Are direct democracies more vulnerable to disinformation?
Deliberately spread misinformation surfaced during many elections in 2024 and is having an impact on social trust.
But the wave of disinformation is expected to particularly affect direct democracies – such as Switzerland or many US states – according to Touradj Ebrahimi, professor at Federal Technology Institute in Lausanne (EPFL).
Do you think that disinformation is particularly dangerous for societies where citizens directly vote on many political issues?
More
US disinformation surge rings alarm bells for Swiss direct democracy
Direct democracies are less vulnerable to misinformation because citizens have the power to change laws and public expenditure which through misinformation can harm or affect their well being. All socialist government and regimes put out misinformation to keep themselves in power. Misinformation can take hold in direct democracies because many are comfortable with government handouts and emotional concerns about their communities differing in the acceptance of misinformation in other countries around the world (eg differing in thinking from the socialists managing the undemocratic EU). As a registered Professional Chemical Engineer, I understand better than most the manufacture and necessary testing of pharmaceuticals. I understand how Nuclear power stations work, the design, the costs, the control and safety. I have expertise in combustion, and heat transfer. I know there is around the world misinformation about weather, and climate. One can only hope that direct democracy can act to allow freer discussion so more will recognise that misinformation is a power play from people who have no interest in democracy.
Representative Democracy and Direct Democracy have always been vulnerable to selective information and twisted truths.
People need to learn about all sides of any issue, from different sources, not just what is Preached on "Democracy" Conferences, and exhibited on the main media.
From Taiwan to Switzerland to Mexico, Direct Democracy International Forums have been co-opted by monopolists of "The Best Western Democracy Money Can Buy".
No representation of Eastern countries were available, condemnation of democratic socialist governments were stated, and on the final report of each conference, a one sided support for Western narratives were declared.
Direct Democracy ought to tabulate the opinion of the majority by referendums rather than propagate a one sided opinion.
Ion I am
Thank you for your message - but unfortunately there is no example of "eastern countries" (Taiwan is as far east as you can get) that organise open referendums in a "democratic-socialist" way. Or what would be such examples in your opinion?
Vielen Dank für Ihre Nachricht - es gibt aber leider kein Beispiel für "östliche Länder" (Taiwan liegt ja soweit im Osten, wie es geht), die auf "demokratisch-sozialistische" Weise offene Volksabstimmungen durchführen. Oder was wären dann Ihrer Meinung nach entsprechende Beispiele?
I think that society, including today's youth, who started using SNS only for convenience without knowing the risks involved in using it, has spawned a herd that reacts immediately to false information and is made to dance around it. In a sense, this may be the beginning of the age of information devolution. Unfortunately, it is not easy to stop it, and if we don't immediately study what measures are effective in order to prevent this from becoming a cause of various conflicts, it will be too late.
今の若者も含めて、SNSの利用でのリスクも知らずに便利さだけで使い始めた社会が虚偽情報に直ぐに反応して踊らされる群れを産み出したと思う。ある意味、情報でのデビルの時代の始まりかもしれない。残念ながらそれを阻止する事は簡単ではないし、これが色々な紛争の一因にならない為にはどのような対策が有効かを至急世界中で研究せねば手遅れになると思う。
Thank you for your contribution - how would you react to this as a society? There is individual responsibility, but there are also aspects of how a state or civil society can become active in terms of education and/or regulation.
Vielen Dank für Ihren Beitrag - wie würde man denn darauf reagieren als Gesellschaft? Es gibt ja eine individuelle Verantwortung, aber auch Aspekte, wie ein Staat oder die Zivilgesellschaft für Aufklärung und/oder Regulierung aktiv werden kann.
Very dangerous.
There is information that is more dedicated to those who pay for the ink than to those who buy the newspaper.
In a direct democracy like Switzerland, it is even more dangerous, because the voter may not have the time to check it out.
Muy peligrosa.
Existe informacion dedica mas a quien le paga la tinta, que a quien compra el periódico.
En una democracia directa como la Suiza, es aun mas peligrosa, pq quizás el votante no tiene tiempo de contrastarla.
Hello
Indeed misinformation data is chaos and people are prone to believe what we are told without thinking with our own brains.
Regards
Hola
Efectivamente la desinformacion de los datos es el caos y las personas somos propensas a creer lo que nos dicen si pensar con nuestro propio cerebro.
Saludos
If you mean online distribution of misinformation or fake news which can then in turn influence a society of direct democracy, then the answer is obviously YES.
Misinformation or deliberate persuasion of voters are not new in Switzerland. The only new thing is the rapid fire of news online with viral videos or comments which can turn a vote quickly and suddenly. Therefore it is vital that there must be some sort of checking or self-checking mechanism (like X.com where users self check and posts notes to counter claim posts) must evolve. No easy task.
Thank you for your message!
The fact is that disinformation has not only become a prominent topic since social media.
Are there any reactions that a society can take to counter this? Social media are constantly changing their approach - X.com is a good example - so it is unclear how sustainable such plans by individual companies are.
Vielen Dank für Ihre Nachricht!
Tatsächlich ist es so, dass Desinformation nicht erst seit den Sozialen Medien zu einem präsenten Thema wird.
Gibt es denn auch Reaktionen, die eine Gesellschaft dem Entgegenstellen kann? Soziale Medien ändern ihr Vorgehen ja dauernd - X.com ist da ein gutes Beispiel - entsprechend ist unklar, wie nachhaltig solche Pläne einzelner Unternehmen sind.
there are different types of disinformation: direct by govts, indirect by the repeated spreading via social media.
both need to be tackled.
For state sponsored: journalists need to do a much better job. Good example: Ukraine invasaion. Not one major news outlet looked into the history of repeated nato expansion and lack of listening to russian concerns. or take covid, still no push for a full investigation.
For social media companies need to be held accountable - laws for prosecuting and blocking and block for under 16 snould be considered.
Thank you for your message. I would disagree with you, journalists have indeed dealt with these issues - and reported on them in a differentiated way. But I'm unlikely to convince you of that.
Vielen Dank für Ihre Nachricht. Ich würde Ihnen widersprechen, Journalist:innen haben sich sehr wohl mit diesen Themen befasst - und differenziert darüber berichtet. Aber da werde ich Sie wohl kaum überzeugen.
Join the conversation!