I have a new article published in the Conversation UK. In this piece, I argue that the removal of guardrails and safety measures from online platforms makes it harder to promote reconciliation in deeply-divided societies. Drawing on examples such as my own work on Northern Ireland, I suggest that commercial platforms like X (formerly known as Twitter) are not the best place to promote peace. Perhaps a public service internet would be a more suitable forum in which to reconcile former antagonists.
Many thanks to Charlotte Morris, Dale Berning Saw and the Conversation UK for their feedback and assistance in getting this published.
Bored Panda interview about how people share content on social media
I was interviewed by Ieva Gailiūtė for Lithuanian publication Bored Panda this week. We discussed why people share things on social media without checking their accuracy, and the negative impacts of people being shamed for historic posts.
Some quotes from the interview are below:
When asked why social media users often share their thoughts without thinking twice, Dr. Reilly explained the design of online platforms encourages instant responses and reactions. “The stories, images and posts that feature prominently in our social media timelines are often the most likely to elicit emotional responses from us.”
“The ‘publish then filter’ model of these sites also means our opinions are published immediately with no cooling off period for us to consider whether we want to post them or not,” he added.
When asked whether our online contributions always become permanent, Dr. Reilly told us, “Yes and No. It’s true that social media posts are no longer your property when you share them publicly, or even privately given that they can be shared by others. Even on encrypted apps like WhatsApp and Snapchat, people can take screenshots of content deleted by others and share them later.”
“However, there needs to be a motivation for someone to do this,” he continued. “This is why we see so many politicians being shamed for historic (and often deleted) social media posts. The consequences can be severe, ranging from embarrassment, reputational harm, people losing jobs and even worse.” Especially because sometimes, digital content can be made permanent in ways we never imagined. The posts can be changed, modified, or altered into something completely different from what they originally intended to be.
“People should ideally verify the information before they share it, but many don’t,” he said. “However, it should also be noted that people are better at detecting ‘fake news’ and disinformation than they are often given credit for.”
So even when we can essentially say whatever we want online — whether it’s objectively true or not — and not really have very serious consequences for it, we should all strive to make social media a better place. “Read the story before you share it. Satisfy yourself that it is based on an authoritative source. If it makes you feel an extreme emotion then be wary — this is often a sign that it is disinformation designed to polarize audiences,” Dr. Reilly concluded.
Many thanks to Ieva for the invitation. The article can be read here
Yesterday I was interviewed by Elise Evans on BBC Radio WM Breakfast about social media and ‘fake news’ during the Ukrainian conflict. This was in response to a report that footage from a disaster movie filmed in Birmingham had been used on social media to suggest the war was a hoax.
We discussed what online platforms are doing to deal with ‘fake news’ and how we can identify false images and videos circulating online.
Thanks to Elise, Louise, Megan and the BBC Radio WM team for the interview.
I have an essay in Human:Putting the Social into Science on the role of online disinformation and US President Donald Trump in the violent scenes at the US Capitol Building last week. I argue that the pro-Trump mob are a manifestation of an information crisis fed by Trump, which has created an alternative reality in which the unsubstantiated claims of electoral fraud are believed to be true. I argue that political leaders should be wary of legitimising ‘fake news’ given that they may undermine trust in the institutions they purport to represent. Thanks to Laura Lightfinch and Victoria Wood for their help with this. The piece can be read here
Image of protesters at Capitol Building, Washington D.C, 6 January 2021
Yesterday I was interviewed by Stephen Jones (Press Association) about Donald Trump’s role in amplifying disinformation about the 2020 US Presidential Election. We discussed a variety of issues, including the rise of the right-wing information ecosystem in the US, how social media companies like Facebook have responded to disinformation campaigns, and Trump’s use of online platforms to question the credibility of the 2020 US Election result.
Thanks to Stephen for the interview, which can be read in the following publications:
I have had an article published in the most recent edition of France Forum. I argue that we all have a responsibility to verify information about COVID-19 before we share it online. I also suggest we should be wary of the misinformation about the pandemic shared by politicians, which has the potential to hamper efforts to flatten the curve.
Many thanks to Marc Foucault and Elisabeth Cazeaux for the invitation to write this piece. An English language version can be read below.
This morning I was interviewed by Toby Foster on BBC Radio Sheffield about the misinformation and disinformation about COVID-19 circulating on social media. We talked about how we as citizens should respond to false and misleading information online and how governments and social media companies might take stronger action to address it.
Many thanks to Toby, Katie and Robert at BBC Radio Sheffield for their help with this- enjoyed it!
Stop Hate for Profit 24 hour boycott of Facebook and Instagram
This morning I did a couple of radio interviews about US celebrities joining the Stop Hate for Profit boycott of Facebook and Instagram in order to force them to take stronger action against hate speech and disinformation. On BBC Good Morning Ulster,Naomh McElhatton and I discussed whether these boycotts were an effective way to raise awareness of this issue. The segment can be listened to here
On The Breakfast Show on BBC Radio Foyle, I spoke to Anna Curran about the issues raised by this campaign and how we can better regulate hate speech and disinformation. This interview can be listed to here
Thanks to Anne Jordan and Dean McLaughlin for the invitation.
Dr Paul Reilly 