Ruth George Lwakatare
Good morning, good afternoon and good evening to everyone joining us from around the world. Thank you so much for being here today. This is a Common Futures Conversations community webinar on countering disinformation. My name is Ruth George and I am a proud member of the CFC community. I am currently pursuing a Bachelor of Laws with International Relations, but I like to joke that law is my side hustle. My full-time job and where my passion truly lies, is as the founder of Tukue Pamoja, an organisation dedicated to amplifying African voices and equipping the continent’s youth to realise their full potential and contribute meaningfully to Africa’s progress.
It is an honour to be chairing this event, and I am excited for the discussions ahead. For those unfamiliar, Common Futures Conversations is a Chatham House Centenary project, centred on bringing together young people from Africa and Europe to develop their knowledge of the most pressing current issues. The aim is to give young people a seat at the table in important policy discussions. The CFC community conducts three-month policy design cycles, where we engage with specific topics and experts, to develop our knowledge of the policy area, before writing our own policy solutions to address challenges and opportunities that we have identified.
This event is the culmination of the community’s engagement with countering disinformation. Over the past few months, the community has learnt about disinformation and has worked together to come up with solutions to counter it. I would like to extend a special welcome to members of the Common Futures Conversations community, as well as Chatham House members who are joining us for this event. We would also like to welcome everyone else who is joining us today. Thank you so much for your participation.
Just a few housekeeping rules before we officially get started. This event is a webinar and all attendees will be muted throughout, but you will be able to use the Q&A function to ask questions throughout the event. We will also have a dedicated Q&A time, at which point you may raise your hand if you would like to ask a question out loud. If you are selected to ask a question, you will be granted the ability to unmute yourself. We will try to get to as many questions as time allows.
I am delighted to be joined by Sam Nazari, Lead Researcher at the Alliance4Europe, and Co-ordinator of the Counter Disinformation Network. Sam is an Open Source Intelligence Researcher, focusing on Chinese and Russian influence operations. Sam, thank you for being here, and we’re excited to hear from you tonight. So, without further ado, over to you.
Saman Nazari
Thank you, Ruth. Okay, let me see if I can share my screen. Okay, ‘share’. There we go, awesome. Yeah, hi, I’m going to talking with you about some of the work that we did during the European Parliament elections, in building a coalition and doing – to counter influence operations. And before I get into that, let me tell you about Alliance4Europe. We are a European nonprofit organisation, working to protect European democracy and create communities for impact. Our approach to studying this issue is to not look at if something is true or false, but rather, look at the manipulative behaviours. So, we look at influence operations and information manipulation. We’re trying to understand the underlying issues that allow disinformers, or threat actors, or whatever you want to call them, to be able to do harm in the information space.
The approach we use is – and the framework that guides our work, is the DISARM Framework, which is a common taxonomy that describes disinformation behaviours, so tactics and techniques used by disinformers to try to deceive populations and manipulate the information space. It’s been adopted by the European, you know, Commission, the European External Action Service, and a whole bunch of, you know, different international organisations, civil society organisations and so on, and it’s quite useful.
So, I want to initially to just start talking with you about some of the challenges that our community of defenders is facing. When I talk about the ‘defender community’, I’m talking about the organisations who are trying to counter influence operations, disinformation and issues like this. And sadly, as we’ve been seeing in – well, lately in the US, authoritarian forces are, kind of, winning, and they’re really, you know, growing and they’re gaining support, and it is a major threat to our democracies.
The defender community is rather splintered. There is Fact-Checkers, Journalists, Open-Source Intelligence Researchers, Academics and so on, and a lot of us are working, you know, quite separately. You know, maybe some of us are working together on some projects, but the community is quite splintered, with some very few exceptions. We’re also facing an issue where we have quite limited resources, compared to the issues that – you know, the actors that we’re facing and, you know, having this combination of splintered community and limited resources is not ideal.
The research community, which is the community within the defender community, which is doing the practical research, the threat detection and so on, is also partially disconnected from the responder community, which is the actors who are, you know, doing strategic communication, they do media literacy and so on. There’s very little communication between these two different spheres, in many cases, and we’ve seen major issues happening due to this, as – in relation to, for example, the Moldovan elections and the Romanian elections now, most recently. There’s also an issue of knowledge valorisation, which, kind of, ties into this, where we’re producing a lot of research tools, methodologies and so on, which are not reaching the people who need to, you know, to get access to them.
So, when the European Parliament elections came around, a month before they started, we got funding to create this coalition, and initially, it was just meant to be a coalition to work together on protecting the European Parliament elections from, you know, influence operations. And it was, so, you know, a community of Researchers, OSINT Researchers, Journalists, Fact-Checkers and Academics from a wide range of organisations from around Europe. We ended up becoming around 130 participants, 30 participating organisations, I think, between 30 and 40 organisations, and together we produced, or got sent to, 30 incident reports, which outlined, you know, cases of influence operations. And we had around 30 advocacy meetings, where we spoke with policymakers, platforms and a wide range of different stakeholders, who can maybe take more long-term measures against the issues that we saw.
