Fake or advert: between disinformation and digital marketing | IGF 2023 Networking Session #171

Heloisa Massaro

The commercial marketing industry has always been a significant source of funding for newspapers and has a critical influence in shaping the information environment. Understanding how programmatic ads work and how they finance online ad campaigns is crucial for making informed choices and structures for online advertisements.

In Brazil, workshops were conducted with digital marketing actors, highlighting the necessity of integrating robust risk analysis into marketing and advertising content creation. This is aimed at tackling the risks associated with disinformation and hate speech. By embedding risk analysis, marketing campaigns and advertisements can be developed with the necessary precautions to counteract disinformation.

Heloisa Massaro advocates for the development of best practices and guidelines for the advertising industry to mitigate potential negative effects on the information environment. The Internet Lab conducted a project called “Desinfo,” initiating a dialogue on best practices and guidelines in the advertising industry.

The influence of digital influencers in politics is seen as a problem due to the difficulty in separating their work from their political marketing roles. This raises concerns about the transparency and credibility of the information disseminated by digital influencers.

Self-regulatory bodies play a crucial role in addressing disinformation in advertising. Discussions are held regarding measures to mitigate risks through self-regulation, promoting responsible advertising practices.

Exploring regulatory approaches is also important in handling disinformation in advertising. Mention is made of a platform regulatory build that tackles fake news in Brazil. These regulatory approaches aim to create a more accountable and transparent environment in the advertising industry.

To summarize, the commercial marketing industry significantly influences the information landscape. Understanding programmatic ads, integrating risk analysis, and developing best practices and guidelines are essential in addressing disinformation and ensuring responsible advertising practices. It is important to address the influence of digital influencers and explore regulatory approaches to mitigate potential negative effects on the information environment.

Audience

Political advertising plays a significant role in modern political systems, but it is a complex and problematic issue. This form of advertising has the potential to be weaponised and has frequently been used for data targeting, as highlighted by the Cambridge Analytica scandal. The misuse of data for political purposes poses a serious challenge to the integrity of elections and democratic processes.

It is argued that the role of political advertising needs better management and interventions to address these challenges. Election observation groups, such as the National Democratic Institute (NDI), engage in monitoring political advertising to ensure transparency and fairness. However, the Cambridge Analytica incident has underscored the need for stronger measures to regulate the use of data in political campaigns.

The involvement of digital influencers in political advertising further complicates the situation. There is a difficulty in distinguishing their actions as independent content creators from their role as political marketers. This blurring of lines makes it challenging to discern the extent of influence they have over public opinion and the potential impact on political campaigns.

To mitigate the risks associated with political advertising, it is argued that regulation should be developed to observe how advertisements contribute to disinformation in political campaigns. The dissemination of false or misleading information poses a serious threat to the integrity of elections and public trust. The difficulty lies in distinguishing between political content and other types of content circulating on the internet, which requires careful monitoring and regulation.

In Brazil, there is a self-regulating council for government advertisements. This council, overseen by the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee and advised by technical expert Juliana, aims to ensure that government advertisements adhere to ethical and legal standards. While the self-regulatory framework is in place, it is important to consider how measures to mitigate risks can interact with this framework and state regulations. The potential for regulatory capture within self-regulating councils and other complexities must be acknowledged and carefully addressed.

In conclusion, the role of political advertising in modern political systems necessitates better management and intervention. The weaponisation of political advertising, data targeting, challenges related to digital influencers, and the dissemination of disinformation all underscore the need for regulation and monitoring. As seen in Brazil, self-regulatory councils can play a role in ensuring ethical advertising practices, but it is crucial to consider the interactions between mitigation measures, self-regulatory frameworks, and state regulations. By addressing these concerns, steps can be taken towards fostering fair and transparent political campaigns and preserving the integrity of democratic processes.

Eliana Quiroz

An analysis of the role of marketing companies in the disinformation ecosystem reveals various perspectives. One viewpoint asserts that marketing companies are integral to the spread of disinformation. They excel in providing marketing strategies and facilitating effective micro-targeting, enabling the dissemination of misleading information. This complex ecosystem is formed by the involvement of multiple private companies in digital marketing and disinformation.

Contrarily, another perspective argues that the distinction between companies offering marketing services is blurred. This lack of clarity makes it challenging to define individual responsibilities in the disinformation ecosystem. For instance, Meta, a digital platform, provides marketing advice and services to influential clients, while newspaper companies in Peru act as intermediaries. This emphasises the need for a comprehensive understanding of the different actors involved to effectively combat disinformation.

The analysis also notes the impact of the Cambridge Analytica model on digital marketing and disinformation companies. This model, involving detailed data analysis and targeting strategies, serves as a reference for manipulating public opinion. However, its full implementation requires sufficient resources and interest. In cases of limited time or money, certain elements of the model may be utilised.

Having an understanding of country-specific marketing services is essential in addressing disinformation effectively. The analysis highlights the wide range of marketing services available in the global South, reflecting diverse resources. Additionally, journalists and influencers can play significant roles in the disinformation ecosystem. Therefore, a tailored approach is necessary to combat disinformation successfully.

Shifting focus to political advertising, the analysis underscores the importance of identifying the various actors involved to ensure transparency. The entities involved in political advertising include marketing companies, influencers, data providers, data analysts, media production companies, digital communication and public relations firms, and fact-checking and public opinion companies. A thorough understanding of this ecosystem is crucial for promoting transparency in political campaigns.

Regulation is suggested as a solution for promoting transparency and protecting human rights in political advertising. However, striking the right balance with freedom of expression is essential. It is recommended that regulation extend beyond digital platforms to include companies engaged in political advertising.

