Disinformation in the Global South: Why Context Matters
A new book breaks new ground by discussing disinformation in the Global South
By Audrey Hatfield
Over the last several years the phenomenon of disinformation and fake news has escaped from the confines of scholarly discussion to become a nearly ubiquitous household concept. This notoriety has been in part aided by the pervasive deluge of lies that former U.S. president Donald Trump spread in the wake of the 2020 presidential election. The echo chamber he has found to proliferate and amplify these lies has horrified and shocked many in the Global North. Yet, the Global South has “in fact been dealing with the problem for much longer,” as we learn from a new book on the topic.
Much of existing research on disinformation and fake news focuses on Western cases and is grounded in the psychology of individual behavior. “Disinformation in the Global South”, a book edited by Herman Wasserman and Dani Madrid-Morales, explores how these behaviors are often mired in specific historical, social and political contexts. Along with a team of experts, Wasserman and Madrid-Morales outline the histories, theories, and methods that encompass disinformation and sample cases from the Global South.
Robust disinformation analysis should take into account the social, political, economic, and historical contexts of where disinformation is consumed and spread. The authors underscore how the Global South provides for a more nuanced approach to studying fake news because of the diverse composition of countries represented. To that point, the umbrella term of the “Global South” is meant to refer not only to the geographical regions outside of Europe and North America, but in reference to the economic, political, and cultural marginalization of countries which have historically been the focus of developmental studies. This term is employed as an acknowledgement to an entire history of colonialism and the ongoing persistence of Northern imperialism.
The authors examine the influences that political regimes, social structures, and varied histories have on disinformation in the Global South, which sets their analysis apart from the often contextually agnostic research in the Global North.
For example, as Saba Bebawi discusses in her chapter on disinformation in Arab media, it is critical to evaluate fake news within the context of Arab linguistic and cultural practices. Bebawi explains that Arab journalism has evolved to become an extension of the Arabic language and is often shaped by emotive persuasion rather than fact-based means. The Arabic language is filled with literary expressions that intertwine exaggeration, overemphasis, overassertion, and repetition. Emotive journalism has greatly contributed to the spread of disinformation in the region, Arab journalists being thus forced to develop their own evidence-based reporting and investigative practices.
In his chapter on contextualizing fake news, Edson C. Tandoc Jr. studies the spread of disinformation within collectivist cultures which value harmony, close family ties, and respect for seniority. Individuals may be discouraged to directly repudiate known fake news if it’s circulated by an older loved one. The research of Ozan Kuru et al. furthers this study by analyzing the role that group trust plays among individuals who engage with disinformation in WhatsApp groups. The motivation in these contexts then is not necessarily to propagate fake news, but rather to navigate existing social constraints.
Another key emphasis for disinformation research from the Global South which largely sets it apart from the Global North lies in the unequal relation between the media and the government. As Kecheng Fang describes in his chapter on propaganda and censorship strategies in China, authoritarian regimes which exert control over information channels to suppress independent criticism have learned to weaponize fact-checking efforts. By mimicking verification processes undertaken in independent media states, the Chinese government can elevate official discourses and censor unwanted information in the name of stemming fake news. Fang argues that while China’s move to undermine professional journalistic practices is less likely to occur in democratic regimes, right-wing political parties and individuals who excel in fabricating alternative narratives may look to capture these same tactics.
The holistic research put forth by Wasserman and Madrid-Morales exposes how disinformation in the Global South is molded by the environment it grows in. While their book encourages players from the Global North to abandon a western-biased definition of disinformation, it is possible that this multi-faceted view on disinformation may still apply to the Global North as well. Wasserman and Madrid-Morales ultimately conclude that further research needs to be undertaken in the Global South to address the growing threat of disinformation — difficult yet necessary work.
Audrey Hatfield is a master’s student at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. She is a Contributing Editor for The Morningside Post, a leading independent news and opinion publication at Columbia.
This article was originally published on the Media and Journalism Research Center’s Journalism Trends blog.
Invest in independent media research and join a community of practice.
MJRC takes no government money — which is why we ask people who value independent investigation to invest in it directly. Your contribution supports our investigations and global analysis. Supporters can receive early access to new findings, invitations to small-group briefings, inclusion in our Supporters Circle updates, and the option to be listed on our Supporters Page.