Menu Menu
[gtranslate]

Facebook, Twitter, and WhatsApp suspended during Zambia’s election

Zambia officials threatened to suspend all broadband services on the day of its election to combat misinformation. In the end, its Ministry of Information froze traffic on WhatsApp, Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

In the fight to stem the spread political misinformation during its presidential election, has Zambia compromised a sense of genuine democracy?

When it comes to political advertising, social media sites frankly don’t know whether to stick or twist.

Throughout large parts of 2020, and particularly in the lead up the US elections in November, several social media companies were exposed for facilitating the spread of misleading content.

In one instance, Facebook promoted political ads featuring former president Trump and a slew of unfounded claims that votes had not being counted.

Ahead of its own presidential election – for which polling closed at 12pm on August 12 – Zambia’s Ministry of Information took the bold decision to kill outside influences stone dead by cutting the nation off social media altogether.

Analysts have predicted a ‘very tight’ election between President Edgar Lungu and businessman Hakainde Hichilema, and Zambia has moved to kill any last minute scheming online.

Zambia’s social media blackout

According to digital rights organisation Access Now and internet monitor NetBlocks, a nationwide blackout axed both state-owned internet providers and other private networks for 24 hours.

There had been rumblings in the build up to election day that Zambian Broadcast Services planned to shut off internet services entirely. Predictably, that suggestion went down like a lead balloon.

Amid record turnouts from voters, NetBlocks confirmed a stagnancy in real time internet traffic on WhatsApp, Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook which suggested Zambia instead targeted social media.

A small minority managed to slip past government censorship using VPNs, but for the most part people were left without the means to communicate online or share content related to the election.

The obvious drawback of this decision is that updates on polling locations and wait times, as well as safety and security measures, failed to reach citizens.

Considering the instances of extreme violence which have occurred in the build up to the vote, some have deemed the decision to be negligent as well as anti-democratic.


A threat to transparency and civic engagement?

This type of stunt is becoming increasingly common across the continent.

Zambia joins CongoUgandaTanzaniaGuineaTogoBeninMauritaniaMali, and Cameroon as the latest African nation to face internet shutdowns and social media restrictions during elections.

In this case, the weeks leading up to ballots have been littered with violent attacks (and several killings) between warring supporters. The response of Lungu was to mobilise the military to help the police force maintain order.

You can see then how preventing people from accessing real-time safety and incident updates could be deemed as anti-intuitive. Especially as tensions come to a head throughout the voting process.

You could argue that voting windows are the most important time for complete transparency, free expression, and civic engagement, and social media provides a space for political discourse in a safe and controlled manner.

More to the point, if governments can start to discern exactly when people can and can’t turn to social media to express themselves, can we describe our favourite apps as democratic platforms at all?

It’ll be interesting to see the response from those affected by the issue once normal service resumes. I can’t imagine the story ends here.

Accessibility