Lastly, the analysis highlights the significance of inclusivity and raising awareness of human rights frameworks among companies involved in political advertising. Some companies may not fully comprehend their role within the context of human rights. By fostering inclusion and promoting awareness, ethical implications associated with political advertising can be addressed.

In conclusion, a comprehensive understanding of the role of marketing companies in the disinformation ecosystem is crucial. The blurred boundaries between companies and the influence of models like Cambridge Analytica must be acknowledged. Tailored approaches, regulation, and a focus on human rights and inclusion are necessary to effectively combat disinformation and promote transparency in political advertising.

Anna Kompanek

The analysis explores the important role of the private sector, particularly local businesses, in addressing the issue of disinformation. It suggests that the definition of the private sector should be expanded beyond just big tech companies to include local business communities. These communities are both contributors to and victims of disinformation, making it crucial to involve them in tackling this problem.

The analysis highlights the need to sensitize companies about the potential ramifications of their advertising placements. It points out that companies may indirectly support disinformation through their advertising spending, with ads appearing on disreputable websites associated with disinformation. Therefore, companies must go beyond simply reaching audiences and consider the potential negative consequences of their ad placements.

The business community is seen as a key player in improving information spaces and combating disinformation. It is noted that a growing segment of companies is recognizing the dangers posed by disinformation. These companies can support independent journalism through ethical advertising and other means. By investing in healthier information spaces, businesses can contribute to creating a diverse and reliable range of information for the public.

The analysis underscores the need for global support and responsible business practices to foster healthier information spaces. The report by the Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE) and the Center for International Media Assistance (CIMA) emphasizes ethical advertising as one way to support independent journalism. It suggests that responsible businesses have the power to promote and maintain healthy information spaces through their practices and collaborations.

Independent journalism is emphasized as being vital in combating disinformation. It is recognized for providing a diverse range of information to the public, countering the spread of false or misleading information. This underlines the importance of supporting independent journalism in efforts to tackle disinformation.

Furthermore, the analysis notes that local businesses can play a significant role in investing in healthy information insights and independent journalism. They can contribute through various strategies, such as ethical advertising, impact investment, blended finance, corporate philanthropy, and corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives. These initiatives enable local businesses to have a positive impact on information spaces and support the work of independent journalists.

Collaboration between government, civil society, and the private sector is identified as essential in addressing disinformation effectively. It is noted that the biggest danger lies in governments passing laws without consulting civil society and local private sector representatives. On the other hand, collaboration and dialogue can lead to more informed policies and effective measures against disinformation.

A noteworthy observation is the value of bringing local business organizations together as part of broader coalitions to secure the information space. In the Philippines, for example, the collaboration between the Philippine Association of National Advertising and the Makati Business Club was instrumental in discussing and addressing issues related to information security. By uniting local business organizations, effective measures can be taken to safeguard information spaces and combat disinformation.

In conclusion, the analysis underscores the crucial role of the private sector, particularly local businesses, in addressing disinformation. It promotes the inclusion of local businesses in efforts to combat disinformation and emphasizes the need for responsible advertising practices and support for independent journalism. Collaboration between government, civil society, and the private sector is crucial, and local business organizations can contribute to securing information spaces through broader coalitions. By working together, these stakeholders can foster healthier information environments and mitigate the negative impacts of disinformation.

Herman Wasserman

Disinformation has been a longstanding issue in the global south, with its roots tracing back to colonial periods. During this time, various forms of communication and propaganda were used to justify the subjugation of the colonised. In the post-colonial era, states in the global south have continued to control the media and engage in disinformation campaigns, aimed at limiting critical voices and maintaining their power.

The scholarly production around disinformation reached its peak in 2016, following elections in the United States, bringing increased attention to the issue. The advancement of new technologies has further amplified existing trends and forms of disinformation, posing a significant challenge to the global south.

The global south faces a dual threat to its information landscape, both externally and internally. Foreign influence operations draw on historical loyalties and presences in the region, while repressive states exploit the fight against “fake news” to enact laws that effectively criminalise dissent and restrict freedom of expression.

Another factor contributing to the proliferation of misinformation in the global south is misleading advertising and sensationalist journalism. These practices can promote false information and pose a challenge to the sustainability of small, independent media outlets which often rely on advertising for financial support. Economic downturns, in particular, can lead to cutbacks on advertising, further threatening the viability of local news outlets.

Despite these challenges, citizens in the global south are actively combating disinformation through various strategies. These strategies are often intertwined with other struggles, such as those for internet access, digital rights, media freedom and education. It is crucial to acknowledge the agency of individuals in the global south in the fight against disinformation.

In terms of political advertising regulations, South Africa currently faces a disconnect between the outdated regulations and the current social media climate. Regulations primarily focus on traditional broadcast channels and newspapers, failing to address the unconventional methods employed by political parties in the digital realm. As a result, there is a need to update and adapt regulations to match the evolving landscape of political advertising.

While formal regulation is an important aspect of controlling political advertisements, it is insufficient on its own. Public awareness and understanding of political communication play a pivotal role, along with fact-checking as a crucial part of political discourse. A coalition of journalists and civil society organisations is necessary to scrutinise political parties’ claims and ensure accuracy and transparency.

In conclusion, the issue of disinformation in the global south is multifaceted and complex. It stems from historical contexts and continues to be perpetuated by external influences and domestic repression. Misleading advertising and sensationalist journalism add further challenges to the region’s media landscape. However, the agency of citizens, along with updated regulations and collaborative efforts, can mitigate the effects of disinformation and uphold peace, justice and strong institutions in the global south.

Renata Mielli

The analysis provided reveals the detrimental consequences of false and misleading information being spread through the Internet and digital platforms. It argues that the Internet has allowed the dissemination of unreliable news and misleading content on a large scale, negatively affecting society. This widespread dissemination of false information has drawn attention to its harmful effects on society, as it undermines the credibility and reliability of information sources and can potentially manipulate public opinion.

The findings also highlight the role of digital platforms in amplifying and promoting misleading, false, and harmful content. It is noted that content with demonstrably false information circulates more widely than verified content, feeding the business models of digital platforms. This is further exacerbated by the use of personal and sensitive data by digital platforms, enabling targeted advertising and content distribution across various platforms. The promotion of such content through sponsored and boosted content has a greater impact on reaching internet users.

In response to these issues, the analysis suggests the need for regulatory initiatives and stricter rules in online advertising. It argues that these regulations should consider specific aspects of information flow, the advertising market, and its actors, as well as how the business models of large platforms favor misinformation. The analysis emphasizes the importance of establishing strict measures for transparency and advertisement, as well as the corporate responsibility of intermediaries and links in the advertising chain in relation to the integrity of public debate.

Moreover, the analysis supports the call for more transparency and stricter rules in online advertising. It advocates for the disclosure of the reach and profile involved in advertisements or boosted content, contributing to accountability and limiting the dissemination of false information. The analysis emphasizes the significance of establishing clear guidelines and measures for transparency and advertisement.

Additionally, the analysis highlights the need for locally designed policies to regulate online platforms. It points to the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee’s consultation process on platform regulations, which addressed issues about concentrations in the online advertising market and the risks of the platform business model, such as disinformation and infodemics. This emphasizes the importance of tailored regulations that consider the specific challenges and dynamics of each region.

The analysis also discusses the challenges of conceptualizing political advertisement and the negative impact of advertisements on health. It acknowledges the difficulty in determining whether political party content should be classified as advertisement or not. Furthermore, it raises concerns about the effect of advertisements on health, particularly during the pandemic, emphasizing that misleading advertisements about medicines can negatively affect people’s lives.

Notably, some arguments within the analysis reject the idea of self-regulation in the advertisement sector. They highlight the impact of advertisements on health and emphasize the need for a more serious public discourse on advertisement. They advocate for increased scrutiny and public engagement to address the negative consequences associated with advertising.

In conclusion, the analysis provides insightful observations on the harmful effects of false and misleading information disseminated through the Internet and digital platforms. It emphasizes the need for regulatory initiatives, transparency measures, and stricter rules in online advertising to protect society from the adverse consequences of misinformation. The analysis also highlights the importance of tailored, locally designed regulations and discusses the challenges surrounding political advertisement and the impact of advertisements on health.

Heloisa Massaro:
So, hello, everyone. Hello, everyone who is here and who is watching us online. Thank you very much for being here. I know it’s almost the last session of the almost last day. So, it’s really great to have you here to hear us. So, thank you for everyone and thank you for our panelists, Renata, who is on my right side, Anna, who is on my left side, and Eliana and Herman, who will be joining us online. So, just to give a quick overview on the topic and why did we propose a session with this topic. So, the topic in general, I mean, what do we want to discuss? We want to discuss what is the role of marketing and advertising dynamics and actors on the information environment, which is the risks, which are the implications, and how can we build, and this is the key issue, how can we build best practices and guidelines for the advertisement industry. And I think it’s worth mentioning that this topic, it’s actually appeared for us through a project we developed last year who we called in Portuguese, Desinfo, and I think it’s worth, I realize that I haven’t presented myself. My name is Eloisa. I am director at Internet Lab. Internet Lab is a Brazilian think tank on digital rights and Internet policy, and we developed last year this project called Desinfo, who mapped, who aimed at developing best practices, actually start developing and start this conversation on best practices and guidelines for the advertisement industry, bearing in mind the role of the marketing industry on the information environment. And this is important because the marketing industry has always had an important role in shaping the information environment and influencing it, and it’s interesting to think about it in two levels. When it’s more economical, structural, that the way the commercial marketing structure itself and where it puts money and where it advertises its pieces, it’s normally a key source. The commercial marketing is normally a key source of funding for information for newspapers, and it has always been. But on the second level, there is also the narrative side of it, that marketing upholds and creates narratives that impact the information environment, and it becomes more prominent in the digital area where information, the production of information is decentralized, and new forms of digital marketing and new strategies of digital marketing appear. And there is also, we can say, there is a crisis on the authority of science and journalism. So, with all this together, this theme becomes even more important when we move online. So, during this project, what we did, and I will stop here and pass to our invitees, is that we actually mapped the initial themes and the initial subjects that related with digital marketing, with actually marketing and advertisement in general, and the information environment. Based on that, we workshopped these themes with Brazilian digital marketing actors. This was a collaborative project developed with a marketing agency, and we workshopped these themes, and the goal was to try to understand how this appeared on their daily work, and how we could move towards guidelines and best practices. And the result of this was what we called a working guide for, actually, in development guide for digital marketing, who covers topics such as influencer marketing and the importance of ethical safeguards in good practices when hiring influencers for marketing, social media ads, and website banners, what we call the programmatic ads, and the importance of developing an understandment of how they work, and who will be financed depending on the choices and the structures, and finally, the last topic, the narratives that can be created and fostered by this information, by advertisement campaigns. And I would say that the key takeaway of these workshops that is on the guide, it’s the importance of embedding risk analysis in which regards disinformation and hate speech on the whole process of developing marketing campaigns and advertisement strategies. So, I would say this was a really rich process that we were really able to engage with a lot of marketing actors in the country, but it was, as I said, like a first step. We wanted, like, to open the conversation. And the aim of this panel is, like, to dig into this topic and, like, to create the opportunity to develop further on the challenges and the possible ways to go under this topic. So, I have said enough, and I will pass. What we will do is a first round of five minutes with our speakers, and then we will open the floor, and then we’ll get back. So, first, I want to invite Eliana Quiroz, who is joining us online, and she is a member of the Board of Internet Bolivia. She holds a PhD, she’s a PhD candidate at Universidade Maior de San Andrés, La Paz, focusing on disinformation’s impact on marginalized communities. She holds a Master in Public Administration and has 20 years of experience in international cooperation agencies, including the World Bank and the United Nations. In 2021, she researched disinformation during Bolivia’s political crisis and authored the first academic handbook on Internet and society in Bolivia. And Eliana will give us a brief overview on the role of digital marketing in this information disorder. Eliana, please, the floor is yours.

