Like the country's political, constitutional, industrial and social structures, the media sector also needs a deep review, introspection and reform. The flood of 'misinformation' and 'disinformation' makes the sensitive role of credible, responsible and accountable journalism all the more necessary.

In this context, Kantipur has started a debate series to give special space to criticism, critique, review, and suggestions. We are waiting for the participation of stakeholders and experts in an objective and responsible debate.

On the evening of last Bhadra 24, content about an attempt to set fire to the Pashupatinath Temple circulated on social media. The content came on TikTok with a video of some people trying to climb the closed chain gate of the main entrance of the Pashupatinath Temple. The previous day, protests and arson had broken out across the country after the government turned violent in the Gen-G youth movement. When that content spread, Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli had already resigned, security mechanisms were ineffective, and the army had not yet taken over security.

When I was shocked to see pictures and videos of the burning of many government and commercial structures, including the Parliament Building and Singha Durbar, that unexpected content was shocking. Many who saw the content posted content with the intention of ‘saving Pashupatinath’, while some expressed fear that the Pashupatinath temple might burn down and lead to religious conflict. A user posted a video from the Pashupatinath premises on TikTok, saying ‘there was no crowd there’ and urging people to be cautious.

Assessing the potential harm that the content could cause, ‘NepalFactCheck.org’ published a fact-check, in which evidence was provided that the video was from the Vatsaleshwori Jatra a few months ago.

This example reflects the changed information environment due to the Internet and social media, the changes that it has brought about in terms of who controls the flow of information and discourse, as well as the dangers that misinformation can bring in the digital information environment and the usefulness of that environment to address that danger. This article analyzes these themes and presents ideas on the roles that the state, media, civil society and citizens should play to make the best use of the digital information environment.

The changed information environment

One important aspect that the Gen-G movement has shown is the changed information environment. Discussions and messaging about the Gen-G movement were mostly happening on social media platforms. Different types of social media platforms were used in different ways. They chose Reddit to talk about the social media restrictions being used for communication, knowledge, self-employment and entrepreneurship for young people. From the content posted there, they realized that corruption, the suffering of government offices and the poor quality of education they received were not personal but common problems and chose Discord to form the conclusion that something should be done.

From there, they chose Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube and TikTok, which we use a lot only for the promotion of the determined programs and public support. The participation of a larger number of young people in the Bhadra 23 demonstration than the state, traditional media and many others expected, showed that our information mechanisms could not understand the changed information environment. Radio, television and newspapers, which were considered the main means of disseminating information to citizens, felt lost in the new information environment.

The new information environment, especially for the digital-native Internet generation, is not a powerful part of the traditional media, nor is it a single social media platform or a specific account or group based on it. The Internet and social media have created an innumerable number of small sources in the information environment, and those sources of information also change with time, topic, and situation. Some popular groups or pages try to remain relevant by changing their content according to time and situation.

There are unlimited players in the contemporary information environment, and the flow of information is not in the hands of a limited number of people or groups. A few decades before traditional media such as radio, television, and newspapers became powerful, information was controlled by media owners, influential journalists, and a limited group that could influence those owners and journalists in some way, which was criticized by German journalist Paul Seth, who called ‘freedom of the press the freedom to spread their ideas for the 200 rich people’. The power of a limited number of influential people in society to control the flow of information and create political and social discourses is weakening in the current information environment.

Who creates discourse?

One of the many narratives that has been circulating in Nepali society since the Gen-G movement is that ‘this movement was planned by foreigners, especially Americans’. Not only to cover up the legitimate demands of the movement and their inaction while in power, but also to cover up their own political or social agendas, extremist ideologies are fueling this narrative. Its targets are non-governmental organizations, which have worked with the support of foreign donors to develop the leadership of Nepali citizens, strengthen democracy, and raise awareness.

Not all the work of all non-governmental organizations can be defended, but at least one fact is that in order to receive foreign assistance, the approval of each program must be obtained from the Social Welfare Council of the Government of Nepal, and the council monitors whether the work has been done according to the approved project. This means that those programs were not done secretly/covertly, and if they have been done, we should also consider our state to be weak. Some social discourses are now being created by posting pictures of events where a book was discussed about the resistance to information manipulation, and using materials such as ‘proof that money was given to a certain organization’ for information manipulation.