To illustrate, kind of, what I’m talking about when I say ‘influence operations’, I’m going to bring to you two Russian influence operations that we saw. One is called the ‘Doppelgänger’, and it’s mimicking Western media. So, they’re creating websites that are looking like Western media, and then they’re publishing articles claiming that these – which are, you know, promoting Russian narratives. And they’re promoting these articles through Twitter and Meta primarily, using, you know, anonymous accounts that are posing as regular people and then, through this, reaching significant amounts of people. And we’ve found a way, or rather CeMAS, one of our partner organisations, found a way to automatically collect these tweets, and we highlighted that while these issues are well-known. And Twitter has been informed about exactly how it’s operating, and that we, with very little resources, are very easily able to find these tweets, Twitter, or X, is not doing anything about this.
Another one which we actually managed to do something about is a cluster of Facebook pages which were posing as different segments of French society. They were calling themselves “Muslims of France,” “African Diaspora in France,” “French Patriots,” and catering to the far-right and so on. And while building communities around themselves, they were also using unlabelled political ads, so – which were attacking Macron and Ukraine. We traced back this network to West Africa, to Burkina Faso, Mali, Benin, countries where we know that what was – what used to be called the Wagner private military group, which has now been integrated into the Russian military, is operating. We managed to get this network taken down right before the French – the second French – you know, the run of the French elections.
The network was quite useful, and people want to continue, so we decided to continue it, and now we shaped it into just a collaborative platform where organisations from all around the world can meet and work together. But also, a crisis response platform where we can, you know, bring together people very quickly in times of a crisis or a major event, such as, the German elections that are coming up now, and the Romanian elections that were – and quickly respond together. And, also, to, like – with the limited resources we have, to complement each other’s work.
Also standard – it’s also a standardised system for knowledge valorisation. We’re creating a mailing list that – where organisations can amplify their content, the things that they produce, to a wide range of people, so that their – you know, the articles and reports reach people that can do something about, reuse the work that they’re producing. It’s also [audio cuts out – 10:23] between Practitioners from all around the world, so we’re expanding the network, and we’re expanding the network beyond Europe, to also now include the US, Taiwan and Ukraine, Moldova, and – Moldova is Europe but not EU, and so on. And we’re hoping to continue this and connect with other networks, so we can learn from each other at round tables, to discuss the common issues that we’re facing, and hopefully, create a more global – create global efforts. Thank you so much. That’s it.
Ruth George Lwakatare
Thank you so much, Sam, for sharing all the impactful work that you’re doing. Your expertise and insights truly set the stage for the diverse solutions we’re about to hear. I would now, like, to invite the members of the Common Futures Conversations community to present their policy ideas. These solutions were written in response to the prompt, “How can we effectively counter disinformation in a fractured geopolitical order?” The solutions that you will hear were the proposals that received the most votes from the Common Futures Conversations community. I will invite each community member to pitch their proposal for five minutes, before turning to Sam to provide a brief feedback. First up, we’ll hear from Faith Chelangat, a CFC member from Kenya. Faith will be presenting her idea on countering disinformation through empowering Journalists. Faith, the floor is yours.
Faith Chelangat
Thank you, Ruth, and I’ll go straight to my solution. I titled my policy suggestion, “Debunking Misinformation and Building Journalist Capacities.” One of the things that we have seen is the proliferation of digital platforms and how it has revolutionised how we disseminate and consume information across board. I come from Kenya and during the 20 –recent 2024 protest that we had against the government, we saw how misinformation spread and can impact how the government reacts, and, also, how communities react across different platforms. We mig – we saw how digital platforms, like X, Facebook and WhatsApp, were central spreading misinformation and how the widespread can easily spread false narrative, and, also – and gain traction easily if it’s not debunked. That’s my thought on debunking misinformation.
While looking at the challenge that we are presented by CFC, one thing that came to my mind is what Ukraine is currently doing. I came across Stop Fake News, whereby they put together – they have a platform that put together all the informations and then – all the information that is out there put by the different channels that are spreading fake news about the ongoing crisis. And they verify and say which news is not correct and which one – and also give a section which shows which news should be followed/which news is actually accurate as per what they have verified. And that gave me the challenge of whereby there is need for more of such platforms across board. And to build on these, and I thought about the bit of media literacy, and then, also, having Journalist – media literacy and Journalists, and then also having more grassroots media literacy, cutting across from Journalists, and then also on grassroot. I thought when we build communities of Journalists, and, also, at the grassroot level, that are more resilient to fake news, and by borrowing from some of these platforms that are really – already existing, we will be able to easily fact-check and verify information that is out there.
And some of the challenges that I thought would come when it comes to implementing this, and – sorry, I didn’t say for my context on this, I’m thinking of having something for the region, the Eastern Africa region, something that can be used across the different countries in the region. One thing, one of the challenges that I saw is, most of the platforms that we currently have centred to – centred around elect – are centred around election period, but spread of misinformation and disinformation cuts – goes across election – across and beyond election period. Like, we’ve seen again in the recent protests, and then, also, with the ongoing situation across the region, this is my focus, is the whole of Africa. Sorry for that.
And I think that’s where there’s a gap in terms of why – the existing projects that we have that only cover mostly election periods, and we don’t go beyond that, that’s what I thought might be a major challenge on that. And, on my policy, some of the reval – relevant stakeholders that I think need to be brought on board not only includes the government, but then, also, the grassroot processes that we have, including community leaders, and then also religious leaders, depending on the different country context. And then, also, media houses and Journalists, because like I’ve said, my focus is on focusing our train – focusing media literacy, Journalists and also at the local level.
