Cover: Conflicted Information in Conflict Zones

Conflicted Information in Conflict Zones

Multidimensional analyses of social and traditional media from two case studies

Published Aug 3, 2021

by Luke J. Matthews, James Ryseff, Omair Khan

Download eBook for Free

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 1.9 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

When social media first rose to prominence, many in the technology industry thought it would be unequivocally good by democratizing the sharing of information and thereby furthering democratic society and the will of the people against those governments who would repress it. While it has done these things, it now is recognized social media has also created substantial societal damage by equally democratizing the sharing of misinformation, state-sponsored propaganda, and outlandish conspiracy theories. These recent societal effects of social media, however, in many ways parallel the earlier technological democratizations of information brought about by the printing press.

Given this context, RAND undertook to study the patterns of information sharing on both social media and traditional print media in two contemporaneous conflict zones both with postcolonialism historical roots. In our case study of China and Hong Kong, we found that social media was an enabler of pro-democracy movements, and that state-run media largely controlled the information space of traditional media. In our case study of India and Pakistan, we found that neither social nor traditional print media were controlled by the state, but that information content degraded over time into two fact-free and partisan narratives. The findings from two distinct contexts similarly suggest that more persistent attention to objective information about events, potentially through recycling of chronologically earlier news stories by media platforms, may help increase the volume of accurate information relative to misinformation that is shared and consumed by platform users.

Research conducted by

The research described in this report was conducted within the Pardee RAND Graduate School.

This report is part of the RAND working paper series. RAND working papers are intended to share researchers' latest findings and to solicit informal peer review. They have been approved for circulation by RAND but may not have been formally edited or peer reviewed.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.