Eliana Quiroz:
Hi, Eloisa, thank you. Good morning here, and I guess good afternoon and good evening there and everywhere. So, thank you for the invitation, and your introduction was really great because, especially because Brazil is one of the examples of disinformation and campaigns in the world, and you come with examples from grassroots, so from the practice. I want to share some initial thoughts from my research in Bolivia and also trying to understand what are, which are the actors of a disinformation ecosystem. And when we are talking about that, it’s very obvious that private companies are key actors on the disinformation ecosystem. And I’m talking about, of course, marketing companies, which is the focus of this session. But when I’m trying to identify these marketing companies in the practice, the borders of different private companies offering different services blurs. So, we can find, for example, platforms, digital platforms, giving advice on marketing strategies. For example, it’s very well known that when Meta has big clients, let’s say clients that are going to spend one million, five million dollars in their platforms, in Instagram and Facebook, they bring some intermediary between this client, this big client, let’s say, and Meta. And this intermediary is there to help them to micro-target and direct the ads in the best way. And in that moment, this intermediary is bringing some services around marketing, digital marketing strategies. And in Bolivia, for example, this intermediary was a bureau of lawyers. But in Peru, for example, it’s El Comercio. It’s a well-known mainstream newspaper. Or, for example, when I’m talking about blurring these borders that are not so clear, marketing companies offering databases or even data science services. So, my first point here is that when talking about marketing private companies as an actor of this information ecosystem, we are really talking about private entities, different private entities, bringing services and, of course, having an interest of making money out of this business. So, we should try to understand each ecosystem and the practice as they work in each country to identify not only marketing companies, but different private companies or private actors, private entities. The second idea is that these companies have a model, and the model is Cambridge Analytica. So, when you have a lot of money and a lot of interest, you will have the whole model of Cambridge Analytica. And when there is less money or less time, we will have only some parts of this model. And I’m talking about this, thinking about the South. In the South, you will find, for example, some countries that do have a lot of money to spend. So, it’s perhaps the case of Brazil, Mexico, the Philippines. And you will find almost the whole model. But sometimes there are less money. So, you will find perhaps even not marketing companies, but influencers or content creators or what we talk, TikTokers, bringing these services of marketing, digital marketing campaigns. And even also journalists, journalists that are having a very hard time because media shortage, because the media, the model, the business model of media are in crisis. And many journalists are in the streets without employment, but they know about the information flows. So, perhaps we will find some journalists creating some part of the services of marketing digital strategies. So, in the South, I would say, you will find a wide range of marketing services, digital marketing services for campaigns, for disinformation campaigns. So, again, when we are looking at a country and a specific country, in a specific country, it’s good to understand that you will find different actors. A lot of actors playing some part of the roles of the ecosystem of disinformation. I would say that to begin. Then we will dig a little bit more on perhaps the solutions or the way forward.

Heloisa Massaro:
Thank you, Eliana. I will pass now the word to Ana Kompanec, who is here in person with us. Ana is Director for Global Programs at the Center for International Private Enterprise to manage a portfolio of programs spanning emerging and frontier markets around the world in SIPI’s core teams of business advocacy, strengthening entrepreneurship, ecosystem, and institutional trust, economic inclusion, and organizational resilience. Kompanec holds a BA in International Studies from Indiana University of Pennsylvania, a master’s degree in German and European studies from Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, and an MBA from George Mason University. She is a Certified Compliance and Ethics Professional International and a graduate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Organization Management. And Ana will dig into the role of the private sector and how can we work towards developing good practices and accommodations.

