What is the impact of fact-checking when the government shares the goal of increasing accurate information and reducing disinformation?
I was eager to find out the answer to that after I received an invitation as director of the International Fact-Checking Network to observe fact-checkers preparing for the 2024 elections to the European Parliament. A robust regional network, the European Fact-Checking Standards Network, or EFCSN, met in Brussels recently to make plans for fact-checking collaboration across the continent that will lead to more impact and a more informed electorate.
The European fact-checkers have an ally in the Digital Services Act, a new law in the works since 2020 that seeks to hold large technology companies accountable for their information policies. The regulations apply to the largest technology companies across the 27 countries that make up the European Union. If platforms fail to meet the new rules, they could be subject to heavy fines, or the worst-case-scenario punishment of being banned in the EU. The June elections will be the first European parliamentary elections to happen with the act in force. An accompanying Code of Practice on Disinformation sets policies that the EU wants platforms to follow to discourage misinformation.
Rather than setting forth specific outside rules that apply to all platforms in the same way, the code of practice encourages companies to develop internal strategies and tactics for discouraging misinformation. Reporting requirements allow regulators to evaluate whether the companies’ different efforts are adequate. Working with fact-checkers is one of the commitments technology companies can make to show they are complying.
At the Brussels conference, fact-checkers specifically focused on topics that have been ripe for misinformation, such as elections and voting; migration; and climate change. They discussed how to envision a common database of fact-checking work. And they emphasized efforts to detect important trends ahead of time.
Detection efforts have been aided by a government-funded collaboration between fact-checkers, academics and media literacy groups known as EDMO — short for the European Digital Media Observatory. EDMO, launched in June 2020, has been publishing monthly reports on misinformation trends by compiling fact-checking from roughly 30 organizations in Europe.
Both the official regulations and monitoring have stood in stark contrast to other parts of the world that don’t have institutions equivalent to the European Commission, or places where the government is actively hostile to fact-checking efforts. In the United States, misinformation researchers have been investigated by a Republican-controlled House committee, and in India, government internet policies have raised concerns about press independence and freedom.
In Europe, though, fact-checkers seem comfortable with their role, and they believe the legislative details of the Digital Services Act and subsequent regulations mean that press freedom and independence will be preserved, as well as free speech rights for the public.
Carlos Hernández-Echevarría, the head of public policy for the Spanish fact-checking foundation Maldita.es, told me that the law takes a cautious approach. The law says that social media companies have to identify the risks of their services being manipulated to disseminate disinformation at scale, and that they need to make sure those risks are addressed through “effective mitigation measures.” That doesn’t include censorship or deletions.
“A good analogy would be a hotel,” he said. “Does management have to go room by room opening doors to see if there’s a fire? No. Do they have to make sure there are fire extinguishers and emergency exits? Yes! Having a fact-checking program that labels disinformation, for example, is an effective risk mitigation measure and does not affect press freedom or freedom of speech at all.”
Overall, though, the law still needs to prove its effectiveness, said Vincent Couronne of the France-based fact-checking group Les Surligneurs and a member of the EFCSN governance body. Ultimately, it will be up to the European Commission to ensure the law works as advertised.
Couronne advises fact-checkers to “investigate, investigate, investigate. Their reports on the platforms’ compliance with the Code of Practice will serve as evidence of infringement. Independent fact-checking organizations in Europe (and worldwide, too!) can report to the European Commission.”
European fact-checkers intend to keep fact-checking particular issues relevant to their own home countries and as well as to the upcoming parliamentary elections, and they are hoping to combine their efforts on common sources of misinformation, making fact-checks about the parliamentary elections more easily accessible both to fellow fact-checkers and to the public.
Couronne said Europe’s fact-checkers appear to be fully engaged with the process. Fact-checkers, he said, “have started to use the DSA to ask both the platforms and the EU institutions to adhere to their commitments. That’s what is happening now in Europe, as far as I can tell, and seeing the fact-checking community being so active is really thrilling.”
