When Governments Establish ‘Ministry of Truth’
The Thin Line Between Combating Fake News and Upholding Free Speech
Newsreel Asia Insight #38
Nov. 8, 2023
The governments of two southern states, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, are setting up fact-checking units to sift through fake news. At first glance, this might seem like a proactive measure to curb misinformation. But can a government act as a truly neutral judge in these matters?
Tamil Nadu has announced 80-member Fact Check Unit, which would be autonomous, as reported by The News Minute.And Karnataka’s unit will have ties with legal and police authorities, with ramifications under the Indian Penal Code and IT policy, according to Hindustan Times.
Such government-run units could act as a double-edged sword. On one side, they fight the spread of false information; on the other, they hold a blade that could slice through the fabric of free speech. The implications for journalists and the media at large are profound.
The Editors Guild of India has raised a significant flag regarding these initiatives, advocating for independent bodies rather than solely government-run ones to tackle misinformation. Their stance is not one of defiance but of foresight, recognising the potential for power misuse. Measures to protect the public from fake news must not become instruments of oppression, or the remedy should not exacerbate the ailment.
When governments control these bodies, they inherently possess the ability to define the scope of truth and falsehood. This power is potent and can easily be wielded to silence dissent or unfavourable coverage under the guise of correcting misinformation.
Such efforts are highly likely to deter journalistic practice due to the inevitability of minor reporting errors.
In the rapid pace of the digital news cycle, media may at times fail to fully verify facts before publication, resulting in the spread of incorrect or unconfirmed information. Will such content also qualify as fake news? It gets more complicated when considering the level of truth in satire and jokes, where the truth is often dressed up with a wink. Will the government’s fact-checkers appreciate the nuance, or will the jest be lost in translation, complicating the landscape for those behind the pen?
These complexities in combating misinformation can be exploited by those in power to target media outlets critical of government policies.
In 2017, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Freedom of opinion and expression, David Kaye, said this about the issue: “‘Fake news’ has emerged as a global topic of concern and there is a risk that efforts to counter it could lead to censorship, the suppression of critical thinking and other approaches contrary to human rights law.”
In fact, many believe that tolerating misinformation may be necessary to uphold the freedom of communication. After all, if you had to choose between a world with no lies but no freedom to speak, or a world full of rumours but full of debate, the choice is simple. Most would pick a noisy, free world any day.
The need for independent fact-checking organisations – Alt News, for example – becomes clear when considering the potential conflict of interest inherent in government-run units.
Moreover, a collaborative approach, as called for by the Editors Guild of India, ensures that multiple stakeholders have a voice in the fight against misinformation. Involving media professionals and legal experts can create a robust mechanism for fact-checking that upholds press freedom while effectively addressing the spread of false information.
To truly show they’re serious about fighting disinformation, governments could fund and back independent fact-checkers, alongside bolstering quality journalism and teaching the public how to tell fact from fiction, or media literacy, instead of trying to be referees in a game where they’re also playing.
