Legal issues in dis/misinformation

I’ve discussed in previous posts the nature of dis/misinformation, as well as some of the social and cultural issues involved. However there exist several legal issues with the existence of both disinformation and misinformation in the wider information society and in the knowledge economy that are worth considering. For example, the types of disinformation that I have discussed before, such as ‘weaponized narratives’ and ‘psychological operations,’ can be used to incite terror in populations, undermine governments, and foment dissent, all of which are potentially criminal.  

Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash

In 2003 the US government used potentially dis/misinformed reports of the existence of Weapons of Mass Destruction to justify the invasion of Iraq and the destabilisation of the Iraqi government. When analysing the way this evidence was treated, Jervis (2016) wrote that decision makers used no comparative methods, failed to test alternative hypotheses, displayed rampant confirmation bias, and ignored contrary evidence. Taken together, this points to concerning lack critical information skills in those running our governments. Yet politicians weren't the only ones affected. In 2003 international researchers investigated how members of the public processed information about the war:

“We draw three pragmatic conclusions: First, the repetition of tentative news stories, even if they are subsequently disconfirmed, can assist in the creation of false memories in a substantial proportion of people. Second, once information is published, its subsequent correction does not alter people’s beliefs unless they are suspicious about the motives underlying the events the news stories are about. Third, when people ignore corrections, they do so irrespective of how certain they are that the corrections occurred.” (Lewandowsky, Stritzke, Oberauer & Morales, 2003, p. 194). 

While official estimates vary, the resulting war led to in excess of a hundred thousand deaths, civilian and military alike. Dis/misinformation can have a horrific cost. 

A more recent example of this includes evidence given at the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee Inquiry into fake news, which revealed that data from social media combined with military methodology had been used to manipulate the voting intentions of hundreds of thousands of British citizens (Dehaye et al., 2018). Shortly after the revelations debate erupted as to whether the results of the 2016 referendum were potentially invalidated (Hansard, 27 March 2018, col. 689). Most responses to the news that fake news and microtargeting were being used to influence democratic process called for technical solutions. Facebook for example has implemented a ‘disputed’ message for questionable content appearing in for German and US users. But this fails to address the point; it is not that some information is potentially dis/information, but that all information is potentially dis/misinformation. In response to the inquiry, colleagues writing on behalf of the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP) advocated for a greater emphasis on critical thinking coupled with information literacy, particularly in secondary school (Goldstein et al., 2017). It’s a tame response, but they make a good point. In order for societies to function democratically, citizens need to be able to critically question all the information they are given, and schools are good place to start building that capability. 

More practically for information professionals, some have suggested that dis/misinformation in the information economy risks accusations of negligence and information malpractice (Ferguson & Weckert, 1998; Healey, 2008). The Special Libraries Association was concerned enough to issue and information kit on malpractice in librarianship in 1992. However commentary from Diamond and Dragich (2001) suggests this is highly unlikely to occur. But the discussions raise an interesting thought, who is ultimately responsible for actions arising from dis/misinformation? For example;

• If an academic librarian unknowingly gives a student incorrect information to use in an assessment, and that student fails, is the librarian responsible? 
• If a legal librarian unknowingly gives judicial officials disputed information, is the librarian responsible for any resulting miscarriage of justice? 
• If a health librarian unknowingly gives a surgeon recalled practice guidelines, and a patient is harmed or dies as a result, is the librarian party to that harm?

These may be examples, but they show that the work of modern information professionals is important. And because of that importance, we must do our work well. From here we enter the realm of ethical issues in information practice. Stay tuned...

Dehaye, P.-O., Wylie, C., Collins, D., Elliott, J., Farrelly, P., Lucas, I. C., … Watling, G. (2018). Oral evidence: Fake news, HC 363. London: HM Government. Retrieved from http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/digital-culture-media-and-sport-committee/fake-news/oral/81022.pdfDiamond, R., & Dragich, M. (2001). Professionalism in librarianship: Shifting the focus from malpractice to good practice. Library Trends, 49(3), 395–414.Ferguson, S., & Weckert, J. (1998). The librarian’s duty of care: Emerging professionalism of can of worms? The Library Quarterly, 68(4), 365–389.Goldstein, S., Secker, J., Coonan, E., & Walton, G. (2017). Written evidence submitted by InformAll and the CILIP Information Literacy Group (FNW0079). London: Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport. Retrieved from http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/culture-media-and-sport-committee/fake-news/written/48215.htmlHealey, P. D. (2008). Professional liability issues for librarians and information professionals. New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers.Jervis, R. (2006). Reports, politics, and intelligence failures: The case of Iraq. Journal of Strategic Studies, 29. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390600566282Lewandowsky, S., Stritzke, W. G. K., Oberauer, K., & Morales, M. (2005). Memory for fact, fiction, and misinformation: The Iraq War 2003. Psychological Science, 16(3), 190–195. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.00802.x