Thursday , January 27 2022
Home / In The Magazine / Dictators using social media

Dictators using social media

Is social media becoming a threat to democracy on the continent?

ANALYSIS | THE INDEPENDENT | In early 2021, Facebook (Meta) deactivated more than 20 accounts linked to Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni’s ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) party. Shortly afterward, Twitter also followed suit, closing 11% of the nearly 3,500 accounts worldwide that allegedly spread pro-government propaganda.

Thus in total, almost 440 Ugandan social media accounts close to the Ugandan government have been blocked by social media networks to date.

Twitter and Facebook accuse the Ugandan government of using social media as a tool to manipulate public opinion, spread disinformation, and intimidate the opposition. Facebook says the Ministry of Information had been using “fake and duplicate accounts” for propaganda purposes.

A new favorite tool used by autocratic leaders

According to analysis by the Oxford Internet Institute, the spread of misinformation driven by political organisations on social media has been sharply on the rise in recent years. The report states that in 2017, disinformation campaigns were carried out in 28 countries. Three years later, that figure had risen to 81 countries.

“This method is gaining ground in countries whose leaders are desperately struggling to maintain their image and reputation on social media,” said Ugandan human rights activist Nicholas Opiyo in a DW interview.

According to Opiyo, this involves using bots and trolls, computer programs, and paid users who use fake accounts to flood social media with posts favorable to the government.

Bans across Africa

In Tanzania, Uganda’s neighbour, Twitter took similar action, removing 268 accounts for spreading “malicious reports” directed at members and supporters of the Tanzanian human rights organisation Fichua Tanzania and its founder.

In Nigeria, President Muhammadu Buhari criticised the activists of the #EndSARS movement in June and called for action to be taken against them. However, Twitter deleted this call, and in reponse, Buhari’s government banned Nigerians from accessing the micro-blogging site, Franziska Ulm-Düsterhöft, Africa expert at Amnesty International in Germany, told DW.

Back in Uganda, the government in Kampala has also been trying to make it harder for Ugandans to get independent information online by imposing taxes on mobile data. The government also doesn’t shy away from temporarily shutting down social media altogether, as was witnessed during the run-up to the presidential election a year ago.

Angelo Izama, a political consultant and journalist from Uganda, describes the move rather as an “overreaction” rooted in deeply-held patriarchal beliefs. Izama says that “(t)he political leadership, especially here in sub-Saharan Africa, comes from a generation where society was structured so that the child would not contradict the father.”

“If it did, it was punished. And that’s the relationship between the state and the citizen,” Izama told DW.

But he says that society is changing, he says, leaving such political elites in the dust. Young people in particular, he highlights, are now able with the help of the internet to react immediately to laws and bans, and make their opinions known about the performance of the government or of private institutions.

2 comments

  1. Kipto arap Cheruyot

    Whereas Twitter, Facebook, etc have a right to determine who uses their applications, they should be conscious enough not to be seen as being biased in their sanctioning. It is surprising that when you read the above article and come to see who has been blocked, it is exclusively the state agencies, or those individuals, agencies that have relation with the state. In other words, Twitter, Facebook have turned themselves into proxies of the non state actors, which is contrary even to the basic tenets of WTO. Does Twitter and Facebook want to tell me that all those that misuse their platforms are exclusively government? And that the non govt actors are all angelic? With Uganda for example, it is common knowkedge that there are some non state actors such as Lumbuye that continue to post on Facebook very horrid writings, calling for ethnic cleasing, racial extermination, genocide against certain ethnic groups in Uganda. He has even gone ahead to call on his group to use terrorism, bombs, poison, to eliminate those people in govt. He has gone ahead to even demonstrate in audios how such bombs can be assembled and used. AND TWITTER AND FACEBOOK HAVE NOT BLOCKED HIM! Does Twitter and Facebook promote and condone such terrorist activities, just because Lumbuye is not a govt agent? By discriminating users because of their political belonging, twitter and facebook are simply guilty of being irrational, discriminatory, and biased for looking the other side when known criminals are using their facilities. I hope my write up will be allowed audience.

  2. Lets not forget that the “Arab Spring” was started and fueled by Social Media and the MSM.

    These #FakeNews mongers need to be Controlled and/or be shut down if necessary.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *