Turkey Votes: Government Control of Internet Threatens Elections, ‘Social Platforms Step Up Efforts Against Disinformation’

ROME – While the Turks prepare to go to the vote on Sunday 14 May, Human Rights Watch And Article 19 publish a note in which they shed light on the risk that Erdogan and his party for the Justice and Development (AKP) can disproportionately control the entire digital world to influence the outcome of the elections. The Turkish government has a long and established history of silencing dissidents and opponents, including online, so it has a vast arsenal of digital censorship tools. The document from the two organizations details what steps social media platforms and messaging services should take to fulfill their rights responsibilities ahead of this election.

The censorship. The Turkish government has ramped up its efforts to censor and tighten control over social media and independent online news sites ahead of these elections – writes Deborah Brown, researcher at HRW – so these elections are also important because they are a bank of test to understand how much the Turks can trust the news circulating on the net and on social networks. In recent years, Erdogan has stepped up his crackdown on journalists, political opponents and anyone who has criticized the president or government by even sharing critical articles online. He systematically blocks websites and orders the removal of unwanted content. Turkey has a record of blocking access to social media networks during times of political unrest or crisis, such as the February 2023 earthquakes.

Laws against freedom of the press. In October 2022, a generic offense of “public dissemination of misleading information” was introduced. Social media platforms that refuse to comply with the government’s demands can face heavy fines and bandwidth restrictions that would effectively render their platforms unusable in Turkey. On the contrary, online manipulation has always been widely practiced. Ahead of the past election, scores of fake accounts spread pro-government views on social media. The online threats, in this voting round, also concern the political parties participating in the elections. The presidential candidate of the Republican People’s Party, Kemal K?l?çdaro?lu, said that the government has a plan to circulate falsified audio or video aimed at discrediting him.

The United Nations. Under the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, companies have a responsibility to respect human rights and end abuses. In the specific case of elections, this means that they are required to take all necessary measures to counter disinformation and any attempt to undermine the right of citizens to participate in elections. Yet social media and messaging platforms continue to invest little resources to adequately address these risks.

HRW’s investigation and Article 19. The two organizations examined the policies of social networks and found that only Meta and TikTok have outlined a framework of rules to counter disinformation in the Turkish elections. TikTok works with Turkish, Arabic and Kurdish speakers to moderate content on the platform and counter narratives that violate its policies. But overall no company is completely transparent on this issue. Most of them have failed to outline a set of rules for interpreting declarations of victory and preventing the telling of lies that undermine the integrity of the electoral process.

The Twitter problem. Twitter’s failure to label Turkey’s state-run news agency, Anadolu Ajans?, as “affiliated with the state” is particularly concerning, despite Twitter’s longstanding policy of labeling all accounts it deems pro-government in this way. in other countries of the world. Yet on Election Day, Anadolu will be a primary source of news related to the election results.

How companies should behave. They should resist threats from authorities when they request the removal of undesirable content or when they request access to data, the two organizations wrote. This is even more true when it comes to content shared by civil society, because in the case of elections they are essential for monitoring and could have a negative impact on election results if they are removed or blocked. In addition, companies should establish contingency plans to ensure that the public has access to platforms throughout the election period.

The point of view of Article 19. Social media companies can come under intense pressure to remove content that the government deems unwelcome, including independent monitor ratings,” says Sarah Clarke, director of ARTICLE 19 Europe. This is why it is essential that companies resist these pressures and do everything in their power to reject measures that would make them complicit in rights violations during the most critical moments, including the upcoming election deadline in Turkey.