Lost your password?

The Politicization of Fact-Checking

AfricaFebruary/March 2025
Fact-checking

Photo illustration by Dami Mojid / THE REPUBLIC.

THE MINISTRY OF WORLD AFFAIRS

The Politicization of Fact-Checking

The role and perception of fact-checking in regions with fragile trust in media and government has sparked recent debates, as analysts question its effectiveness amid partisan exploitation by political actors.
Fact-checking

Photo illustration by Dami Mojid / THE REPUBLIC.

THE MINISTRY OF WORLD AFFAIRS

The Politicization of Fact-Checking

The role and perception of fact-checking in regions with fragile trust in media and government has sparked recent debates, as analysts question its effectiveness amid partisan exploitation by political actors.

Although fact-checking has gained traction for its use in debunking misinformation, it has not succeeded in countering cognitive biases or conspiracy theories. Its effectiveness ultimately hinges on the willingness of individuals to engage with opposing viewpoints and reevaluate their beliefs. As fact-checking became prominent worldwide, in Europe in 2010 and Africa in 2014, various individuals, organizations and platforms began determining what was ‘important’ for fact-checking, with considerations ranging from prominence, interest and virality. This selectivity often reflects political, social, or economic interests, leading to the inevitable politicization of fact-checking. This phenomenon refers to the shift from objective truth-seeking to fact-checking influenced by ideological leanings, institutional agendas, or financial incentives.

Politicization also acknowledges the harsh reality—that there is no single truth or fact, and that what used to be considered sacrosanct can now be questioned simply because another group decides not to agree. And in a heterogenous society, with different thoughts and preferences, this can be weaponized to devastating and disruptive effects. This issue has become a growing trend in parts of Africa, like Ethiopia, where fragile democracies and deep-seated societal divisions make the politicization of fact-checking a significant concern. Or in Nigeria, where fact-checking during the 2023 general elections often focused on claims tied to dominant political factions, leaving grassroots-level disinformation unaddressed. Thus, politicization is manifested in various aspects of media including social media.

THE EVOLUTION OF SOCIAL MEDIA IN POLITICS: FROM TWITTER AND FACEBOOK TO X AND META

Two years after Elon Musk acquired the social media platform X (formerly known as Twitter), significant changes have reshaped the platform’s approach to disinformation and fact-checking. Musk’s leadership has been characterized by workforce reductions, a rebranding effort and the disbanding of X’s disinformation unit, justified as a move to promote free speech and public opinion due to fact-checker bias. These decisions, however, have sparked widespread criticism from professional fact-checkers, journalists and disinformation analysts. 

Under Musk’s leadership, X introduced ‘community notes’, a crowd-checking approach that allows individuals to collaboratively add context or corrections to misleading posts. While designed to democratize fact-checking, this approach has faced criticism with professional fact-checkers arguing that the system has significant flaws. Paid verification and content creator incentives have compounded the problem by enabling the spread of manipulated or fake information to generate engagement and income. Additionally, the platform’s restrictive Application Programming Interface (API) policies have made it challenging for researchers to analyse disinformation trends effectively.

On 07 January 2025, Meta similarly announced the discontinuation of its fact-checking arm, citing the same rationale as X: the promotion of free speech. This decision, however, has sparked criticism given Meta’s extensive history of supporting fact-checking efforts. Since 2016, Meta has contributed $100 million to fact-checking programmes, including direct support to organizations and industry initiatives such as sponsorships, fellowships and grants. According to Poynter, by 2023, Meta’s fact-checking partnerships accounted for 45 per cent of the total income of fact-checking organizations.

The policy change coincides with Donald Trump’s stunning return to the US presidency in 2025. It also shows a volte-face in the position taken by social media platforms in 2021, after Trump faced bans following the Capitol Hill attack. Trump’s return to power has seen companies respond with a shift in corporate alignments as well as donations. Meta has also promoted Joel Kaplan, former Republican deputy chief of staff for policy under George Bush’s presidency, as Meta’s new global policy chief. Kaplan has consistently advocated for free expression and has shown concerns about biases in third-party fact-checking. His influence is evident in Meta’s adoption of a community notes-style approach, where unpaid users and not third-party experts, moderate content. Meta’s new pivot has since earned Trump’s praise.

shop the republic

shop the republic

COMMUNITY NOTES: A NEW FRONTIER FOR CROWD-CHECKING

In October 2024, the Centre for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) revealed that the majority of accurate community notes did not reach enough users to counteract the spread of original false claims. Misleading posts, such as claims about the illegal importation of voters and the 2020 US election being stolen, amassed billions of views but had no community notes displayed. Critics allege that Musk, a Trump supporter, indirectly politicized information access through the platform’s policies. Musk’s misleading posts about the 2024 election were viewed more than a billion times without any notes ever added.

According to the report by the CCDH, although 74 per cent of the community notes were found to have accurate notes proposed, they were never displayed. This, according to CCDH, was ‘due to toxic X users gaming Community Notes to hide information they politically disagree with.’ Community notes has also faced operational and perception challenges. According to the Poynter Institute, only 8.5 per cent of the 122,000 community notes written in 2023 were visible to regular X users. Public visibility of notes depended on ratings from other community notes users, who assessed the quality, clarity and contextual relevance of the notes.

The system’s reliance on user behaviour has raised concerns about bias and outdated information. A community note attached to a CNN report on absentee African American fathers was criticized for using outdated data but remained live for days before being corrected. With community notes, it becomes a case of the public deposition in ensuring accuracy rather than facts beyond personal dispositions. This is particularly crucial, especially seeing that Africa is polarized based on religion, culture and ethnicity.

