Disinformation a threat during the big election year 2024

Author Moonshot.news

Published on: 08/11/2023

Around two billion people around the world will be able to vote in elections next year. This means that fighting disinformation is crucial and much of this disinformation is technology-based. The European Parliament has reached a provisional deal on new rules to make elections and political advertising more transparent and resistant to interference. Meta announced that political advertisers will not be allowed to use the company’s AI tools for their campaigns. A global UNESCO survey shows that 87% of citizens are worried about the impact of disinformation on the upcoming elections in their country.

And advertisers need to be more active in protecting themselves from inadvertently supporting disinformation, according to an article in Harvard Business Review. 

“As advertisers handed off day-to-day operations to a bewilderingly complex digital advertising supply chain, companies often don’t know where their ads are ending up — including on sites that spew disinformation and hate-speech”, writes Claire Atkin, CEO and co-founder of adtech industry watchdog Check My Ads.

PREVENTING ABUSES

The EU Parliament agreed on rules to regulate political advertisements, notably online ads, while also providing for a framework for political actors to advertise more easily across the EU.

“As political advertising has shifted largely online, existing national rules for regulating political advertising and preventing abuses have proven themselves to be no longer fit for purpose”, the Parliament says.

The European Council and Parliament still need to formally adopt the agreement before the rules enter into force. The rules will apply 18 months after the entry into force, while the measures on the non-discriminatory provision of cross-border political advertising (including for European political parties and political groups) will already apply for the European Parliament elections in 2024.

Commenting after the deal was struck between Parliament and Spanish Presidency negotiators, lead MEP Sandro Gozi (Renew, FR) said: “This is a major step in protecting our elections and achieving digital sovereignty in the EU.” 

“Citizens will be able to easily spot political advertising online and who stands behind it. The new rules will make it harder for foreign actors to spread disinformation and interfere in our free and democratic processes. We also secured a favourable environment for transnational campaigning in time for the next European Parliament elections”.

The agreement says that political advertising will have to be clearly labelled. Under the new rules, the Parliament says it will be easier for citizens, authorities and journalists to obtain information on who is financing an advert, their place of establishment, the amount paid, and the origin of the financing, among other details.

NON-EU SPONSORS

To limit non-EU sponsors from interfering in European democratic processes, the Parliament agreed to include a ban on third country entities from sponsoring political advertising in the EU in the three-month period before an election or referendum.

Under the agreement, only the personal data explicitly provided for the purpose of online political advertising and collected from the subject can be used by providers to target users. 

“Political advertisements based on profiling using special categories of personal data (e.g. ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation) would also be prohibited. Parliament introduced other provisions to further regulate targeting, such as a ban on using minors’ data”, the Parliament says.

Internal communications, such as newsletters from political parties, foundations or other non-profit bodies to their members, are not considered political advertising and will not be subject to additional privacy rules.

The agreed text introduces the potential for periodic penalties to be levied for repeated violations. In line with the Digital Services Act, sanctions can go up to 6% of the annual income or turnover of an ad provider.

TESTING AI TOOLS

Meta in a statement said that tests of its new Generative AI ads creation tools in Ads Manager, will not be allowed to include ads for Housing, Employment or Credit or Social Issues, Elections, or Politics, or related to Health, Pharmaceuticals or Financial Services.

“We believe this approach will allow us to better understand potential risks and build the right safeguards for the use of Generative AI in ads that relate to potentially sensitive topics in regulated industries,” Meta said.

Claire Atkin writes that advertisers need to take back control over their own advertising. 

“They need to demand access to their own granular data from third-party ad exchanges, audit their ad campaigns, and clarify for themselves where on the internet they really want to be. If they don’t, they will continue to put themselves at brand risk. Even more seriously, they will continue to send money to the people who financially benefit the most from publishing disinformation on the internet.”

Her recommendations:

Check your ad campaigns. Forget high-level performance reports from ad tech companies. Instead, ask them for log-level data, which is the real source of truth of your ad placements, because it includes specific data about on which websites where your ad appeared. Supply chain research firms can help you audit your campaigns.

Avoid brand safety technology. The leading ad verification companies only provide high-level reports, keeping you unaware of which websites your ads are being placed on and blocked from. This isn’t sufficient for ensuring that your company’s ads aren’t supporting bad actors. If you are using brand safety technology, ensure that that data, too, gets audited regularly — brand safety technology is often ineffective, and sometimes even harmful.

Demand cash refunds. There will often be a discrepancy between your log-level data and the campaign standards you were promised. When this happens, demand a cash refund — not a make-good. You are entitled to your money back and an explanation of how the discrepancies will be avoided in the future. If not, ditch the vendor.

UNPRECEDENTED CHALLENGES

The next year may bring unprecedented challenges for the protection of elections, write Microsoft’s Brad Smith, Vice Chair and President, and Teresa Hutson, Corporate Vice President, in a blog post.

“No one person, institution, or company can guarantee elections are free and fair. But, by stepping up and working together, we can make meaningful progress in protecting everyone’s right to free and fair elections.”

The company’s Threat Analysis Centre in a report says that Russia remains the most committed and capable threat to the 2024 US election. 

“The Kremlin likely sees next year’s contest a must-win political warfare battle determining the trajectory of support to Kyiv and the outcome of the Ukraine War.”

The centre’s forecast says: 

• First, Kremlin-aligned actors likely will reuse existing assets to infiltrate and influence US voters. 
• Second, some assets affiliated with the late Yevgeny Prigozhin, previously the owner of the Wagner Group, Patriot Media Group and the Internet Research Agency (colloquially known as the Russian troll farm), remain active — but persistence and lasting impact remain to be determined. Two Prigozhin-affiliated assets remain persistently focused on the US election: the former NAEBC profile network and the Foundation to Battle Injustice outlet, which has platformed damaging personal claims around at least one 2024 candidate since at least January 2023
• Finally, Russia-affiliated actors will likely leverage newly observed tactics empowered by new technology — generative AI. Since at least July 2023, Russia-affiliated actors have utilised innovative methods to engage audiences in Russia and the west with inauthentic, but increasingly sophisticated, multimedia content. These actors publish videos spoofing legitimate media coverage of fake content espousing Kremlin-preferred narratives delegitimizing Ukraine and casting blame for the current Israel and Gaza conflict on the US and Ukraine.

SOCIAL MEDIA

The UNESCO survey shows that on average in the 16 countries surveyed, 56% of internet users frequently use social media to stay informed about current events, far ahead of television (44%). 

But there are differences among population groups: television is the primary source in the most developed countries (55% compared to 37% for social media), while it lags significantly in countries with high (42% vs 63%) or medium/low levels of Human Development Index (HDI) (37% vs 68%)

“Traditional media, especially television, are the most trusted sources in terms of credibility and quality of the news they provide to the public.” 

“Overall, 66% of those surveyed have trust in the news broadcast on television, 63% in radio news, and 61% in print media news, compared to only 50% for news gathered from social media.”

“Across all 16 countries, 68% of internet users told us that social media is the place where disinformation is most widespread, far ahead of groups on online messaging apps (38%) and media websites/apps (20%). This sentiment is overwhelmingly prevalent in all countries, age groups, social backgrounds, and political preferences”, the UNESCO survey says.