Until a few years ago, traditional media played an influential role in the formation of political and social discourses in society, but now that foundation has weakened. Now, discourses are being created on social media, and 

Influencers, who can reach a large number of people, are at the top. The problem with this change is that many influencers have not entered the circle of social responsibility and it is not clear who they are and for what purpose they are creating discourses. Therefore, in the current situation, influencers living abroad, far from the context of Nepal, are using Google search results to create misleading content by using loud voices and strong vocabulary to create the discourse of Nepali society.

Influencers’ woes are social media algorithms, which demand regular popular content, and for that they constantly need controversial topics, loud-mouthed characters, and extremist expressions. Politicians also seem to like to play in this same mud. That is why in political rhetoric, they have started showing interest in content creators or YouTubers who are looking for content rather than critically aware, knowledgeable journalists. As a result, the partisan content they want to spread, which in most cases is false or misleading, is spreading in society.

The danger of misinformation and discourse

Misinformation is generally false or misleading content. Whether spread in ignorance or deliberately spread to achieve some objective, all kinds of falsehoods or half-truths or wrong references or unverified topics that create confusion are disinformation. The ‘Ashwatthama Hatohhat’ from the Mahabharata shows that the foundation of misinformation is mythological, while its use in politics is not new. In Nepal itself, the 'Hrithik Roshan scandal' in 2057 BS, which resulted in the death of four people due to false information, was an incident before the spread of the Internet. 

After the advent of the Internet and social media, false information began to increase rapidly. Previously, false information took time to spread beyond a certain geographical boundary and was forgotten for some time, but due to the Internet, it spread very quickly and became permanent. Not only underdeveloped countries with low literacy rates, but also developed countries with high literacy rates such as the United States and Europe have had incidents where false information has affected citizens.

Research has been published claiming that the election of Donald Trump as US President in 2016 and the results of the referendum on Britain leaving the European Union in 2017 were false information. It is claimed that false information has affected a large population that refuses to get vaccinated even during the Covid pandemic. These various incidents show that false information can affect a person's daily life, public health, and political decisions, and can also have violent consequences. 

Disinformation has come to be considered one of the biggest threats to democracy, especially after extremists, undemocratic and populists started using it to incite citizens and achieve their political goals. Since the foundation of democracy is based on the free will of citizens and the free will of citizens depends on the information they receive, disinformation fundamentally weakens democracy. 

When we go to different parts of the country to discuss and study the impact of disinformation, we see a scenario of risk. Although we had concluded from the monitoring conducted during the previous two elections that although the amount of disinformation in Nepal was increasing significantly, it did not have any significant impact on changing the outcome of the elections. During the last election, we found that a large number of parties and candidates used disinformation for their own good publicity and in rare cases, it was used to spread negative news about competing parties or candidates. However, disinformation was used to prevent candidates from becoming candidates in the election or to weaken competitors within their own party. After the last election, some dangerous changes have been observed in the trend of disinformation, which has worried those of us who monitor and study it.

These trends include the increasing use of artificial intelligence in the creation of false content, the increase in content that criticizes others rather than its own good, the use of disinformation to spread hate speech, and false narratives created against the independent views of the media, civil society, or intellectuals to kill the critical consciousness of citizens or society. The use of AI makes it very difficult to identify false content, while negative content increases polarization and controversy in society. However, the fascination of some extremists with such content is pushing Nepali society towards unrest.

Now, individuals are using the internet to spread ideas. In the old days, videos that looked like television programs have started to be produced in such large numbers that it has become almost impossible to keep track of them all. No one has the time to watch long content of such videos. However, their short controversial clips go viral, which in most cases are without context.

The dialogue between questioners who seek out insults, criticism, political extremist expressions, conspiracy claims, unproven emotional topics, and absurd claims that go viral and respondents who say whatever they want has been laid bare by the fact that they are not held accountable for what they say. Logical and experienced ideas have been sidelined by the fact that logical things have not only become unworkable items, but the attacks on such ideas have made it difficult to speak freely. The ongoing attacks on the media and NGOs show that. An environment has been created where it seems impossible to criticize and hold accountable those in power, which is essential for democracy. 