I’m looking at this policy being more of regional level, that is cutting across the countries in the whole of Africa, and then, also, hoping at that point we’ll be able to have more localisation. Because we share a lot of procedures that cut across, as we – that cut across these countries, and I think having a centralised process whereby we are able to tackle misinformation in the whole of Africa, will easily build capacity both of the Journalists who cover across the region, but then, also, ensure that the countries have, like, policies that are regulated at that level. And whom I think will be responsible for implementing and maintaining this particular policy, both the government at the national level, and then, also, the different CSOs and CBOs working at the community level, so that it’s not just left at the national or at the community level. And that’s it from me.
Ruth George Lwakatare
Thank you, Faith. Over to you, Sam, for brief feedback.
Saman Nazari
Thank you. So, I really like this project. It’s trying to bring people together, and it’s always something that’s very good to do. There’s many different actors in this space, in a society, rather, that needs to work together to be able to counter this issue on that systemic level, and I think this project is capturing that quite well. There is a few things I’ve been considering when it comes to your proposal, and I think the first thing that came to mind is the concept of fake news. In the debates that we’ve had now, the last couple of years, we’re trying to move away from the concept of fake news. It’s not very well-defined, and it’s not – it’s very politicised, due to Trump. So, we’re trying to instead talk about, you know, disinformation, misinformation, influence operations, and other terms like this, which are a bit more better defined.
Most of the information that we’re seeing right now that’s manipulative in nature, intentionally manipulative in nature, usually isn’t necessarily false. It’s – many times, it’s just opinions or views that have been promoted in an unethical or untransparent way, so they aren’t really many times fake. And it’s good to make a distinction between what is misinformation, meaning that, you know, it’s not intentionally false, and what is disinformation, when there is an actor who’s trying to push a false information, or to – trying to manipulate. Fact-checking, in my experience, and in, you know, the things I read recently, it’s a really good tool to counter misinformation. But when it comes to disinformation, you’re literally fighting an actor who is using facts as a tool to reach an objective, so they’re using lies to reach an objective. Lying itself is not the objective, the objective is to gain power, to gain money, etc., etc. Hmmm, ah, very good.
And then, it’s – I think it’s good to, instead, look at – when you’re looking at disinformation, to look at the infrastructures used, the techniques used, the methods that they’re using to be able to get their messages out there, and then by understanding this, maybe you can stop it, you can create countermeasures. So, if they’re, for example, using – you know, they’re going to places of worship, for example, to have conversations then with, you know, religious leaders, and inform them about, you know, “This – they are – they’re not just regular people, they’re coming here, they’re deceiving you,” etc., and then the, you know, the community itself is inoculated.
Debunking, in itself, it’s also a great tool when it comes to misinformation, but prebunking is also good. So, if you’re going up aga – in an election, or it’s a major event happening, if you know that there is something that’s going to happen in the future, that there have already been some narratives around in the past, it’s good to maybe be able to put good information out there already, without necessarily repeating the false information. Let’s also try to team up with Investigative Journalists who can work on understanding, you know, how are these operations happening? I think that’s it, but yeah, that’s really good idea, I think.
Faith Chelangat
Yeah, I think I like the idea of prebunking information, and I’m going to explore that further as I look at this further. Sorry, just one thing on what you’ve said, I think on fact-checking, just – so as also to just avoid some form of censorship, I think it, kind of like, promotes transparency when it preserves a bit of freedom of expression, when you just let people learn how to fact-check what is right, and then just leave the rest of the fake news to just flow through. So, yeah, thank you.
Ruth George Lwakatare
Thank you. Next up we have Peter Mumford, a CFC member from the UK, who will be discussing his policy solution on “Countering False Historical Narratives.” Over to you, Peter.
Peter Mumford
Hi everyone, I’m Peter. Yeah, my – so, my solution’s entitled “Countering False Historical Narratives.” So, yeah, so, the global proliferation of dis – as – of disinformation, and by disinformation here, I mean the deliberate dissemination of intentionally misleading or false information, may be relatively recent in nature, but much of the content of today’s disinformation is actually far from modern. The people spreading disinformation increasingly seek to reshape and rewrite historical narratives, sometimes embellishing historical facts, sometimes actually twisting them into outright fabrications.
History, from the recent past to the ancient world, has become the frontline in today’s information wars, and the weaponisation of this history has been particularly accentuated by social media, in which actors can uncritically share information that’s designed to create shock and outrage, rather than just informing about the truth of the past. Young people, who are social media’s most prolific users, are particularly vulnerable, and whether it’s spread by a state running a targeted campaign or an independent actor seeking profit or attention, disinformation tactics are constantly evolving to become increasingly sophisticated and targeted, and efforts to counter them must therefore follow suit.
One example of state-level disinformation that seeks to create an alternative history is Russia’s newly issued school history textbooks, that reinterpret not only the events of the current invasion of Ukraine, but also, the entire history of the Russian nation, in line with the regime-approved propaganda. And the aim of this is to indoctrinate children with a Kremlin-approved version of history, that both whitewashes historical atrocities committed by the country, but also, distorts their account of more recent events, to emphasise the supposedly malign role of Western influence, and kind of, imbue their view of history with the regime propaganda.
