In Asia, citizen groups fill fact-checking gap left by Big Tech

Initiatives across Asia are tackling misinformation using on-the-ground training and civil society engagement to cater to the needs of communities. They are filling a fact-checking gap left by tech giants who lack expertise in local languages and context.

Dado Ruvic/Reuters
The Meta logo is seen on a smartphone in front of displayed logos of Facebook, Messenger, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Oculus Oct. 28, 2021. As tech firms face scrutiny for misinformation, experts say they do not invest enough in developing countries.

Fed up with the constant stream of fake news on her family WhatsApp group chats in India – ranging from a water crisis in South Africa to rumors around a Bollywood actor’s death – Tarunima Prabhakar built a simple tool to tackle misinformation.

Ms. Prabhakar, co-founder of India-based technology firm Tattle, archived content from fact-checking sites and news outlets, and used machine learning to automate the verification process.

The web-based tool is available to students, researchers, journalists, and academics, she said.

“Platforms like Facebook and Twitter are under scrutiny for misinformation, but not WhatsApp,” she said of the messaging app owned by Meta, Facebook’s parent, that has more than 2 billion monthly active users, with about half a billion in India alone.

“The tools and methods used to check misinformation on Facebook and Twitter are not applicable to WhatsApp, and they also aren’t good with Indian languages,” she told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

WhatsApp rolled out measures in 2018 to rein in messages forwarded by users, after rumors spread on the messaging service led to several killings in India. It also removed the quick-forward button next to media messages.

Tattle is among a rising number of initiatives across Asia tackling online misinformation, hate speech, and abuse in local languages, using technologies such as artificial intelligence, as well as crowdsourcing, on-ground training, and engaging with civil society groups to cater to the needs of communities.

While tech firms such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube face growing scrutiny for hate speech and misinformation, they have not invested enough in developing countries, and lack moderators with language skills and knowledge of local events, experts say.

“Social media companies don’t listen to local communities. They also fail to consider context – cultural, social, historical, economic, political – when moderating users’ content,” said Pierre François Docquir, head of media freedom at Article 19, a human rights group.

“This can have a dramatic impact, online and offline. It can increase polarization and the risk of violence,” he added.

Local initiatives are vital

While the impact of hate speech online has already been documented in several Asian countries in recent years, analysts say that tech firms have not ramped up resources to improve content moderation, particularly in local languages.

United Nations rights investigators said in 2018 that the use of Facebook had played a key role in spreading hate speech that fueled the violence against Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar in 2017, after a military crackdown on the minority community.

Facebook said at the time it was tackling misinformation and investing in Burmese-language speakers and technology.

In Indonesia, “significant hate speech” online targets religious and racial minority groups, as well as LGBTQ+ people, with bots and paid trolls spreading disinformation aimed at deepening divisions, a report from Article 19 found in June.

“Social media companies ... must work with local initiatives to tackle the huge challenges in governing problematic content online,” said Sherly Haristya, a researcher who helped write the report on content moderation in Indonesia with Article 19.

One such local initiative is by Indonesian nonprofit Mafindo, which, backed by Google, runs workshops to train citizens – from students to stay-at-home mothers – in fact-checking and spotting misinformation.

Mafindo, or Masyarakat Anti Fitnah Indonesia, the Indonesian Anti-Slander Society, provides training in reverse image search, video metadata, and geolocation to help verify information.

The nonprofit has a professional fact-checking team that, aided by citizen volunteers, has debunked at least 8,550 hoaxes.

Mafindo has also built a fact-checking chatbot in the Bahasa language called Kalimasada – introduced just before the 2019 election. It is accessed via WhatsApp and has about 37,000 users – a sliver of the nation’s more than 80 million WhatsApp users.

“The elderly are particularly vulnerable to hoaxes, misinformation, and fake news on the platforms, as they have limited technology skills and mobility,” said Santi Indra Astuti, Mafindo’s president.

“We teach them how to use social media, about personal data protection, and to look critically at trending topics: during COVID it was misinformation about vaccines, and in 2019, it was about the election and political candidates,” she said.

Abuse detection challenges

Across Asia, governments are tightening rules for social media platforms, banning certain types of messages, and requiring the swift removal of posts deemed objectionable.

Yet hate speech and abuse, particularly in local languages, often goes unchecked, said Ms. Prabhakar of Tattle, who has also built a tool called Uli – which is Tamil for chisel – for detecting online gender-based abuse in English, Tamil, and Hindi.

Tattle’s team crowdsourced a list of offensive words and phrases that are used commonly online, that the tool then blurs on users’ timelines. People can also add more words themselves.

“Abuse detection is very challenging,” said Ms. Prabhakar. Uli’s machine learning feature uses pattern recognition to detect and hide problematic posts from a user’s feed, she explained.

“The moderation happens at the user level, so it’s a bottom-up approach as opposed to the top-down approach of platforms,” she said, adding that they would also like Uli to be able to detect abusive memes, images, and videos.

In Singapore, Empathly, a software tool developed by two university students, takes a more proactive approach, functioning like a spell check when it detects abusive words.

Aimed at businesses, it can detect abusive terms in English, Hokkien, Cantonese, Malay, and Singlish – or Singaporean English.

“We’ve seen the harm that hate speech can cause. But Big Tech tends to focus on English and its users in English-speaking markets,” said Timothy Liau, founder and chief executive of Empathly.

“So there is room for local interventions – and as locals, we understand the culture and the context a bit better.”

This story was reported by the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to In Asia, citizen groups fill fact-checking gap left by Big Tech
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today