Measures to reduce misinformation

What can protect this world of misinformation and the society it has begun to distort? The answer to this question is not easy. Since it affects all sectors of society, there is no magic wand solution. In a country like Nepal with a weak democracy, diversity, low literacy, and a lack of a strong media presence, solving it seems even more difficult. A weak democracy and state system that does not fully embrace civil rights and democratic values ​​and does not have serious discussions even in parliament on major social and political issues means that the state cannot formulate strong policies to reduce it.

In the past, bills that were said to regulate social media and decisions that social media should be ‘built’ to stop misinformation are examples of this. Although there is no doubt that state policies are important for reducing misinformation. However, for this, making information providers responsible and accountable is more important than regulating the platforms they use.

The sooner citizens understand about misinformation, the more aware they will be. For this, it is necessary to increase information literacy. While ‘CMR Nepal’, to which I am affiliated, is running a small campaign to increase media and information literacy among the youth, it has been observed that literacy about misinformation is very low and that even with a small effort, basic awareness of questioning the information received by citizens can be developed. While awareness against misinformation is gradually increasing among citizens, there is a need for the state and civil society to run a large-scale media and information literacy campaign to accelerate that growth.

Fact-checking is important, but it has been neglected in Nepal. There are hundreds of fact-checking programs in neighboring India, but only one or two small efforts in Nepal. Fact-checking requires huge investment and expertise, for which I have had great difficulty in continuing to work as the project head of ‘NepalFactCheck.org’.

Accurate information is the perfect remedy for disinformation. Therefore, the strongest weapon we have to fight disinformation is journalism. Journalism has built an influential information network in the form of media. If journalism uses that information network to establish itself on the moral ground of freedom, the influence of disinformation will be weakened. However, now efforts are being made to weaken journalism and the media at both the internal and external levels to weaken journalism and the media. In order to weaken journalism and the media, it has been partisanized, attempts have been made to make it a mouthpiece, news has been called fake, and the media, which is considered the permanent opposition to the government, has been accused of being biased.

The work of making it worse is done by journalists and the media themselves by not providing them with material to prove themselves independent and impartial. Even in good investigative news about corruption, they have become weak because they do not give the accused a proper place to express their views, while many journalists have not been able to show themselves impartial by unnecessarily showing political or thematic bias on social media. Journalism is becoming weak in some cases because they do not realize that the views of editors are not personal, they represent the views of the media they lead. It seems necessary for us to be aware that when journalism becomes weak, it negatively affects not only our profession, but also the entire society and the country.

The main role of journalism

I try not to use the term 'fake news' because from the study and practice of journalism, I believe that 'news is not false, and false is not news'. The term 'fake news' is being used as a slow but strong poison to devalue and weaken journalism and the media. Due to the current information landscape, the world of misinformation and discourse, and our weak situation, we are at risk of the destructive effects of misinformation.

Some small incidents have already been seen where misinformation can shake the foundation of unity and peaceful society in Nepal's diversity. In this situation, the state, society, and citizens need to mobilize unified power to counter misinformation. Although the role of all stakeholders is equally necessary, the most powerful weapon available for defense is journalism. However, everyone's cooperation is necessary to sharpen journalism.

The state's contribution is necessary to strengthen journalism and the media. Especially in the current harsh economic environment, a media-friendly policy of the state is necessary to save the media. For example, a policy to determine the ratio of advertising in local media and social media is necessary for our national interest when social media is taking over the advertising market.

In some states like the United States, realizing the need to provide financial and other support at the state level to save local journalism, it is necessary to develop the idea that the state should support the Nepali media when it is being discussed in the draft laws. Enhancing the skills of journalists or studying and researching the media situation and content also helps the media. The information landscape will also improve if the media based on the internet platform is classified and oriented towards the code of conduct and basic principles of journalism. All this requires a media-friendly policy and investment from the state.