The incentives of social media for both users and companies are at odds with the nuance and de-escalation requirements of transitional justice. This, writes Mesfin Fikre Woldmariam, could have dangerous implications for the future.
Transitional justice (TJ) peace talks require the participation of many stakeholders and entities. These include the families of victims, government, civil society organisations, researchers, and the media.
Increasingly, social media are the default platforms where the majority of Ethiopians get their everyday information. People usually read and watch content that comes their way (through algorithmic recommendation) rather than deliberately searching for content of interest. But, in a country with low levels of digital literacy, many people don’t doubt the authenticity of the content they watch or read. This creates a good business opportunity for irresponsible entrepreneurs to generate and circulate content that is fake but engaging and to make revenue out of it. Content that is looking to engage rather than inform can find an audience in societies going through emotionally difficult moments, such as those that require transitional justice. But this fake content can influence how society regards the credibility of transitional justice processes.
Digital literacy, social media, and justice
Digital media literacy in its early stages in Ethiopia. The country has a strong oral tradition, which means that oral content shared from peer to peer is more easily trusted than, for example, government documents. If the content is religious, ethnic, and or political in nature, many in society take it for granted. In a social media world, where there are many content creators with different motives, such societies are exposed to a variety of misinformation, and people can easily get trapped by social media active personnel.
Social media is at the centre of amplifying misleading content that goes viral. This can seriously affect peace talks and transitional justice initiatives in conflict affected areas. Social media is dominating what is circulating digitally. Its algorithms promote content that people engage with (likes or shares), regardless of its veracity. Social media algorithms don’t understand context, and they do what they are designed to do. Societies need to understand how algorithms work, have policies of keeping digital content in circulation, and the archival of digital content on social media platforms needs some attention and further exploration.
Content verification in the social media space is manipulated and dictated by just a few with different motives. Transitional justice fact finders and investigators largely depend on social media for their source of information. Social media platforms document many crimes and atrocities. Verifying such content on social media is challenging. It can be edited or manipulated by third parties. They can also be removed by content moderators deliberately or those who are paid by governments or their agents.
Social media platforms might also alter or remove some content if they find the content violates their community standards or if they feel content violates their terms of use. Content manipulation or removal can be done with AI technologies. For whatever reason, content manipulation and removal can affect fact finding processes of TJ.
Fact finders and investigators rely on social media platforms for their information sources. But, as this space is manipulated with different actors for different motives, it would be tough for fact finders to differentiate facts from those fabricated by third parties. Given the above possibilities of manipulation by different stakeholders, it is hard to accept and comply what is the truth and what is not.
The use of some other data types and sources as a complement to social media data can significantly contribute towards fact finding process. For example, the use of open-source intelligence tools, social media analytics tools, and techniques that use satellite imagery. These sources of datasets can also be complemented with phone calls and mobile internet datasets.
As briefly explained above, the implementation of TJ depends on truth finding from different sources of data. Social media platforms are a potential source of such information that can be manipulated by different actors. Each of these has their own goals and makes content of their own. In such an environment, TJ actors need to be aware of this dynamism and need to have the necessary knowledge and skill sets to assess the quality of their evidence.
TJ implementation team needs to be aware of the drives and goals of the key stakeholders and try to triangulate their evidence and avoid being trapped by fake content. The need for relevant content moderation training (technical as well as ethical dimensions) for moderators is also worth mentioning. These all call for the need for ethical content sharing, content validation, and the need for social media skill development.
Photo credit: Pexels
