How not to fight fake news

In an attempt to tackle the spread of malicious propaganda, the federal government has announced a 10-member joint task force to identify and take action against those disseminating disinformation, particularly in the aftermath of recent incidents of terrorism and vandalism. Approved by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, the task force is expected to report its findings in 10 days, focusing on identifying individuals and groups behind fake news campaigns and suggesting policy improvements. While the intent to curb disinformation is commendable, the approach raises significant concerns about its implementation. Disinformation is not unique to Pakistan; it is a global issue that has undermined trust in governments, institutions, and even media. Countries with robust legal frameworks address this menace through transparent legal systems – civil legal systems, that is. Unfortunately, in Pakistan, the response is often mired in draconian measures such as the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) or the filing of dubious cases, making the state’s actions seem more punitive than corrective.

Disinformation must be combated, but through democratic, lawful, and transparent means. Pakistani authorities' reliance on criminal law, rather than civil law, to address this issue creates a chilling effect on freedom of speech and stokes distrust between the state and its citizens. It is not just the content of disinformation but also the methods of suppression that erode credibility. And the role of the media in this equation cannot be ignored. Mainstream media, with its editorial oversight, remains a relatively reliable source of information compared to the unregulated sprawl of social media. However, media organisations – sometimes even mainstream media – have been complicit in perpetuating disinformation. Journalists, YouTubers, and even established channels have launched malicious campaigns that endanger lives and reputations. Media bodies need to enforce stricter codes of conduct, ensuring accountability for those who misuse their platforms. Penalties, such as fines or expulsion from press clubs, could act as deterrents, but only if implemented consistently and fairly. That would include deplatforming culprits of disinformation. That would also include applauding those brave journalists that have been fighting for the truth consistently – and without favour – for decades on end.

Expectedly, the state's measures, such as throttling the internet and banning platforms, are counterproductive and often exacerbate the problem. When citizens cannot communicate, work, or access information due to government-imposed restrictions, frustration grows, and the state’s credibility diminishes further. Even positive developments, such as inflation control or economic stabilisation or PIA getting part of its wings back, cannot repair this trust deficit if the state continues to lean on authoritarian tactics. The solution lies in building trust, fostering transparency, and implementing a comprehensive strategy to address disinformation. This includes promoting media literacy, encouraging ethical journalism, and bridging the gap between the state and its people. Regulation must not be equated with persecution – and for that it must not be used as persecution either. Only through collaboration between the government, media, and civil society can Pakistan hope to combat disinformation effectively while safeguarding democratic values. For a country that claims to be a democracy – even a hybrid one – it is essential to remember that authoritarian shortcuts lead only to greater disillusionment and unrest. Instead of throttling freedoms, Pakistan must prioritise strategies that uphold the rule of law, protect rights, and inspire public confidence.