So, yeah, historical disinformation targets people whose understanding of history may be relatively limited, but also, people who interpret the past through a political or ideological viewpoint, which is in line with the aims of the of the disinformation campaign. And people tend to accept or reject information based on pre-existing attitudes or opinions. So, for instance, a negative view towards a particular country or individual might make someone more likely to believe a conspiracy theory which claims that this country or individual is actually secretly responsible for a particular event, or often a catastrophic event, in the past. And it’s actually relatively simple for these campaigns, these illicit influence campaigns, to repurpose genuine historical facts and information and then reinterpret them in line with their new narrative, and in areas with traumatic historical pasts, this can be particularly damaging. So, it’s vital to recognise the potential risks posed by historical disinformation and to address and confront the issue.
So, my policy solution idea would be to create an online platform which focuses on mitigating the impact of historical disinformation on a global scale. This platform will provide information and resources to help people recognise, avoid and combat the false historical narratives that they encounter in media or social media, and information and resources will be available in multiple languages. And this platform would have country-specific sections, that contain resources pertaining to a particular country or region, and that would aim to promote reliable sources of historical facts that are easily accessible, but also, with re – pro – also, providing people with resources that accurately explain a particular event or period of history.
And this would, sort of, function as a database of sorts. It would be a constantly evolving process, and it could be added to as the platform partners with different organisations across the world, and initially, it would focus on contentious or controversial historical events or issues. And this – yeah, the – so, there could also be events, campaigns, partnerships with likeminded organisations, and work to amplify the work of other organisations with similar values and goals.
And I’m aware that there are obviously existing initiatives that are similar to this one, and so, this would complement these other efforts, but my proposal would have a narrower focus. It would centre in particular on historical disinformation and the potential impact of false historical narratives, and by providing country-specific resources and information in different languages, it could have a broader global reach. The idea, ultimately, would be to provide people with the tools they need to recognise and counter historical disinformation and enable them to gain a deeper and more accurate understanding of the past, in order to safeguard the future.
Ruth George Lwakatare
[Pause] Thank you, Peter, for that insightful proposal. Over to Sam for feedback.
Saman Nazari
Thank you, Peter. It’s a – I think you also found an interesting issue, because, indeed, historical revisionism is a interesting topic, which is – we’re seeing more and more of around the world. Even in Japan we’re seeing it, which is quite interesting. I have some questions. What type of platform are you envisioning this to be, a website with text or videos, or – I think, yeah, that’s the first question I – which would also shape the rest my answers.
Peter Mumford
Do you want me to answer now or do you want to…?
Saman Nazari
Yes, please.
Peter Mumford
Yeah, okay, yeah, so, the idea would probably be some, sort of, website, and it would, sort of – so, the idea would be to partner, as I said before, to partner with other – with regional-specific organisations. And so, essentially, it would be a website which would be evolving, and which would also have links to partners’ websites, so it’d be more like a data – some kind of database. It probably – it might have videos, but that – again, that would depend on the scale and how much it would grow or – yeah, okay.
Saman Nazari
Really cool. Okay, so, I would say one of the things that are – it’s good to know – think about is that, yeah, there is a bunch of projects which are trying to, basically, create knowledge bases for people to get access to accurate information, and these…
Peter Mumford
Hmmm hmm.
Saman Nazari
Many of these projects are struggling with the fact that people just don’t like reading and going to websites. So, one of the main challenges I see with your project is getting people to actually go onto this platform and accessing the content.
Peter Mumford
Hmmm.
Saman Nazari
Another thing that I’m considering is, also, legitimacy and scepticism towards the West. I think it’s really good the approach you have with partnering with loc – with organisations, especially with local organisations, ‘cause I think the history of colonialism of the West, in many different contexts, creates issues of trust, between, you know, between Western organisations and local populations.
Peter Mumford
Hmmm hmm.
Saman Nazari
And with this, if you then try to go and say, like, “This is the version of history that’s correct,” you know…
Peter Mumford
Hmmm, yeah.
Saman Nazari
…why would they believe you? Where does the legitimacy come from? It’s a major challenge, I think, in general, when we go out and talk with the global majority.
Peter Mumford
Yeah, and…
Saman Nazari
So…
Peter Mumford
…actually – that’s actually why I was – that actually is why I included the partnering with organisations as part of the thing. I definitely do not envisage this as, sort of, a platform where a couple of people in the West, basically, tell the rest of the world what their true history is. I’m 100% not ex – promoting that.
Saman Nazari
No.
Peter Mumford
The whole idea would be that – and, also, the understanding – and wha – each individual, kind of, country or society is going to have a much better understanding of their own history than people from elsewhere in the world. So, the idea would be very much to platform people in that region who are promote – who are, basically, also working, you know, in counter-disinformation and promoting historical truth and accuracy. So, like – so, first off, yeah, that would hopefully solve some of the issues with scepticism, so it wouldn’t, sort of, be a top-down approach, where we’re, kind of, imposing one vision.
And the other thing, in terms of the accuracy in content and the problems of accessibility, I completely also appreciate that that is – that could be an issue, and again, we would probably try and – I mean, it wouldn’t – it’s not going to be like Wikipedia. We’re not – the – again, the idea would not be to, kind of, be giving people, sort of, a, like, a whole block of text. I think that – again, hopefully in terms of partnering with other organisations, hopefully we would be able to build on some of their work, which would probably be some form of, like, multimedia, including videos and including more interactive ways of learning.
So, essentially, the idea is to attract people who are interested in learning more, that’s true, but also, you don’t want to bore people, put them off, or feel – or make them feel like they’re reading a book. It – I mean – so, possibly short - shorter videos, or shorter pieces of text with images, and so, I think that could be helpful. And again, as it would grow, it would hopefully expand, also, in terms of the breadth of the content.