Despite the criticisms, some experts acknowledge the potential of crowd-checking. Yang Gao, an assistant professor at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, conducted a study on community notes from June to August 2024. His team analysed 89,076 tweets and found that publicly displayed notes often led to voluntary tweet retractions. The study highlighted that observed influence measured by actual user interactions was more effective than presumed influence based on follower counts. This contrasts with traditional fact-checking by professional organizations, whose corrections often struggle to achieve sufficient reach on already viral posts.

shop the republic

shop the republic

PLATFORMS AND AFRICAN MISINFORMATION

To make X localized, the platform opened an office in Ghana in 2021, focusing on disinformation in Africa, especially since its staff was familiar with the continent’s landscape. Unfortunately, after Musk’s takeover, the staff was fired, making the continent porous to information disorder. This was evident in the various elections held in the continent, particularly in Nigeria. In various instances, fact-checkers complained about the X’s reluctance to pull down posts or suspend accounts consistently posting harmful content. During Nigeria’s 2023 elections, for instance, a BBC investigation revealed the recruitment of influencers to manipulate public opinion and sway support, highlighting the role of disinformation in shaping political outcomes. Some of the accounts spreading disinformation were not taken down by X.

Meta’s pivot is also particularly problematic for Africa due to the continent’s dependence on philanthropy, especially regarding initiatives such as the Third-Party Fact-Checking Program and the WhatsApp tip line, amongst others. This is particularly due to harsh economic realities, which have made many media outlets depend largely on government support through advertising to cater for their needs. In turn, this has led to control and influence on the media.

A notable consequence of this shift has been the proliferation of Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (FIMI), particularly by Russia. Disinformation analysts and fact-checkers have identified coordinated campaigns targeting African nations, including Mali, Niger and Nigeria. These campaigns exploit reduced oversight on platforms like X to disseminate propaganda, mobilize support, and even incite protests. For instance, Russian-backed campaigns have utilized X to promote narratives favourable to their interests, garnering support across African nations. The combination of algorithmic amplification and resourceful propaganda strategies makes social media a powerful tool for FIMI.

The use of FIMI is not limited to Russia; countries like the United States, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and others have also employed it as a strategic tool. In a 2023 investigation, an Israeli firm dubbed ‘Team Jorge’ by investigators noted how the firm headed by a former Israeli special forces’ operative, had interfered in elections across the world, notably in Kenya. While Russia gets the majority of accusations as regards the use of FIMI, the United States is equally complicit. Various undercover projects, such as Covert Social Media Operations and Operation Earnest Voice (OEV), are being used in other regions, including Africa.

Crowd-checking may not be the most effective solution for Africans, where political and social dynamics are heavily shaped by ethnic and religious divisions. In the build-up to the 2023 elections in Nigeria, a tribal divide became extremely evident amongst the Igbo and Yoruba ethnic groups with politicians capitalizing on it. This is quite important, especially as many political organizations engage the services of influencers in pushing agendas. Similarly, in Eritrea, the New Africa Institute’s 71-page report on the Tigray conflict, which was disseminated by Ethiopian officials and embassies, illustrates how unsupervised fact-checking initiatives can be hijacked by state actors to advance a political agenda, distorting narratives in favour of national interests.

shop the republic

shop the republic

THE IMPLICATIONS FOR FACT-CHECKING

The shift from institutional fact-checking to community-driven models like community notes represents a broader trend in the politicization of fact-checking. Furthermore, the alignment of major social media platforms with political figures raises questions about the future of information integrity. The payment of influencers by Nigerian political parties highlights how social media can be manipulated, undermining the platforms’ role as a neutral space and eroding public trust in online information. Additionally, Facebook’s algorithms have been found to exploit users’ attraction to divisive content, stoking polarization, especially in regions with limited access to reliable news.

African fact-checking organizations must prioritize the development of alternative funding mechanisms that extend beyond advertising revenues and international aid. This shift would reduce the continent’s dependency on Western nations while fostering the growth of robust, transcontinental local structures.

The issue of free speech must remain central to policy discussions. However, in the absence of systems that ensure free speech does not infringe on basic human rights or undermine democratic processes, it risks becoming a weapon for bad actors who consequentially cause the erosion of truth, the spread of extremist ideologies and the deepening of societal divides. Striking a balance between safeguarding free expression and preventing its misuse is vital. Thus, policies that uphold free expression while creating accountability mechanisms to prevent harm need to be put in place in African countries. This includes promoting transparency in how social media platforms moderate content, holding bad actors accountable for hate speech or disinformation, and fostering public education on media literacy. Additionally, policymakers must define what entails free speech and further ensure that any restrictions on speech are narrowly tailored, clearly defined and not used to suppress dissent or critical voices. In this way, societies can safeguard free expression as a democratic value while mitigating its potential to be weaponized against the very principles it seeks to protect.

Policy formation at the regional level is equally urgent, with organizations like the Economic Community of West Africa States (ECOWAS) and the African Union (AU) playing pivotal roles in creating frameworks that regulate social media platforms. These policies should serve as guiding principles for the operation of social media companies within the region, much like the European Union’s (EU) approach. Such policies should emphasize transparency in content moderation, accountability for the spread of harmful content, and safeguards against the misuse of platforms for disinformation or incitement of violence. This is particularly urgent for Africa, where the region grapples with threats to democracy including electoral manipulation and ethnic tensions, that are heightened by unregulated digital spaces. Regional policies would not only harmonize efforts to regulate tech giants but also ensure that solutions are tailored to the unique sociopolitical contexts of African nations. Where a regional or continental policy fails to be adopted, Africa becomes not just a ground for the spread of FIMI but for practices by actors who intend testing propaganda and other vices⎈

BUY THE MAGAZINE AND/OR THE COVER