Abstract
The past decade saw a changing political landscape in Southeast Asia. From a promising turn towards democracy, marked by episodes of backsliding and authoritarian tendencies, and recently threats of democratic regression and political decay in most parts of the region, have dominated current discourse. Central to these changes is the evolution of information and communications technology, and the ubiquity of social media platforms as sources of news and information, as well as shaping public opinion. The paper looks into three cases in Southeast Asia: online hate along ethnic lines in Myanmar; Duterte populism and broad forms of disinformation in the Philippines; and increasing fake news and online radical Islamism in Indonesia. Trends, common areas of concern, and possible patterns would be gleaned from the case studies; and from there, distil prospects for engagement and better approaches against the growing concern for disinformation in the region. The research recommends that a more concerted and inclusive regional approach would help turn the tide against an increasingly deceived public. Keywords: Southeast Asia, disinformation, social media, democracy
Highlights
IntroductionFree speech, and expression are cornerstones of strong and functioning democracies
Broad access to information, free speech, and expression are cornerstones of strong and functioning democracies
Based on the case studies, I find three major trends or issues common among the three Southeast Asian countries: (1) glaring digital divide; (2) income inequalities as exploitative opportunities for the disinformation industry; and (3) deep-seated narratives serve as bases for disinformation
Summary
Free speech, and expression are cornerstones of strong and functioning democracies. It goes beyond the procedural definition of the presence of regular, free and fair elections, moving towards the more substantive needs of participation, expression, accountability and transparency, Emy Ruth D. The internet, social media platforms, and smartphones are said to have “democratising features”: free access, user-friendly interface, and broader means for communication. These platforms enabled people to transcend distance, space, time, and hierarchies to establish networks and nodes of engagement among themselves; and as such have been considered essential elements to pursue more democratic societies (Shirky, 2011). The discourse geared towards caution and critical observation on the relationship of NICT and democratisation (e.g. Abbott, 2011; Quintos-de Jesus, 2012; Abbott, 2013; Fuchs, 2014; Tapsell, 2017a)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
