Loading Logo

Fact-Checking in Election Season

September 2024
 by Adam Ispahani

Fact-Checking in Election Season

September 2024
 By Adam Ispahani

Mark Twain is often recognised for quipping “A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on”, a prescient remark on the speed at which falsehoods spread. It was attributed to Twain in 1919 and now, over a century later, is more relevant and accurate than ever. It’s ironic then that Twain never actually uttered this phrase, nor did Winston Churchill to whom other iterations of this quotation are often assigned. Ultimate credit for this phrase belongs to satirist Jonathan Swift who penned “Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it” in a 1710 article in The Examiner.

The critical aspect to be observed from this parable is time and how the world’s relationship with it has changed. Whereas the quote itself took hundreds of years to be misquoted and incorrectly credited, this process now occurs at a drastically greater rate. Disinformation now only requires seconds due to the advent of the internet, a fact that is increasingly being weaponised by those seeking to detract from their opponents on the opposite side of the political spectrum. As this threat to free and fair elections grows, fact-checking has failed to keep pace, in part due to the length of the process, but also the environment the practice is faced with.

Spreading falsehoods

Social networking platforms have had an undeniably transformative effect on society, particularly when examining the way in which people consume and interact with media. While the freedom they have provided has many benefits, it also carries its fair share of negative results, particularly by giving bad actors the ability to spread falsehoods to a wider audience than they previously could have accessed. The gravity of this issue cannot be overstated as the number of people who consider social media to be their primary source of news is increasing annually, and has in fact surpassed direct access to traditional news organisations which is on the decline. These inverse trajectories have been driven by the increasingly polar political landscape, in which a growing number of campaigns have made liberal use of misinformation and disinformation. While this is far from a novel political strategy, this new movement has been highly effective in the way it has also attacked mainstream media, with politicians dismissing any adverse coverage they received as fiction from outlets that shouldn’t be trusted and helping to cement the term “fake news” into the lexicon. Many pundits and analysts tried to dismiss this tactic as simple straw man bluster, and in doing so ignored the incoming harsh reality. As the spotlight intensified on traditional news media, many across the political spectrum, who had long quietly taken issue with the way these organisations operated over concerns of bias and poor investigative standards, felt they were finally able to voice these opinions. Distrusting traditional media outlets became fashionable, completely shifting the balance in the world of reporting as people flocked to social networks for their information.

Fact-checking challenges

As a growing number of incumbent and prospective world leaders set about following this blueprint, the level of political disinformation across the world has climbed to an all-time high. This year’s European Parliament elections exemplified the scale of the problem, as candidates who had expressed support for Ukraine found themselves targeted by doctored audio to undermine their campaigns, while the results were also dogged by false claims attempting to undermine their legitimacy. This has made fact-checking critical as voters need to have access to accurate information in order to make truly informed decisions. However, despite the increased prominence of fact-checking in journalism, it faces a significant challenge that has prevented a general acceptance of the practice: its reliance on traditional media organisations. Fact-checking is naturally an extensive process as it not only requires a detailed analysis of the given information, but it also often necessitates an entirely new journalistic investigation to establish what the actual truth of the matter is. This is time-consuming, costly and must be performed by those with the requisite skills, thus it is only a feasible operation for large news organisations. While this reality should not undermine the value of fact-checking, it does serve to limit its reach and appeal. Those who made the move away from the traditional media players are yet to look back as these outlets have only continued to face criticism of their practices. Furthermore, fact-checking has reinforced the negative perception of mainstream media in certain quarters among those who believe that the emphasis placed on this practice only serves to re-establish the control these companies once had.

The issue of time

Of all the issues faced by factchecking, one of the most critical is time. Reuters states that their fact-checks take over 24 hours on average to produce, which is especially concerning when considering that the content they fact-check is often put together in seconds and spreads in minutes. London Mayor Sadiq Khan faced this challenge earlier this year after AI-generated audio of his voice was used to misrepresent his stance on pro-Palestine marches, with the clip not identified as fake until two days after it surfaced. The obvious solution to this would be to have social media platforms crack down on disinformation and take part in the process themselves. Unfortunately, those that have attempted this have seen limited success. Facebook has tried in recent years to increase their fact-checking capacity, but still advise that their process can take up to 72 hours to complete, further emphasising the resourcing issue. On the other side of the spectrum is X, formerly Twitter, who have become largely resistant to efforts to remove any posts from their platform, which has resulted in several legal battles that remain ongoing. This stance has won them some supporters, although others have been turned off by this as the number of monthly X users appears to be reaching a plateau.

Combatting disinformation

Fact-checking is far from perfect, with many issues that prevent the practice from truly being embraced in its current form. Yet, it remains the most effective solution to combat disinformation, particularly for that which emanates from political campaigns. There is also some evidence that the tide may be turning in its favour. Snopes, an independent website that was originally founded to verify urban legends, is now the pre-eminent source of independent fact-checking, suggesting that there may be a growing appetite for this type of content. However, fact-checking currently remains polarising, so until it becomes more widely adopted it is best to remain patient when coming to judgement on a news story. After all, stories don’t come together overnight, so neither should opinions.

Back to News

Join our newsletter and get access to all the latest information and news:

Privacy Policy.
Revoke consent.

© Digitalis Media Ltd. Privacy Policy.