Anna Kompanek:
Thank you so much, Eloise. And I feel like I should start with an explanation. You know, when we say private sector in fora like IGF, typically what comes to mind is big tech companies. Here we talked about marketing companies. I want to expand that definition a little bit further and focus on a different segment of the private sector, which perhaps I could call just local business community for more clarity, because that is the segment that my organization, Center for International Private Enterprise, or CIPE, or SIPE, if you speak Spanish, or I guess Portuguese works as well. That is the market segment, if you will, that we work with. And I have to say in conversations about combating disinformation and building healthier information spaces, the role of the local private sector as a sort of stakeholder and potentially an ally is not often talked about. So I appreciate this opportunity. Because ultimately, so you mentioned the marketing companies. Ultimately, there is also a question, what about the companies that pay to have their advertisements placed in different online spaces through the marketing agencies? So what we’re seeing in countries around the world is in many cases, for maybe just an issue of basic lack of knowledge, you know, companies don’t necessarily lack of knowledge, you know, companies don’t necessarily think about how their marketing spends may be contributing to disinformation, because their, you know, basic metric when they buy ads is eyeballs, right? How many eyeballs are seeing this ad? Does it help us generate more sales and so on? But they don’t always consider other risk factors, such as, you know, some of the advertisements, for instance, may appear on websites that are well known to be associated with disinformation or disreputable in some other ways. So there’s just a basic question of sort of sensitizing companies who pay for advertising to think beyond, you know, what are some other ramifications of where that money goes and wherever ads appear? And of course, I want to make it clear, you know, local business community in any country is not a monolith. So companies themselves also may be contributing to disinformation. In many cases, it’s commercially motivated disinformation when perhaps we publish or pay for coverage that is not factually accurate, let’s just say of our competitor. So in some ways, there might be contributors to the disinformation problem. And of course, if our advertising spends supports in directly or indirectly disinformation, that’s a problem. But we are also victims of disinformation, be it through just direct impact on their brand, and also more broadly, through the declining quality of the overall information space. So if the overall quality of journalism in a country suffers, ultimately, those companies may not be able to get, you know, economic information, policy information that’s trustworthy, and that is crucial to their operation. So when we think about who sort of the key ally would be, that doesn’t necessarily mean that every company in a given country is interested in doing something about combating disinformation. They may not be, they may be actively involved in spreading it. In many cases, you have state-owned companies or otherwise politically controlled companies that may also be not so great actors. But I would say there’s a growing segment of companies and they are a worthy ally who recognize the dangers and who also, frankly, see the business case to, you know, improve their own conduct or their own information footprint, if you will, and also to support healthier information spaces, and not just through marketing spend. There are many other ways in which companies can be constructive actors in supporting independent journalism. If we have time and the conversation goes that way, I’ll be happy to highlight other examples. For now, let me just mention that one of the resources that may be of interest to the audience here is a report that my organization and the Center for International Media Assistance, or CIMA, worked on together jointly. It’s called Investing in Facts, how the business community can support healthy info spaces, where we did sort of a global scan of different ways in which private companies can be involved in supporting ethical independent journalism and strong independent media spaces. Ethical advertising is one of those ways but there are others and I’ll be happy to get into that if we have time. Thank you.

Heloisa Massaro:
Thank you Anna. This is really a great point and was actually one of our takeaways also from the project that actually engaging in countering or in ethical information ecosystem is also something that it’s important for the companies and the brands itself because it helps also with their public relations. So thank you. Thank you so much. And now we will go to Herman Wasserman. Herman is professor of the Department of Journalism at Stellenbosch University. He’s joining us online today. He currently holds a professorship in media studies at the University of Cape Town and previously directed the Center for Film and Media Studies. An accomplished alumnus of Stellenbosch University, Wasserman’s academic journal spans esteemed institutions both in South Africa and the United Kingdom. His extensive research in media, democracy and society has earned him international recognition leading to memberships and leadership roles in permanent academic association. Herman, thank you for joining us today and Herman will actually cover for us a little bit today the disparities on the comprehension of this information between the global north and the global south and how this can also impact the discussion we are having here today. So please Herman, the floor is yours.

