Online platforms’ failure to share data makes it harder to tackle disinformation, committee to hear

Online platforms’ refusal to share data hampers researchers and policymakers working against disinformation, an Oireachtas committee will hear on Tuesday.

The Foreign Affairs committee is to hold a session with researchers and academics on disinformation and hybrid threats, including the context of geopolitics.

Researchers from Dublin City University, which is the Irish hub of the European Digital Media Observatory (EDMO), will outline how their work focuses on the effectiveness of disinformation countermeasures and supports practical measures like media literacy campaigns.

Dr Eileen Culloty, the co-ordinator of the EDMO hub, will tell the committee that research on disinformation is being “hampered by a lack of access to online platforms’ data”. Independent researchers and policymakers, she will say, are “unable to determine the true scale and impact of online disinformation because they lack access to reliable data”.

UHL is no longer starved of funds. Why is it still so far from satisfactory performance?

---

Your top stories on Friday: Asylum seekers pitch tents in Ballsbridge; united Ireland costs would ‘equal austerity’

---

Stephen Collins: When Harris chickened out of moving McEntee, he lost the chance for a new approach to immigration

---

Joe Canning: Calling out the Tipperary players in public wasn’t smartest move by Liam Cahill

---

Meanwhile, a set of voluntary mechanisms approved at EY level such as a code of practice on disinformation “have failed to deliver relevant insights about the nature of the disinformation that circulates within member states”.

In the absence of co-operation from online platforms, she will tell the committee that researchers, journalists and others “must invest considerable time and resources to try to understand what is happening online”.

She will outline how the intent behind a piece of disinformation or false information can be difficult to discern, but that often “intentionality matters far less than the harm or outcome that arises”.

For many people involved in countering disinformation, she will say, this means they are less focused on identifying the intent behind a piece of content rather than preventing harm. However, when it comes to defence and security, this is revised.

She will say that people engage with disinformation for different reasons and that popular discussions assume people “blindly believe the content they consume”, whereas research indicates people’s acceptance of disinformation is tied to wider issues like objective knowledge, trust and ideological bias – which may be relevant in the context of public vulnerabilities and defence. There is growing evidence, she will say for “pre-bunking” or warning people about the threat of disinformation and explaining how manipulation tactics work

Catriona Heinl, the executive director of the Azure Forum for Contemporary Security Strategy, will tell the committee that disinformation is a security challenge as actors use information and manipulation of the information environment as a “strategic tool”, including manipulating content that isn’t false, but is packaged to reinforce existing views of put things out of context, the use of false accounts, or the use of troll farms, the targeting of conspiracy groups or “throwing mud at the wall”.

In Ireland, she will say, discussion on disinformation has not been “overly focused” on geostrategic or security aspects. The EU has assessed that Russia, she will tell the committee, uses disinformation and actively interferes in an effort to compromise the stability of countries and their democratic processes. She will say examination should be given to how strategic communications efforts would be tailored to an Irish context in the new environment.