Saman Nazari
Cool, so that’s really good. Yeah, I think if you can overcome these two challenges, and I think partnering with the local organisations is perfect for that, I think it’s a really good – a really, really good project.
Ruth George Lwakatare
Awesome. Finally, we have Nosipho Dube of South Africa, who will present her policy solution titled, “Mzansi Ekasi Café on Disinformation,” Over to you, Nosipho.
Nosipho Dube
Okay, thank you. Thank you so much, Ruth and I hope that I’m audible to everyone. So, hi everyone, my name is Nosipho, and I am from South Africa. So, my policy is titled “An Ekasi” – ekasi refers to the townships, and it’s a disinformation café. The reason why I decided to take this approach is because it was my – due – I – when attending the London Conference, it was my first time being exposed to an environment of a democracy café, and seeing the work that CFC, along with organisations such as My Life and My Say doing – bringing them together. And the running thought I had throughout that process was realising, oh, this is really nice, but also, realising that how many other young people in my country and throughout Southern Africa would wish to be in environment similar to it, or one that is tweaked or adapted to their specific context, in that style of a democracy café?
So, my approach is taking the very approach of a democracy café, but inverting it in such a way that it accommodates the young people who live in townships. Townships are the rural ghettos that are commonly found here in South Africa. And it intends to further educate South Africans and those residing within Southern Africa, to better navigate information, misinformation and disinformation, but to do so in a way that recognises specific socioeconomic contexts and bring less – and bring more access to formal media literacy training, in environments where others may not necessarily be able to do so. So that it creates an organic community-led approach to combating false information, as opposed to top-down intervention.
So, townships are underdeveloped areas in South Africa, and it’s a – very much a legacy that is part of Apartheid, and on my – from my own context and family, where both my maternal and paternal side, both my parents were born and raised in townships, which – of which my late grandfather has a huge imprint and legacy in one of them that my father’s from, as well. And at the core in the landscape of townships are what are called ‘spaza shops’, so it’s Zulu for a convenience store, for buying food and snacks, as well as, internet cafés, which are essentially shops and hubs for internet connectivity and Wi-Fi that you are allowed to go into and make use of that space and environment at a fee. But I do feel that in a context of increased fake news and insurmountable information, of digital literacy, the importance of reusing and revamping those spaces, because they are already trusted and familiar spaces within communities.
And when writing my dissertation, albeit during COVID lockdown, on “Digital Inequality on Education Within the South African Context,” I touched on the importance of townships and community-based led interventions, especially in my father’s home township of Mabopane, and especially as education inequality is a challenge that further effects South Africa’s youth and ties into the divide of a knowledge-based society.
So, considering that I’ve – I thought that it would be worthwhile to open – to work on the pre-existing spaces through what I call a ‘container customisation’, which is essentially an inexpensive building technique that has continued to take shape, especially in spaces such as underfunded schools in rural areas, where buildings may have been damaged, and those starting out small coffee shops. Because it repurposes redundant shipping containers into standalone structures, of which they could play a key role in curbing the divide and creating that conducive space for people to meet and create a café-type environment, as well. And it will also be environmentally friendly.
I do emphasise the fact that, in doing so, it must be off the grid and must work on solar, because not only will it be environmentally friendly, but will also be working in knowing that it is a conducive space for all people. Especially as South Africa does have a track record of rolling blackouts, which are known to be load shedding, so knowing that is a – that it will be a conducive space, whereby South Africans can come together and not feel that any session or any form of training will be disrupted from that.
But I do believe it’s also important to add the caveat that I do see it as something that could be positive for community engagement, but also, to know that it could be an opportunity to also address the most immediate and pertinent issues that certain communities are facing, especially as South Africa is a country that is very much characterised by poverty, inequality and unemployment. You know, so, whether one is in a township in South Africa, a favela in Rio de Janeiro, in Brazil, or a slum in Asia, all under-resourced communities have pertinent community issues that need addressing. So, finding ways of concurrently raising awareness on disinformation, misinformation and community engagement with community leaders and local government levels within those spaces, I see is really key for creating transformative change at the local level.
But with that being said, I want to also add the importance of a sense of doing so in a way that enhances education in the context of the AU Agenda 2063, of African solutions to African problems. So, one of the most important ways in which I want to highlight this is the importance of language and translation in doing so, and creating knowledge production for those who live in rural communities. And young people to also activate their own agency in contributing to translation, because you don’t want to find oneself inadvertently being – operating in silos whereby on – information and everything pertaining to the importance of disinformation is only given in English. Especially in a continent whereby they lack – we have the largest body of young people. English may not necessarily be one’s mother tongue language, and in South Africa, the country of 12 official languages, many South Africans speak more than one language, and chances are English is not their mother language.
So, if – through more and more of these community engagements and more and more of it growing, it shouldn’t be a case whereby a young person who’s based in, be it Francophone Africa, or even Lusophone Africa, feel that they don’t have the agency to get the necessary training, but also, to further educate those in their community, in their home language, of different demographics, be it someone who’s older or someone who’s younger. So, it gets to that point where someone who’s based in, be it Angola or Cape Verde can also feel like, you know what – in Portuguese, articulating themselves to say, “Okay, you know what, as a young person, you know, [mother tongue], that I also have the capacity to educate myself and others within my community, in Portuguese, in Portuguese, or in my mother tongue, in a way that feels comfortable.” But also, seeing how that, as it build and cascades over time, can also further contribute to the African Union’s Agenda 2063.