Herman Wasserman:
Hello everyone. It is a great privilege to be joining you unfortunately not in person but remotely. I have received two questions. Is that correct? The one on the disparities and the second also then on the role of advertisement. So I’ll say something very brief on them both to allow for more time for discussion and questions as this is obviously not the optimal way of making a broad contribution but it’s maybe just some points to consider. So I think in terms of the first question, considering the disparities between global north and south and how this information dynamics manifests in these regions, I think there are two points or two main points to consider in this regard. I think firstly it is that this information has existed in the global south for a long time. We have seen recently that it has become a preoccupation in scholarship and policy debates in the global north. We can track that and we have tracked in our research that scholarly production around this information peaked in 2016. No surprise why that is the case around the elections in the US at that point. And from then on it grew very steeply in terms of scholarly research. But when we actually consider the presence of what we now call this information, it is on a continuum with communication strategies, types of communication, propaganda even that have been present in the global south for a long time. And not only disinformation but also the other related issues such as the pressure on the information environment, the pressure on free and accurate exchange, the pressure on the public sphere, all of these things that we now associate with what has been come to call the information disorder. These discourses and these trends have been in the global south for a long time. One could even say I think that the discourses that kept colonialism in place were often a type of disinformation that served to justify the subjection of the colonized. And then in the post colonial era, if we look at my continent, Africa, it is very clear, for instance, even in the post colonial era that states have often limited critical voices by owning and controlling the media, controlling the public sphere, engaging in disinformation campaigns. So what we are seeing today, when we are again seeing that governments in Africa and elsewhere use the excuse of fake news to enact laws that criminalize dissent, there’s a continuity that is important to note. I think it’s really important that we see this in the global south in the historical, in the long historical moment. Also, if we look at foreign influence operations today, I think it is important to recognize that, that there have been foreign influence operations now often draw on historical loyalties, historical presences in Africa, and that there’s this longer historical view. So that’s, I think, the first point to make is that there’s a continuity that we shouldn’t see disinformation in the global south, certainly as something that is entirely new. Um, and that there is also the, uh, we have to understand with within a longer historical perspective, even if these trends and forms of disinformation are now facilitated and amplified through new technologies. It is a continuation of an older threat. I think the second point maybe to make is that we now see a double threat to the information landscape in the global south, both externally by foreign influence operations and internally by repressive states. And that threat is a threat. Also, um, to the threat to the information landscape more broadly, but it is critically also a threat to journalism and to free journalism in the region. Um, and I will get to that when I make a few points about the information environment in the role of advertisement. But I think it is also important to note that, um, citizens and audiences in the global south have agency, and it is important when we think about this information in these contexts that we also recognize and be very alert to the agency that audiences and citizens, um, have and the ways that they are practicing that agency because that can also hold a lesson for the global north. One of the things one of the points that we’ve made in our research is that, um, we should really encourage more attention to the global south and disinformation in the global south, not merely because the global south is important or because Um, you know, more attention should be paid to it. But because there are actually lessons to be learned from the global south experience that can be useful for the global north. And one of these is the way that, um, citizens and activists and organizations, civil society movements in the global south. Um, are using that agency to fight this information through various strategies. One of the interesting strategies that we’ve seen in the research that Internet lab has also been involved with this project that I lead, um Is how the fight against this information in the south is linked with other struggles so that the fight against this information is not seen in isolation, but it is linked with struggles such as the struggle for access Internet access Internet digital rights, media freedom, education and so on. And you know, if we have time, I can elaborate on that maybe in question time, but I mean, there are clear examples of how the organizations and activists in the global south see the country of disinformation as part of broader struggles. Um so activists in the global south know that to empower citizens to stamp out this information, these citizens need access to the Internet. For instance, they need digital rights. They need freedom of expression. They have to have a good basis of media literacy, etcetera. So these struggles are often linked. And when we approach disinformation, the global south, it becomes very clear That we cannot find this information in isolation. We have to see it as part of this broader ecology, broader array of rights and struggles. So if we if I can move on then quickly to the questions of the role of advert advertisement for the information environment and what implications these disparities might have for addressing and mitigating this information. Um I would maybe like to again return to the focus on journalism. Um if we think that critical independent journalism is one of the most important tools we have to fight against this information in the Global south. We also have to think about the threat of disinformation as linked to the threats to journalism in the global south. One of the major threats as I’ve already alluded to is ongoing state pressure and repression. Uh, this is not a new trend. This has been going on for many, many years. But what is particularly pernicious at the moment is that maybe ironically, states are using the fight against disinformation to enact fake news laws, and that if we’ve seen across the south, but especially also in Africa, but I’m more familiar with Um, the fight against this information has become a smoke screen for further oppression, and that has become a very pernicious and a very Important thing to focus on. Um, but when you look at advertising and marketing again, I think there is a double edged sword or maybe a double two sides of the coin. Um, if we look at the role of advertising in relation to journalism, if we take journalism as a as a key component, um, as a key guarantee or a key Um, uh, weapon again in this fight against this information. Advertising can be part of the problem. I think that is we are familiar with those issues misleading advertising advertising that might Look like journalism, but is in fact, um, you know, marketing. The very fact that business models can promote a certain type of journalism that is sensationalist, um, that promotes click bait. That, um, focuses maybe only on elite audiences and leaves large parts of highly unequal societies without access to media agendas. All of these aspects of advertising and marketing in relation to journalism. I think we are familiar with and can promote can create problems, um, in terms of journalists ability or journalism’s ability to fight this information. But I think an aspect that we often lose sight of is that advertising is also important for organized news organizations in in the South, especially when it comes to small independent media outlets where the state owns and controls many media outlets. These small independent media outlets are often, um, under severe economic threat. We’ve seen during the covert pandemic. Um, how many smaller community organizations, community media, um, independent media and on the continent have had to close down. Or had to severely scale back their operations. And in this regard, advertising and I can actually be in a way for smaller community outlets to sustain themselves. That’s obviously not the only model. There are donor based models and philanthropic Models and so on that are really important to explore. But advertising is one of those avenues. And then I think what we increasingly hear from these news organizations is that the way that advertisements in the online environment are sucked up by big platforms like Google. Um, the result is that local news outlets lose an important source of revenue or get a very small part of revenue, and that threatens their sustainability. Another aspect to point to is that the precarious economic environment large parts of the global South also means that companies often cut back on advertising. So with whenever there’s an economic downturn, whether there’s an economic pressure, and that is something that the global South, um, characterizes the global South almost universally under such pressure, um, advertising dries up. Um, and and so that also becomes a problem for, um, a lot of Problem for, um, news outlets, and then often opens the door for more. Um, sort of a capture of these news organizations by those people that have money and influence and renders them more vulnerable. To disinformation. So I think when we look at advertising in the global South, we have to, um And it’s relation to disinformation and journalism. We have to understand that it’s a it’s a complex issue that there are different aspects to consider. Um, and that one has to take context into account. I think throughout uh, when we when we study disinformation, the global South, um, throughout the global South, it’s clear that context is increasingly or is incredibly important and that we cannot just import models of understanding and analysis from the global North to understand the problem in the global South. We have to look at this problem within context and within the local specificities. So I’ll leave that there. Um, those are my initial comments and be happy to hear any questions or feedback. Thank you.

Heloisa Massaro:
Thank you so much, Herman, for the great overview, and I will pass now to Renata Mielli. Renata is journalist with a bachelor’s degree in social communication from Faculdade Casper Libero. She’s currently pursuing her doctorate in communication science program at the School of Communication and Arts at the University of Sao Paulo, and she holds the distinction of being the first female coordinator of the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee, the CGI, a multi-stakeholder entity responsible for, among other duties, for establishing strategic guidelines related to the use and development of Internet in the country. So, Renata, please.

