Daily Times

The Malaysian parliament in early April approved a sweeping anti-‘fake news’ law that aims to curb the diffusion of news content online that is deemed against the national interest. Those found guilty will be slapped with six-year jail terms and hefty fines. More countries are expected to follow Malaysia’s example as ‘info-wars’ emerge as the next frontier of human conflict. And this is why it’s worth examining the pros and cons of such policymaking.

This move unsurprisingly sent free speech defenders into a tizzy. Critics of expanded legislation to shackle social media claim any further attempts to censor content cycling through the internet is tantamount to censorship and edges Malaysia ever closer to the cusp of tyranny. Moreover, they accuse the government of using the fake news as a pretext to ‘cover up the truth’ about its allies ahead of GE14.

Their most note worthy argument, however, is the government delivers a fatal blow to democracy by caveating the expression of free speech on social media through self-serving definitions of what is real or fake. Likewise, they believe new laws will rapidly shrink the space for impartial debate available to the general public, which again undercuts democracy.

Finally, they question the cost-benefit calculus of addition allaw-making. Under Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998, law enforcement canal ready slap heavy fines and jail time on individuals fabricating and forwarding fake news online. If the existing legal framework has failed, they argue, what sorcery will produce results the next time around?

To me, these critics utterly fail to recognise the broad social harm that will follow a laissez-faire approach to fake news. When we let misinformation, mischaracterisation and propaganda flow unchecked, it activates the collective dumbing down of society.

A thriving democracy not only requires open access to information, but it also needs the average voter to flex his or her mental and moral muscles. For without the voter’s ability to make informed decisions based on facts, the latter is useless. We can all agree that ‘slacktivism’ and sharing news stories on Facebook without vetting the source or content are counter-intuitive to the democratic process.

The fundamental erosion in critical thinking is what perpetuates fake news. It creates divisions and sharpens contradictions. This is why even highly literate societies like France and Germany have been compelled to legislate against social media content that it judged harmful to the state.

In Malaysia’s case, its fragile interracial harmony will be under threat if the fake news is not speedily clamped down upon, as it invariably peddles the most grotesque ethno-racial stereotypes. Considering recent statistics that reveal 69 percent of Malaysians get their news from social media sources like Facebook or Twitter, sound deterrents are urgently needed.

The rise of fake news has two key catalysts, technological and human. While we often praise the internet for bridging geographical boundaries, we must also recognise its insular effect. With face-to-face contact waning among millennials who prefer virtual interaction through social media, their exposure to new and conflicting ideas that provoke debate is proportionally decreasing.

On Facebook, for example, we have friends and friends of friends that more often than not share our worldview and validate our experiences. Hence, their news-feeds reinforce our confirmation bias and build a false sense of trust in their posts, likes and shares.  Put another way; Facebook acts as an echo chamber of opinions, whether correct or flawed, we already hold.

Furthermore, the underlying dysfunction of social media as a news source is its visual homogenisation of stories. In print, for example, it is easy to distinguish between the tabloids and reliable news sources based on their headlines and layout. This difference is neutralised in cyberspace, especially through Facebook where most news posts look similar and to the casual consumer may carry the same weight.

The human catalyst has had an equally deleterious effect on real news. Arguably, the reason why so many people are willing to believe the fake news today is because many hallowed institutions of journalism — including The New York Times and CNN — are no longer doing their jobs. They have shed objectivity, pursued profit at the expense of good reportage, or allied themselves to the elites.

Over the last two decades, major news outlets have started taking sides in conflicts and social movements, and either highly emotionalised their coverage or reported in an overly mechanical fashion that reeks of apathy.

Once teenagers and young adults internalise their responsibilities as citizens and voters, the future spread and impact of fake news will fall sharply

Their gravest sin, however, when confronted with the mushrooming of fake news, has been to belittle audiences. The narrative that news consumers of certain demographic traits, say US President Donald Trump’s white blue-collar base, need to be guided with neon signs toward real news because they’re incapable of sorting truth from fiction has triggered mass desertion.

These audiences have consequently become islands of insularity — highly fragmented and parochial — while mainstream news outlets by merit of losing objectivity have devolved from authoritative sources to merely a few voices among many in a pluralistic media patchwork.

That said, I agree with critics of new anti-fake news laws that a top-down remedy will only yield piecemeal results. We need a complementary model that goes far beyond new legislation or truth-o-meters like sebenarnya.com. Rolling back the era of ‘post-truth’ necessitates an emphasis on critical thinking and media literacy at lower tiers of the education system.

It demands future voters and leaders — many of who are targets of fake news today — understand the harm to society from broadcasting media content without verifying its credibility. Once teenagers and young adults internalise their responsibilities as citizens and voters, the future spread and impact of fake news will fall sharply. This is the beating heart of democracy.

Fake news not only creates social divisions by mocking different ethno-racial or ideological groups, but it also produces a false counter-narrative about many scientific truths that are crucial to our survival as a species. Think of all the viral stories you’ve read about the purported harms of vaccination and the hoax of global warming despite copious scientific evidence to the contrary.

Finally, we must remember only chaos and anarchy await us should we continue to trivialise information that underpins the social order. As English novelist and scientist CP Snow Clairvoyantly noted close to a century ago: comment is free, but facts are sacred.

The writer is an Islamabad-based independent journalist

Published in Daily Times, April 10^th 2018.