But I also want to also highlight the fact that in the context, again, of South Africa, it can further add to the importance of the South African school curriculum, especially for underfunded schools, and allow for more on disinformation to be part of the curriculum. Especially as within the South African school curriculum, there is very much a social science-based subjects, known as LO, or life orientation, that all students from primary all the way through to high school take. So, seeing as how that can form a part of the curriculum of LO, as well, can be quite crucial. Especially whereby, it’s important to – well, I want to know that within the context of South Africa, unfortunately, now AI has infiltrated the WhatsApp space, of which people from many vulnerable communities could fall victim to, especially in terms of misinformation, of spreading it throughout WhatsApp. And now it’s – throughout news context, many people have been told to be highly aware of AI-generated voice notes through WhatsApp.
So, if a relative of mine who may live in an informal town could randomly get an AI-generated voice note that sounds so much like me, and they immediately think, oh my goodness, it’s Nosipho and she needs assistance with one, two and three, only to realise then later on, when I tell that relative, “But that was not me in the first place talking to you.” So, it’s important to also know that – find those echo chambers and microwaves of pushing that as an – different agenda points within those specific cafés and hubs, and tackling misinformation spread and disinformation spread, I feel. And the reason why I feel like it’s also important to note, is the importance of just community and bringing people together, because it takes the exposure, more than anything, of someone to then learn what they can do to enhance and better improve in creating that transformative change. So, never underestimate the importance of starting very small.
So, ‘cause I’m Zulu and Setswana, there’s actually a expression that I’ve always grown up hearing, which more or less shares the same sentiment as Ubuntu, and that’s [mother tongue] which translate to – which translates to, “I am because you are,” or, “A person is a person because of other people.” So, that’s why – at the core of why I decided to take this localised approach in tackling disinformation, is the importance of the fact that, based on the expression that I’ve grown up knowing, emphasise the interconnectedness of individuals within your community, but also, the importance of co-operation and mutual support, and a way – as a significant reminder of community harmony. So, even though we’ll be living in a context of disinformation, AI-tuned content, it’s important to know that we – there are many that you could potentially leave behind, and to make sure that one makes – ensures that that does not take place.
Ruth George Lwakatare
Thank you so much, Nosipho, for such a creative and community driven proposal. Over to you, Sam, for feedback.
Saman Nazari
Surprise, surprise, I love the community aspect of this, as I said in the previous feedbacks, as well, but yeah, I think it’s really, really interesting. It’s quite a different approach than I’ve seen before, to challenge this issue, and I really like it. Bringing people together, I think, is indeed a good approach, and having people teach each other, rather than having this top-down, you know, “I know best and you should do as I say,” approach is, kind of – it’s very refreshing and very good. And I also really like the aspect that you’re, basically – are you suggesting creating these type of internet café, kind of, things, or going to existing ones?
Nosipho Dube
So, going into existing ones and then building from the ground up, and basically, reinvigorating how they are.
Saman Nazari
Okay, yeah, it’s amazing. It’s going to where people already are, and that, I think, is usually something that I feel a lot of organisations, a lot of initiatives, miss, that it’s really hard to get people to come to you, but it’s a lot easier for us to go to them, and I think this captures that very well. One of the challenges that I see is that there might be a lot of pushback in some communities, and you might only be able to reach the people who are already converted. And I’m also considering, like, would these internet cafés be willing to accept you going there and doing this? Would they not be afraid of you politicising their business?
Nosipho Dube
Ah, okay. No, I see where you’re coming from. I do understand the issue of politicisation and that role that it can play. But I think, again, a important part would be knowing that in doing so, having those within the local government who already work as local government leaders, who are appointed within those specific local government leaders, to have them onboard beforehand, so that in the process of coming within those communities, knowing that the gov – local government leaders basically approved and show to the community that, “Listen, this is not anything that in any way, shape or form allows for those creep-ins to take place, and is independent of it,” as well as bringing other community leaders from different spheres. So be it religious community leaders, community leaders from youth-based organisations, community leaders from schools, be it primary schools or high schools within that community, to try and ensure that that creep-in does not take place. I hope it answers…
Saman Nazari
Okay.
Nosipho Dube
…the question.
Saman Nazari
I was more thinking around, you know, like, internet cafés, as I understand them, and this might be different in the context you’re talking about, are companies or businesses. And usually – well, at least, this is a very Western perspective and I could be completely off here, please excuse me if that’s the case, but businesses usually are worried when you bring in things that are political, ‘cause that can create division and scare away people. It’s more about the businesses, if they’re willing to actually collaborate on doing something like this or not.
Nosipho Dube
Yes, no, 100%, I do understand that, as well. So, I think it would also be worth noting that to avoid that, to also bring in the important of respective business unions, or business unions that are specifically regist – that – whereby the specific business is registered and a particular union, as well, to also bring them on board to the table within that process. And in further, not to say convincing, but I guess, in further demonstrating to that respective business the collaborative potential that could be seen from it in that – in the case that that may take place.
Saman Nazari
Cool. I think also it does help that you’re, you know – you’re going to help them also build up their, kind of, their space and improve it, and so on. I think that’s a good incentive, as well. Yeah, really cool project, as well. All of you, like, well done, everyone.
