Misinformation Policy in Sub-Saharan Africa: From Laws and Regulations to Media Literacy

"Governments, media and academics across Africa and around the world have since 2016 highlighted the actual and potential harm caused by misinformation worldwide."

This policy brief, published by the Communication and Media Research Institute (CAMRI) at the University of Westminster, contains two research reports examining policy towards misinformation in sub-Saharan Africa. The volume first examines the teaching of "media literacy" in state-run schools in seven sub-Saharan African countries as of mid-2020, as they relate to misinformation. The second report examines changes made to laws and regulations related to "false information" in eleven countries across sub-Saharan Africa from 2016 to 2020. Both reports examine responses that fall within the remit of government and provide recommendations for the way forward.

The first research report, The State of Media Literacy in Sub-Saharan Africa 2020 and a Theory of Misinformation Literacy, by Peter Cunliffe-Jones, Sahite Gaye, Wallace Gichunge, Chido Onumah, Cornia Pretorius, and Anya Schiffrin, focuses on Cote d'Ivoire, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa, and Uganda as it seeks to answer two research questions:

• Whether elements of broad media literacy, or of a form of news literacy, focused specifically on identifying misinformation, were included in or planned for the curricula. taught in state schools in the seven countries as of June 2020; and
• Whether evidence suggests that teaching young people such elements of broad media literacy, or a form of news literacy focused on the issue of misinformation, reduces their susceptibility to believe and share false information.

To answer these questions, the report covers:

• Clear definitions drawn from past and recent scholarship of "broad media literacy" or "media and information literacy" [MIL], "media literacy", "news literacy", "misinformation literacy", and "misinformation literacy behaviours";
• An outline of the six fields of knowledge and skills that the reviewed research suggests are essential to the development of what the authors define as misinformation literacy and misinformation literacy behaviours;
• Evidence of the extent of the teaching of elements of media or news literacy in the seven countries as of June 2020, drawn from a review of the curricula most widely followed in public schools and interviews with subject experts in those countries; and
• Evidence from past studies around the world of the effectiveness of teaching media literacy or misinformation-literacy-type knowledge and skills in reducing individuals' susceptibility to misinformation and leading to misinformation literacy behaviour.

Findings include:

• Media literacy is barely taught in the seven countries studied, and elements of misinformation literacy are present in only one.
• Misinformation literacy is its own sub-type, distinct from both media literacy and even news literacy.
• Misinformation literacy requires knowledge and skills in six fields particular to false information: Context, Creation, Content, Circulation, Consumption, and Consequences.
• Studies suggest that these misinformation knowledge and skills will help individuals identify and dismiss false information.
• Norm-setting by public figures, institutions, and changes from traditional and social media may also be vital to bring change in misinformation behaviour.

Identifying obstacles to the introduction and effective teaching of misinformation literacy, the authors make five recommendations for the promotion of misinformation literacy in schools, to reduce the harm misinformation causes. In particular, it highlights the need for:

• Ministers to order misinformation literacy to be part of school curricula;
• Ministers to ensure the necessary teacher training, resources, and support for schools;
• Teachers' leaders to engage with the subject and introduce assessments with benchmarks;/li>
• Traditional media and tech firms to promote transparency and misinformation literacy on their platforms; and
• Public figures and institutions to set norms of accuracy and honesty and not spreading false information.

The second report, Bad Law: Legal and Regulatory Responses to Misinformation in Sub-Saharan Africa 2016-2020, by Peter Cunliffe-Jones, Assane Diagne, Alan Finlay, and Anya Schiffrin, looks into the nature and effects of changes made to laws and regulations related to "false information" between 2016 and 2020 in 11 countries: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cote d'Ivoire, Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa, and Uganda. It seeks to answer two research questions:

• What changes to legal and regulatory measures related to media and information did authorities in the 11 countries introduce from 2016 to 2020 in response to declared concerns about misinformation?
• What effect, if any, can these measures be shown to have had on (a) the flow of misinformation, harmful or otherwise, and (b) freedom of speech and freedom of the media on the continent?

To answer these questions, the report:

• Sets out evidence, drawn from official records, news reports, interviews, and civil society monitoring, of changes to the regulatory and legal framework for media and information in the 11 countries from 2016 to 2020;
• Sets out evidence drawn from a separate forthcoming report in this series, other academic papers, civil society reports, and news reports, of the types and drivers of misinformation in circulation in sub-Saharan Africa and what is known of its effects;
• Sets the legal and regulatory changes made in Africa in a global context by examining changes to the regulatory and legal framework in countries and regions outside Africa over the same period; and
• Examines how closely the laws and regulations in place across the continent correlate with what is known of the types, drivers, and effects of misinformation, and what is known of their effects.

The study found that over the five years, the number of laws and regulations in those countries related to "false information" nearly doubled from 17 to 31. However, the laws and regulations passed or amended showed little correlation with, or effect on, the drivers, types, and effects of misinformation in circulation. Although the changes made appeared to have actual or potential chilling effect on media and political debate in many of the countries studied, the effects of the legislation in reducing the harmful effects of misinformation was minimal, a tiny effect compared to the scale and nature of the problem. At the same time as nearly doubling the number of laws and regulations penalising publication of "false information", officials and ministers across the continent made repeated calls for the teaching of media literacy - knowledge and skills that would enable young people to identify and reject misinformation.

The report offers a list of recommendations for governments, public figures and institutions, education and curriculum authorities, media leaders, fact-checkers, library associations, and others concerned by misinformation and researchers of education and misinformation. In particular, it highlights the following five steps that authorities can take to reduce the harm of misinformation:

1. Develop standards-based independent systems of media regulation to improve trust in media.
2. Improve access of public and civil society to official information on important topics.
3. Build systems into parliamentary procedures to promote the accuracy of official information.
4. Work with other countries to require a transparent, standards-based approach to content moderation by global tech companies.
5. Revise laws noncompliant with international law so sanctions are evidence-based and proportionate and that they are applied only when harm or risk of harm is proven.

These two reports are part of a series of reports published by the University of Westminster Press. The series explores, on the one hand, the types, drivers and effects of misinformation spread in sub-Saharan Africa today, and, on the other hand, three approaches to reducing associated harms: (i) fact-checking, (ii) changes to the legal and regulatory framework for media and information, and (iii) media or misinformation literacy. The remaining two reports on fact-checking and on the types, drivers, and effects of misinformation are planned for publication later in 2022.