Renata Mielli:
Thank you. Thank you, Heloisa. Thank you for the Internet Lab to the invitation for this section. I think this dam is very important. In Brazil, we are discussing this a very, very long time. Well, I have some notes here and a few reflections about this problem. The massive dissemination of false and misleading information news has currently drawn attention to the harmful effects it has produced in society. The challenges in developing actions, too, on the one hand, protect fundamental rights such as freedom of expression, privacy, and access to information, and, on the other hand, preserve the respect for cultural diversity its paramount. This information isn’t a phenomenon as old as the history of the press. Historically, the content value chain has been dependent to a greater or lesser extent on the sale of advertisements. Advertising has played a role not only in promoting journalism but also in promoting access to information. Concerns related to the independence of news production and the use of advertising funds to manipulate public opinion are also not new. The Internet, however, has allowed the dissemination of false and misleading news and information to reach unimaginable levels, and its negative effects on society have become even more severe. Understanding this phenomenon necessarily involves understanding the emergency of a network of motivations for the creation, dissemination, and consumption of false and misleading content that amplifies information disorder and is related to the business models of digital platforms. In this sense, the use of the term disinformation industry is appropriate to describe the continuous increase in complexity and size of production chains and networks of factors that emerge as stimulated by high financial investments mostly funded by advertising. Digital platforms have captured an important part of the advertising market, amplifying content through the use of personal and sensitive data. An important part of this content is misleading, false, harmful, and illegal. Research has suggested that content with demonstrably false information circulated more than verified content feeding digital platforms’ business models. Content moderation regulation faces issues as the profound lack of transparency on the development of advertisement and the algorithms that showcase them. Beyond that, intermediary liability regimes, based on the principle of non-liability of the networks, are bringing questioned rising issues yet to be settled. As sponsored and boosted content has greater capacity to reach internet users across different platforms, it is fundamental to investigate the damage it causes to the production of information and news and the role advertisement plays in these processes, especially in a scenario of massive collecting and use of personal data to profile users and target propaganda. Regulatory initiatives need to take into account both the specific aspects of information flow, the advertising market and its actors, as well as how the business models of large platforms favor this information. In order to define strict policies that enable a health informational environment, some directives may be considered. Regulating the role of influencers in programmatic media, this is a very big problem we have. Influencers now have more audience than newspapers and journalists. Establishing strict measures for transparency and advertisement, also considering sponsored and boosted content in social media, such as advertising libraries served by digital platforms and disclosure of the reach and profile involved in the ad or boosted content. I think corporate responsibility of each intermediaries and links in the advertising chain in relation to the integrity of the public debate, as suggests in the booklet formulated by the Internet Lab, called Public or Fake or Ad or Fake. Other initiatives we hope may be proposed in the discussions carried out in this session. Finally, the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee carried out a broad consultation process on platform regulations, which, among other issues, involved questions about concentrations in the online advertising market and the risks of the platform business model, such as disinformation and infodemics. The consultation has more than 20,000 contributions from individuals and organizations of different sectors of society. The analysis of its results is still going on, and we hope that it can be of great value for the formulation of an innovative and locally designed policy. That’s my first. reflections. Thank you for the opportunity.

Heloisa Massaro:
Thank you Renata. Now we are going to open the mic for not only questions but also considerations and comments and thoughts. So we please those who want to make an interventions and are here, use that mic over there. And for those who are online you can either send this via Q&A or perhaps raise your hand and we can monitor for allowing you to intervene.

Audience:
So any? I guess I’ll ask a question if people don’t want to ask questions. So I’m from the National Democratic Institute, Dan Arnato. I’m curious, you didn’t talk too much about political advertising and that’s a lot of what, you know, we engage in monitoring at NDI and other election observation groups. So I’m curious, you know, the role particularly of political advertising and how that could, you know, better be managed using different kinds of interventions, whether they’re legal, you know, mechanisms to control that, whether they’re monitoring systems. I think Cambridge Analytica, as you mentioned, like really demonstrated some of the challenges we have in terms of data that could be used for targeting and just it’s a problematic component because I think that kind of information is useful for research and for other purposes, but it is unfortunately, you know, a problematic component of kind of our modern political systems that these systems can really become weaponized. So curious about your perspective on that piece.

Heloisa Massaro:
Thank you, Daniel. We have one more.

Audience:
My name is Juliano. There is a difficulty in separating the acting of digital influencers in their own work and as political marketeers. Part of advertisement funds is dedicated to political campaigns. So I’d like to hear from the panelists a little bit of how could we develop a kind of regulation that could look into how advertising are fomenting disinformation in political campaigns as it’s so difficult to separate political content than other all kinds of content that are circulating in the Internet. Thank you. Hi, my name is Juliana. I’m a technical advisor from the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee and in Brazil we have a self-regulating council for government advertisement. So I would like to know how the measures to mitigate those risks mentioned can articulate with the self-regulatory frame and with the regulatory from the state. Maybe, for instance, if we could demand more transparency from this influencers through the self-regulatory council or maybe we have too many problems like regulatory capture in these councils and a lot of other difficulties. And if we can adapt these spaces and advance or maybe we should trust in regular regulation and this I think how these things interact. Thank

Heloisa Massaro:
you. Thank you Juliana. Anyone else or do we get back to the panel? Okay, so we are getting back to the panel and before passing the word to my colleagues I would actually like to add something to Juliana’s question which was really great and mentioning that during the project we were developing we actually mapped some of the measures, this kind of self-regulatory bodies for advertisement and how they interact with these issues and it’s interesting that normally there is a couple of safeguards in place or self-regulatory norms that targets well what would be disinformation on the narrative at the level of misleading consumers but when you go beyond that when the narrative it’s the problem with the narrative is less about the project and more about how it can uphold other types of disinformation or even hate speech depending on how you build the narrative and when you’re speaking about how advertisement may finance or be a source of funding for disinformation outlets then there is a limit on what we have until today for the self-regulatory bodies and I think this is one of the challenge how do we think this way forward is this something that should we cover with regulatory approaches like state regulatory approach and now in Brazil and Renata can speak more about that than me we are discussing this on the fake news build with the platform regulatory build that has something on a advertisement but there is a lot there is a long way to go and there is this space that there’s not so many parameters and safeguards and I will stop here to let my colleagues speak and I will go actually backwards now so I’ll pass first to Renata and then I will go with Herman and Anna and Eliana.

