Social Media’s Influence on Misinformation, Free Speech, and Government Regulation

With the advancement of technology, social media has become an important part of our daily lives, influencing the decisions we make and the actions we take. It delivers information and connects people all over the world. We rely on social media for news, real-time updates on what's happening in the world, educational content, raising awareness, and the exchange of different perspectives. According to a 2024 Ipsos-UNESCO survey, 56.5% of internet users use social media as their primary source of news, raising concerns about the credibility and reliability of the information they obtain from social media platforms. The information acquired from social media shapes public opinion, guides individuals’ actions, and affects the decision-making process. Beyond its influence on our daily lives, it also impacts political discourse, the election process, and legal systems in general. In today's society, the influence of social media on politics is undeniable—mobilizing voters, affecting judicial decisions, and shaping campaigns. However, this dependence on social media creates both advantages and challenges. While it helps raise awareness and provide information, it also creates problems such as the spread of misinformation and inaccuracies, which distort public opinion and reshape the landscape of politics. Given its effect on the decision-making process and legal frameworks within the context of politics, it's important to examine how it affects government decisions, how governments respond to its impact, and the legitimacy of the restrictions and regulatory measures imposed by governments.

Social media platforms use algorithms to personalize content and create an interface tailored to the user based on their preferences. While this enhances the user experience, algorithms create bias and echo chambers, restricting exposure to different viewpoints and only presenting information that reflects the user's own. This isolation from other points of view and opposing perspectives leads to misinformation—usually referred to as ‘fake news’—which is the inaccurate and false information found on social media platforms. The spread of misinformation creates challenges in balancing free speech and political transparency, leading governments to implement restrictions and regulatory measures to prevent its dissemination.

Misinformation not only leads to echo chambers and bias but also spreads false information about candidates and policies, influencing public opinion and potentially decreasing political participation, as exposure to misinformation discourages individuals from fully trusting government institutions. For example, Russia’s interference in the U.S. 2016 presidential election involved misinformation campaigns that influenced a large number of American voters. Similarly, domestic disinformation was present in the 2020 and 2024 elections, showing the impact of social media on political decision-making. To combat this exposure and the spread of misinformation, governments and social media platforms implement regulations that restrict published content. However, this creates a dilemma between controlling misinformation and protecting the right to freedom of expression.

Freedom of speech is the right of individuals to express their ideas, opinions, and views without any restrictions or interference by the government. It is protected under different international and national legal frameworks. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states that:

"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."

This right concerns all United Nations member states. Similarly, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which legally binds all the member states of the Council of Europe, states in Article 10:

"1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."

In the United States, freedom of speech is protected under the First Amendment, preventing the imposition of restrictions on speech by the government. These legal protections ensure that the right to freedom of expression is respected. However, the increase in misinformation leads to debates about regulating digital content and creating necessary safeguards to prevent violations of the right to freedom of expression. Although freedom of expression is a fundamental human right, this freedom can be restricted in certain cases to protect the public interest, maintain public order, and safeguard the rights of others. Any restrictions should be clearly defined in law, be proportionate to the objective, and have a legitimate aim. Such restrictions are justified when the exposure to misinformation disrupts public order or encourages violence. However, in some cases, these restrictions can undermine legitimate political discourse and limit free expression.

When it comes to regulating free speech, there is a difference between authoritarian and democratic regimes. In authoritarian regimes, the government can restrict free speech and impose bans on social media to prevent political opposition, suppress dissenting opinions, and limit political awareness. These governments manipulate political information to control and suppress criticism. For example, in China, the "Great Firewall" censors online content, controls what can and cannot be accessed online, and prevents anti-government perspectives, raising serious human rights concerns. Similarly, in Turkey, the government regulates social media in times of political unrest and crisis to control the spread of information and prevent opposing views from spreading. In Russia, restrictions on social media are implemented to control media content and reduce opposing views. Another example is the ban on social media and censorship in Iran. The Iranian government has blocked key digital platforms where people share footage and organize political movements. In response to restricted online platforms, citizens have started using VPNs to access them, yet these restrictions violate the right to freedom of speech and access to unbiased information. Such actions violate the right to free speech and limit access to platforms that expose political ideas and views. In democratic states, restrictions are justified to protect public order and citizen safety by preventing hate speech and misinformation. For example, Germany’s Network Enforcement Act (NetzDG) was implemented to combat fake news and hate speech on social media platforms.

Social media helps people around the world stay informed on global issues and gain information on both global and domestic events while affecting political decisions. However, the challenges posed by misinformation have led to restrictions, media bans, and censorship implemented by governments, raising concerns about the right to free speech and expression. The real challenge is balancing the right to free expression, activism, and democratic participation with the need to protect public order and national security. Governments should control the spread of misinformation and exposure to manipulated false information, bias, and echo chambers, but such measures should be proportionate, transparent, and in accordance with international human rights. With legitimate regulations, well-regulated restrictions can help citizens make informed decisions while safeguarding their fundamental freedoms.