In 1938, thousands of Americans famously mistook a radioadaptation of the H G Wells novel “War of the Worlds” for a genuine newsbroadcast. Police stations were flooded with calls from citizens who believedthe United States had been invaded by Martians. It is difficult to imagine aradio play causing such a misunderstanding today, when people can quickly checkthe latest headlines on their smartphones. But the Internet, like radio in1938, is a relatively young medium. Is it conceivable that a misleading post onsocial media could spark a comparable panic?
We can think of this possibility as a “digital wildfire.” Ina hyper-connected world, information can travel with unprecedented speed andreach. The benefits of new communication technologies are many and obvious; thepotential for pitfalls informs one of the “risk cases” explored in the WorldEconomic Forum’s Global Risks 2013 report, based on expert input about whichrisks could manifest themselves over the next 10 years.
Social media can rapidly spread information that is eitherintentionally or unintentionally misleading or provocative. In certain cases,false rumors are quickly put right by other Twitter users, demonstrating thatsocial media can often self-correct. Nonetheless, it is possible to imagine twokinds of scenario in which a digital wildfire could cause havoc. Firstly, infast-changing situations, such as when a natural disaster is unfolding orsocial tensions are running high, damage could be done before a correction cancome. The real-world equivalent is shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater; evenif the lack of fire quickly becomes apparent, people may already have beencrushed in a scramble for the exit. Secondly, we can imagine situations inwhich false information feeds into an existing world view, making it harder forcorrections to penetrate. The November 2012 clashes in Gaza, in which bothIsrael and Hamas used Twitter extensively, show the growing importance ofsocial media in conflict situations. It is possible to imagine an explosivesituation being created as competing false rumors propagate in self-reinforcingloops among like-minded individuals.
What could be done to protect against the risk of digitalwildfires? Many jurisdictions already have laws that limit freedom of speech inthe real world for reasons such as incitement of violence or panic, and aregrappling with how to apply those laws to online activities. But the task ofestablishing legal restrictions on online speech is complicated by the factthat digital social norms are not yet entirely well established. Newcommunication technologies, by nature, are not easily confined within nationalborders, and it would be difficult to limit online anonymity withoutcompromising the usefulness of the Internet as a tool for whistle-blowers andpolitical dissidents in repressive regimes.
Furthermore, any new regulations, however sensible theymight seem, could also have unintended consequences. Last December, controversyflared at the World Conference on International Telecommunications in Dubaiwhen the United States among others refused to sign a treaty seeking toestablish certain online rules over fears it could lead to more governmentcensorship of the Internet.
If we are to avoid creating new regulations, new norms willneed to emerge. Users of social media typically have less to lose thantraditional media outlets from spreading information that has not been properlyfact-checked, and are typically less aware of laws related to issues such aslibel and defamation. Nonetheless, as has already been seen, social pressurecan exert a powerful influence.
It will also be necessary for more of the consumers ofsocial media to become more literate in assessing the reliability and bias ofsources. Technical solutions “ such as programs and browser extensions that aimto help people assess the credibility of online information and sources “ couldhelp. What’s more, if governments, public bodies and other institutions tookthe route of putting out better quality, better audited, verifiable informationin the first place, then the risk of wildfires would be dampened.
The example of how radio broadcasting evolved after the “Warof the Worlds” incident is instructive. Broadcasters learned to be morecautious and responsible, and listeners learned to be more savvy and skeptical.A similar shift could help to douse the digital wildfires of the future.
Lee Howell is managing director of the World Economic Forumand editor of the Global Risks 2013 report
