traditional media outlets have struggled, has been remarkable. As stated by Duke Reporter's Lab, "While much of the world's news media has struggled to find solid footing in the digital age, the number of fact-checking outlets has reliably rocketed upward for years—from a mere 11 sites in 2008 to 424 in 2022." 

The growth and increasing importance of this field should necessitate that the public at large know about the nature of the operations of these fact-checking organisations. 

The inception of any credible fact-checking organisation requires the following standards of fact-checking methods, as defined by a special body: The International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) serves as the special body, whereby any fact-checking organisation that wishes to be vetted by IFCN and subsequently be recognised as an official IFCN signatory must adhere to the code of principles laid out by IFCN. 

The code of principles includes fact-checking methodology, accountability, transparency of funding, an open and honest corrections policy, and, most importantly, the commitment to non-partisanship and fairness. This means that individuals and organisations conducting fact-checking activities cannot be affiliated with any political party. 

The status of being an IFCN signatory is a prerequisite to participating in the fact-checking programmes operated by social media companies, e.g., Meta's Third-Party Fact-Checking Programme (3PFC).
 
In this existing fact-checking ecosystem, the introduction of state-led fact-checking operations is definitely a new phenomenon, which consequently raises the question of whether or not such operations are destined to be successful in countering the harms of disinformation or are bound to fail. The answer to this is nuanced and demands not only further examination but also innovative experimentation. 

In theory, government-led initiatives can succeed in dealing with significant misinformation challenges. Moreover, government-led fact-checking can be more sustainable than traditional ones, which in many countries remain under-resourced and understaffed. Most fact-checking organisations are non-profit institutions, which largely rely on grants, funds, donations, or contracts with tech companies. 

The absence of such concerns for state-backed and state-financed initiatives can ensure the long-term viability and sustainability of fact-checking activities. 
 
But the central question remains: can this be materialised effectively in practice? 
 
An article recently published by the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) has markedly criticised this phenomenon of government-led fact-checking initiatives like the Brasil Contra Fake, which is backed by the Brazilian government. 

In the article, Natália Leal, the chief executive of Lupa, an IFCN signatory, noted that the initiative has primarily focused on combating disinformation related to the government's own political interests. Lupa has in fact questioned the quality of their published report, whereby a study conducted by Lupa revealed that 52% of the reports by the government-led Brasil Contra Fake either lacked transparent sourcing or relied exclusively on government sources for their information. 

Similar criticisms have been directed towards initiatives like the Ethiopia Current Issues Fact Check, led by Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed's administration, and KOMINFO, operated by the Ministry of Communication and Information of Malaysia. 

Fact-checkers and media professionals have raised concerns about the political constraints limiting the effectiveness and editorial independence of these initiatives, where partisan political interests reign supreme while principles like transparency and non-partisanship are scarcely followed. 
 
Recently, in India, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology issued a notification establishing the Press Information Bureau's (PIB) Fact Check Unit (FCU) as a statutory body with powers to flag allegedly false information related to the government and its agencies ahead of the general election starting next month. 

However, the Supreme Court of India has issued a stay order on this after a petition was filed against it. Thus, the road ahead for these initiatives remains unclear. 
 
To effectively deal with the proliferation of disinformation, it is essential to understand the reasons, motives, beliefs, and cognitive factors driving people to create, share, and spread disinformation. 

The propensity to believe and spread misinformation does not solely lie with the lack of unverified and unauthenticated information circulating online but also with our own cognitive biases, borne out by our intrinsic inclinations and sociocultural experiences, leading us to easily fall prey to such misinformation. 

In an era of growing social and political polarisation, the presupposed credibility of the messenger and the message precedes the established (or lack thereof) veracity of the message. 

Thus, in the quest to combat the harms of disinformation and misinformation, fact-checking as a countermeasure is necessary but not sufficient. 

To comprehensively address the dangers of disinformation and misinformation, both countermeasures (e.g., fact-checking) and mitigation methods (e.g., media and information literacy) should be included in the toolkit for addressing the problem of disinformation and misinformation. 

This comprehensive and integrated approach has the potential to have a meaningful and sustainable impact. The focus on increasing media, information, and digital literacy among the populace so that they can develop into ideal digital citizens is a worthy goal of state-led initiatives. 

Otherwise, if the government's work remains confined to assessing the veracity and controlling the flow of information, it will continue to cast doubt on people's perceptions of the validity and authenticity of the information.
 
It is evident that government-led fact-checking initiatives are gaining momentum. However, despite noble intentions, there remains a great challenge in managing people's perceptions of these initiatives. 

It would be wiser and more sustainable for governments to undertake initiatives to increase media information and digital literacy among the population they govern. 

Therefore, by taking a pre-emptive approach by educating citizens rather than a centralised approach to verifying the validity and controlling the flow of information, governments can surely play a crucial role in the long and hard battle of preserving information integrity and limiting the harms posed by disinformation and misinformation.
 

Shuvashish Dip is a fact-checker at FactWatch, at University of Liberal Arts Bangladesh. 

Rahul Roy is a researcher at Center for Critical and Qualitative Studies, at University of Liberal Arts Bangladesh. 

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of The Business Standard.