Ruth George Lwakatare
Awesome. Thank you to all our presenters for such thoughtful and brilliant solutions. We now open the floor for a Q&A session. You are welcome to direct your questions to Sam or any of the CFC members who’ve presented, so that’s Faith, Peter or Nosipho. Please use the Q&A function to submit your question, or raise your hand, and if selected, I’ll invite you to unmute, this may take a minute, and you’ll be able to ask your question directly.
We’ll begin with Josephine, you’ve had your hand raised for a while [pause]. Josephine, you can unmute yourself and talk [pause]. Alright, we’ll move into the Q&A box. We have a question from Ola Lekan, forgive me if I’m mispronouncing your name. “With major social media platforms increasingly seen as harbingers and purveyors of disinformation, prompting key individuals, institutions, corporations and even sports agencies, to abandon them, how can we, as youth, actively contribute to countering disinformation and restoring trust in digital spaces [pause]?” Who’d like to tackle that question? Go ahead, Sam.
Saman Nazari
It’s a really good question, and I honestly don’t know if I have a good answer. The issue that we’re facing, I think a lot of the – large part of the issue is that there is people who are using social media as a tool to harm. So, maybe if we instead try to use social media to do good, that would also be – would maybe make it more attractive. If we try to – you know, because I think a lot of us, and me included, honestly, have left social media outside of my work, ‘cause it’s just such a toxic place. If we instead make it a – well, if we – maybe not X, for example, which is what everyone I think abandoning, but now if, for example, Bluesky is now actually growing. If we go to Bluesky, and we use it as a platform for good, where we’re engaging with each other and we’re, you know, having civil conversations and trying to, yeah, point out and stop disinformers from taking it over, that might be a good – think it’s a good thing to do, but yeah, quite hard, I think.
Faith Chelangat
Yeah, I think another thing could be using the skills that the youth have in, kind of, restoring some form of trust in some of the digital platforms. But then, also, by using these platforms to create and share, like, truthful content, so that we are not contributing to the different – we are not contributing to disinformation and misinformation. And also, as you – there is a role where we need to participate in, kind of like, community driven fact-checking, kind of, initiatives, so that we are not leaving fact-checking and we are not leaving debunking of harmful content only to people – to Journalists, i.e., like I spoke about. And also to people at the community level, so that also youth, we are playing our role on that.
With the access, with the access of internet and digital platforms that the youth have, there is a very big role that the youth are supposed to play when it comes to actively countering and contributing to countering disinformation, and I think, depending the space where you are from, there is a lot that you can do, but those are some.
Peter Mumford
I just wanted to agree with what Faith just said about the importance of being active to counter this kind of thing. I think it’s also important to, kind of, to be aware of, like, what the purpose is of a particular strain of disinformation, because some of it is intended to spread hate and create division within or between societies, often to the benefit of a particular movement or interest. But it can also create apathy and cause young people, particularly, to lose trust in institutions and aspects of society, and that can be because they’re being confronted with numerous competing and confusing narratives, or, kind of, more insidiously, it could be the intended outcome of a disinformation campaign to disincentivise civic participation.
So, I think it’s something that we have to address and confront, because the future of pretty much all societies does depend on it. And today’s young people, who were the first generation to have grown up with the internet and social media, they may be the most vulnerable and susceptible to disinformation because they’re the most prolific users, but they must also be the best equipped to counter it themselves. So, I’m aware that doesn’t, like, neatly answer the question, but it’s just – I think it’s just something to, yeah, think about.
Nosipho Dube
I also think in the context of young people who may feel their voices are constrained in highlighting misinformation or disinformation within their respective countries, if they’re going through post-election conflict, I think you’re looking for avenues of civil society spaces to shed light on what may be happening in their countries. And both having the back and forth through dialogue within civil society spaces to either get other additional forms of empowerment could be – play a critical part to not underestimate the importance of civil societies in the context where young people’s voices may feel constrained as a result of it [pause].
Ruth George Lwakatare
Thank you for those thoughtful response. I believe that answers the question. Please do feel free, our lovely audience, to ask more questions. There’s no bad questions, no bad answers. We’re all learning together, so go ahead and raise your hand, or put in a question in the Q&A box. In the meantime, we have another question here to the panel, “Do you think Bluesky could be the real next generation of social media usage?”
Nosipho Dube
[Pause] Probably. I mean, I remember when WhatsApp started, no-one fully understood, like, what it was or how effective it would be, and now look at how powerful WhatsApp is.
Peter Mumford
I would say that, at the very least, it looks like it’s going to be similar, but less toxic, than X, so I think that’s obviously a good thing. The problem is, the only thing that – the only problem I would say is that we – what we don’t want to do is, kind of, create, kind of, competing echo chambers. If you get the sense, there’s already some social media that is only frequented by people of a certain political bent, and I think the problem is that if you – if only people who are, sort of, more liberal or left-leaning move to Bluesky, what you’re doing is you do – is you create alternative, kind of, spaces, where narratives – and that’s not a problem for Bluesky, in particular, but it’s more of a problem for, well, X, or whatever it becomes.
And I think that what – as hard as it is sometimes, it some – it might be more – it might – disinformation might be more easily countered by going where the majority of people who might be susceptible are, and right now, that’s probably not Bluesky, but it might be. So, I think, I mean, if Elon Musk completely crashes X or something, I mean, sure, but I think that, yeah, we don’t want to lose sight of the fact that a lot of people are being exposed to a lot of misinformation right now on X. And unless you can incentivise all those people, to, kind of, move to Bluesky, en masse, that’s still going to be the, kind of, the root of the problem.
