Code of Good Practice: Together Against Disinformation
Our Foundation took part in drawing up an extremely important document: the „Kodeks Dobrych Praktyk. Wspólnie przeciw dezinformacji” (Code of Good Practice. Together against disinformation). The authors and signatories of the Code are a dozen or so organisations and institutions working in fact-checking, online monitoring and education about disinformation: Crazy Nauka, CyberDefence24.pl, FakeHunter, Instytut Zamenhofa (Zamenhof Institute), Nauka. To lubię (Science. I like it), SPIDER’S WEB, Demagog, Sieć Obywatelska – Watchdog Polska (Citizens Network Watchdog Poland), Pravda, NASK and us, Fundacja Rozwoju Przez Całe Życie (Continuum Foundation).
Our motivation in creating this document was the need to stand up to the wave of manipulated or false information which is increasingly difficult to verify and which is becoming a phenomenon that threatens public debate.
What will you read about in the „Kodeks Dobrych Praktyk” (Code of Good Practice)?
● Disinformation – whether deliberate or not – influences attitudes in the real world, which may have serious consequences for people’s health and lives;
● Disinformation may concern not only facts but also opinions. Harmful opinions that mislead as to the actual state of affairs and provoke aggressive attitudes or behaviour should be condemned on a par with false information;
● The use of opinions, speculation and rumours to mislead as to the actual state of affairs should be pointed out and countered. Content that results in displays of aggression and hatred in social relations should be flagged and, where possible, in accordance with the law and with respect for the constitutional freedom of speech, countered;
● Bots and internet trolls are only some of the channels through which disinformation content is shared. Disinformation activities often combine seemingly unrelated factors and communication channels;
● Anyone can be a source of disinformation – an ordinary user, an opinion leader, a politician or a journalist;
● A special responsibility for published content rests with the authors with the greatest reach – opinion leaders, politicians and media representatives;
● Disinformation campaigns may use various means, but they have one common denominator – their aim is to change the attitude or behaviour of the group of people at whom they are directed;
● Disinformation campaigns may be run over different periods of time – the most effective ones are continuous/long-term, lasting for years;
● Monitoring of disinformation content cannot be limited to quantitative analysis and automatic sentiment detection of published mentions;
● Effective monitoring of harmful content must include qualitative analysis – taking into account many factors that help to characterise the scale of the disinformation phenomenon;
● In the context of disinformation activities, rumours, opinions and speculation are often mixed with facts. This creates scope for the effective use of many disinformation techniques. Properly recognising and classifying this content is a very important part of countering the phenomenon of disinformation;
● Expressing opinions, asking leading questions or quoting content may also be a form of disinformation. The determining factor here is misleading as to the actual state of affairs and the degree of harmfulness of the content – not its form;
● Inappropriate, unprofessional communication about detected disinformation content can do more harm than good. The key issue is the form of the message presented;
● Social media platforms should adapt their actions and tools to the reality in which we find ourselves. Their passivity may cause irreversible harm to people’s health and lives, as well as to social relations;
● Educational campaigns, responsible conduct by the media, and labelling and reporting disinformation content are key actions that make it possible to fight disinformation effectively.