Renata Mielli:
Well, three very good questions I cannot answer all of them but just a reflection because this challenge into how we can conceptualize political advertisement is very difficult because it’s a very thin line between the freedom of expression, the freedom of flow of the ideas, the political ideas so conceptualize this is very difficult and is a challenge to address some good practice to avoid disinformation in this but we are all dealing with that in Brazil we have passed through two elections when the flow of disinformation content in political debate was enormous but I think it’s very difficult to categorize political advertisement. What is this? We are talking about when a political party do some content this is advertisement or not? Just a question for our reflection how we how we manage with this so this is a very big problem and it’s not easy to to face it another comment is about what Juliana bring to us and I deal with that before working with internet when I am from civil society discussing the democratization of communication in Brazil and our private sector on advertisement always said that there is a new right that we have to put on human rights I don’t know that is the advertise how can I say that advertisement free yes I don’t know free speech of advertisement as a new whole in the human rights so they use this expression how did you translate free the free speech of our advertisement they use this to avoid any kind of regulation and I myself I don’t believe in self-regulation in the sector I think we need another kind of approach of course there is an importance of this kind of structure but we have to have a space and public space to discuss advertisement in a more serious way and we didn’t talk about this but political is a problem but we have problems with health when we have advertisement about medicines and we have problems we saw this in the pandemic and this is a very big problem because this affected people’s lives so that’s only a few comments

Heloisa Massaro:
thank you so much Renata and now back to Herman who is online

Herman Wasserman:
I won’t say much more than the previous speakers have said because I think you know a lot of that resonates in the South African context we do have regulations for political advertising but they come from a sort of previous era pre-social media really so the advertising of political parties prior to elections on say broadcast channels and newspapers that’s fairly well regulated but what happens on social media I think is less easily regulated also just to confirm with the previous speakers what we define by advertisements increasingly political parties are using all sorts of other ways of guerrilla marketing and things of campaigns that you know is not as easily definable in this regard I would say that what is important is regulation but even maybe more importantly is the sort of coalition of journalists and civil society organizations to also interrogate what political parties are saying to fact check their claims to make audiences aware of the source of claims and campaigns and marketing strategies so I think regulation in itself formal regulation is not enough it is important that this is also forms part of a broader let’s say awareness raising and a broader systemic orientation towards political communication from journalists, civil society organizations etc.

Heloisa Massaro:
Thank you Herman and now back to Anna.

Anna Kompanek:
So I won’t necessarily comment on political advertising since that’s not specifically the issue we’re looking at but I just wanted to re-emphasize the point that Herman made in his earlier remarks that independent journalism is the key weapon in combating disinformation and speaking from the perspective of the private sector as I said there are many ways that local private sector local businesses can help invest in healthy infospace in independent journalism beyond ethical advertising through impact investment or blended finance or corporate philanthropy or thinking about it as a part of their CSR and with that corporate mindset of thinking about their sort of impact in the information space you know we do see local private sector also involved in you know just having a voice as policies that govern information space may be made you know in Armenia for instance we work with a local business organization that has provided input into national strategy against disinformation so kind of just a broader principle that you know whatever laws are being passed the biggest danger is the government just passing the law without any kind of consultation on input from civil society and also from from the local private sector and there is also a value that we see in bringing local business organizations together as part of the broader coalitions that were mentioned before to talk about the the issue of securing the information space mapping it out thinking about incentives for private sector investment in independent media and in our work we see that for instance in the Philippines where we help bring together the Philippine Association of National Advertising and the Makati Business Club which is one of the major business organizations in the country to talk about this particular issue which may not necessarily be kind of a natural topic for for entities like that so we’re just you know let’s be creative about which stakeholders are involved and what collaborations are possible.

Heloisa Massaro:
That’s really interesting thank you Anna and now back to Eliana.

Eliana Quiroz:
Thanks building on Anna’s response also yes I guess it’s a key to understand which actors are playing so I would say taking the question about political advertising it will be like following the money and also following or understanding which entities are part of the of this ecosystem so to bring some transparency on which actors are participating and bringing transparency when I’m thinking about bringing transparency for example is to understand in a specific election for example we should know which marketing companies are taking part which are contracted by which political party for example but not only marketing companies but also for example influencers there are many influences that are contracted by political campaigns so it’s good to know who are bringing some information paid and not only like advertising but advertising like directly in the platforms but also understanding which data providers we have there which data analyst companies are playing some kind of role which audiovisual media production companies communication digital and public relations companies and also fact checking and public opinion companies that are bringing some services during an election and I’m thinking about during an election because it’s very it’s delimited it’s kind of a special moment it’s not like the broader or any time in the in the political life but it’s a very specific and it’s possible to bring some regulations by the authority the electoral authority and the second idea there could be that it’s interesting like to understand that some companies are not really aware of some human rights framework like business and human rights framework and it’s very good to include them into the conversation and bring some knowledge about these frameworks to let them know that what is allowed when it’s not allowed and then of course I really do think regulation is part of the solution but it’s very we know that it’s very complicated because we have also to take care of freedom of expression but yet regulation not only to the platforms but also to some actions of other companies are part of the solution and I will stop there.

Heloisa Massaro:
Thank you Eliana and we reached our limit of time so I would like to thank you all our panelists today I think it was a really interesting discussion and I think there are some takeaways or at least some points we can map from this discussion that actually not only the the difficult of defining political advertisement but how when there is a blurred line also between what is commercial advertisement and political advertisement and we have seen this in Brazil in the last election when we do have brands that are engaging politically and where the line of free speech also can be drawn or cannot be drawn and also the importance not only of advancing regulation but also of engaging different actors because despite the fact that we may have actors that have bad intentions within the ecosystem we may have we actually have a large amount of actors that are there to be engaged and to be included in the conversation of business and human rights so I would like to thank you everyone for being here today and thank you for everyone who stayed at almost seven o’clock today with us and I hope you have a good rest of IGF and a good rest of Wednesday.