Faith Chelangat
So now…
Ruth George Lwakatare
Thank you. Oh, go ahead.
Faith Chelangat
Sorry, I believe in not leaving anyone behind. So, just like Peter said, we would – even if it’s just leaving a few people on X who still wouldn’t know what misinformation they’re being exposed to, it’s still our responsibility as someone who is – who has digital skills and as a young person, it’s our responsibility to hold every other person whom you see in position and is spreading fake news, it’s our responsibility to call it out. And also – and create or put content out there that is truthful in all the platforms that exist, and definitely for the coming future, I’m sure there are going to be more and more platforms coming up, but we shouldn’t leave anyone behind.
Ruth George Lwakatare
Thank you. We have more questions that have just come in.
Saman Nazari
Can I just…?
Ruth George Lwakatare
One from Stephen.
Saman Nazari
…quickly chime in on one thing I feel it’s also important to have in mind when it comes to X and in general for platforms. The platforms themselves also have a responsibility. I think a reason why a lot of us are leaving is because X, Elon Musk is failing that responsibility, and they’re under active investigations by the European Commission for that. It’s not solely our, you know – us as citizens, responsibility. It’s also the platform themselves who has to take responsibility. Okay, now to Stephen’s question.
Ruth George Lwakatare
Thank you, Sam. So, we have a question from Stephen for Peter. “Really excellent and interesting initiative and your example of recent Russian history textbooks is very well-chosen. Would you include UK or US culture wars, disputes over the facts and meaning of British imperial history, or the American Civil War, in your scope? For better or worse, these are now part of mainstream political debate and raise questions over how easy it is to determine the truth about history. Would be great to hear your view.”
Peter Mumford
Great question, completely agree with that. I think that that has to be included, just like it – I mean, no – I mean, just be – yeah, just because this initiative might be started in a particular country, it doesn’t mean that country will be exempt, all countries are exempt. And I would say that 100%, both those issues are being weaponised in the so-called “culture wars.” And this is part of – this is actually what I had in – I mean, when I came up with the idea of the – of, kind of, countering historical narratives, I was thinking of Russia and Ukraine, but I was also thinking of the, yeah, the so-called ‘culture wars’ in the UK and America, and how, essentially, that is now, sort of, feeding some rather disturbing interpretations of history that fits certain people’s political narrative.
But I think that one of the other things is that there are – a lot of these issues for a lot of countries are both very controversial, oft – sometimes contested, with multiple interpretations, and often traumatic, because – and they often concern atrocities. And I think that it’s important to be able to discuss this, kind of – that stuff, because if you don’t discuss it, then that leaves the door open to people who can twist – who have an interest in twisting it into their particular interpretation. So, I think that there are, as I said in my speech, there are certain times in which you would have to, sort of, offer alternative interpretations, by saying, you know, “We don’t know the precise truth of why this this happ – why this person did this or why this happened, but here are some theories or explanations,” or something. So, I think sometimes we’d have to go down that route, but I think for certain, those two examples that you’ve mentioned in the question, that we – those would definitely be included.
Ruth George Lwakatare
[Pause] Awesome, thank you, Peter. We have one more question, directed for Sam. We are going over time. Sam, do you have time to answer this question?
Saman Nazari
[Pause] Hmmm, so “How…
Ruth George Lwakatare
Are you able to hear me?
Saman Nazari
…import” – sorry?
Ruth George Lwakatare
“How important is physically seeing and hearing each other as a strategy for countering disinformation or illicit information operations? Why do initiatives that follow in the spirit of democracy cafés work? I completely agree that building a sense of community and tying opinions to human faces can help counter polarisation and support community resilience in the face of illicit influence operations. Would love to hear your thoughts.”
Saman Nazari
Okay, I am a Researcher who usually looks at the issue, not always at the solutions. So, what I’m saying now is mostly based on rather anecdotal experiences I’ve had myself, and not based on my professional experience, so disclaimer. But in general, I think when you meet someone face-to-face, it’s a lot harder to dehumanise them. It’s a lot harder to see – to, you know, just see them as a number or an enemy, or something like this. People are just a lot more comfortable with people they meet, and it’s a lot harder for them to be angry and violent, you know, verbally violent towards them. And it’s easier, I think, for people to sit down and listen to each other when they meet. I think that in itself is quite good and important.
And I think, yeah, just getting people together and getting people talking, instead of talking against each other or, you know, sitting in front of a screen, just slowing down a bit. You know, the internet is a very fast-paced place, while a face-to-face meeting is quite slow, like, you know, we’re seeing right now, and I think, yeah, that’s why it might work better. And just having a community, having a sense of belonging, all of these things are actually things that the threat actors, so the disinformers, are using. They’re trying to create communities themselves, and we can do the same, but just doing that for good instead.
Ruth George Lwakatare
Thank you for that response, Sam, and with that, we’ve reached the end of our time together. I want to extend my heartfelt thanks to Sam for sharing his expertise with us, to our incredible CFC members, Faith, Peter and Nosipho, for presenting your thoughtful policy ideas, and to everyone in the audience for joining us and making this conversation so enriching. Thank you once again, and we look forward to seeing you at future CFC events.
Saman Nazari
Thank you, and again, well done, everyone.
Nosipho Dube
Thank you.
Peter Mumford
Thanks.
Member
Thank you all so much. Have a lovely night.
