“Freedom Convoys” have evolved from a small resistance movement in Canada to a global anti-vaccination phenomenon. This is yet another wake-up call for governments to strengthen social media oversight and prevent the spread of misinformation.

A few weeks ago, Canberrans were ambushed by horn-blaring protestors whose congregation caused much mayhem in an otherwise quiet city. Australia was one of the many countries to witness such protests. Across the ditch, people began protesting in front of the New Zealand parliament in early February, demanding an end to mandated vaccination for certain professions, an end to mask mandates, a reduction of quarantine requirements, and the reopening of borders.

On the other side of the world, on 13 February, a convoy of cars descended upon Paris. They were angry about the recent French COVID-19 law that requires a “vaccine pass” for admittance into venues and for accessing essential services. Some protestors were also concerned about rising inflation and unemployment. Expecting such protests to hit the European Union headquarters in Brussels, Belgian authorities increased security measures to prevent French protestors from entering the city. On 13 February, a convoy of truckers and farmers joined other protestors in Amsterdam to protest COVID-19 measures and government vaccination drive.

The Root of the Movement – Canada

The Kiwi, Australian, and European protests were all inspired by the Canadian truckers’ protest, which began after the Canadian government announced vaccine and quarantine requirements for commercial truck drivers. On 28 January 2022, truckers from across the country converged on Ottawa to oppose the vaccine requirements. For three weeks now, Ottawa, an otherwise quiet capital city much like Canberra, has unwillingly become a hub of protest.

Even at its initial stages, when the trucker protests were largely peaceful, there were indications of a far-right presence within the movement. Nazi symbolism was used by protestors who likened COVID-19 restrictions to Jewish persecution under the Nazis. Over time, the protests gained traction from anti-vaccination groups. Across the border in the United States, notable figures with ties to the right began supporting the movement, including Donald Trump Jr., Joe Rogan, and Ben Shapiro. A GoFundMe campaign for the movement amassed roughly AU$7.65 million.

A blockade was imposed on Ambassador Bridge, which facilitates roughly a quarter of all trade between the US and Canada. Each day of blockade caused an estimated loss of CA$50 million. The Canadian government was quick to respond to the blockade, given that it is the main hub of transportation that facilitates the production of manufacturing industries in the two North American countries. The mayor of Windsor went so far as to dub the blockade as a “national economic crisis.”

The Role of Social Media

Conspiracies have always thrived in times of uncertainty, like war or natural calamity.  However, the widespread use of social media has certainly exacerbated the phenomenon. Researchers have found that people who use Facebook and YouTube as a source of news are more likely to believe in conspiracy theories.

The interactive nature of social media platforms allows people with similar interests to form virtual groups not bound by geographical proximity. This had led to people in one country morally, and sometimes financially, supporting causes in another. As companies such as Meta and Twitter respond to the threat of misinformation, others, such as Telegram and Parler, actively court followers of fringe beliefs. This has made coordinating protests across borders, especially in Europe, relatively easy.

Many experts believe that the spread of misinformation will be the greatest challenge of the century. The Forum on Information and Democracy has released a report that warns democratic governments about creating laws that would prevent the kind of “infodemic” that has emerged in the presence of COVID-19. The barrage of unreliable and false information that is facilitated by social media has severely impacted public health measures. However, conversations surrounding social media regulation often raise concerns about protecting freedom of speech and expression. While such concerns are valid, it is imperative for the existence of democracy that some form of countermeasure be introduced that can limit and prevent the spread of misinformation online.

Social media has been used for nefarious purposes in the past, such as for recruitment and fundraising for terrorist organisations like the so-called Islamic State (IS). Anonymous portals and apps with end-to-end encryptions, a feature of Telegram, are popular with terrorists. Government intelligence agencies and social media platforms have previously worked together to remove accounts that sought to spread terrorist propaganda. For example, Ask.fm, a website where people can ask questions to users anonymously, was often used by IS to help prospective Jihadists. The website was banned in many countries and to this day continues to be heavily monitored. Facebook was also quick to work with government agencies to remove Jihadists from their platform, and Twitter has suspended over a million accounts linked to terrorists.

Therefore, there is clear a precedent of governments working with companies to regulate the use of social media to prevent violent extremism. Such instances have not curtailed the rights of ordinary citizens to practice their freedom of speech and expression. Yet while social platforms have been actively removing Jihadist accounts, they are much slower in doing the same far-right accounts, which don’t just spread COVID-19 misinformation, but also propagate anti-government, anarchist and anti-minority sentiments. The question thus arises as to why such treatment cannot be extended to far-right accounts that spread misinformation online and help coordinate and fund protests around the world.

Meta and Google, under pressure from their consumers, have placed filters on their platforms. These filters are easy to evade, and as recent as 2020, Facebook was still unable to completely remove Jihadist terrorists from their platform. As per Meta’s own statement, it relies on reporting and feedback from consumer and third party fact-checkers for deleting accounts that spread misinformation. However, it is also notoriously secretive about providing data on how many accounts it has shut down. Moreover, substitute platforms are on the rise, with Parler and Gab replacing Twitter and BitChute replacing YouTube. Such substitute platforms pride themselves for having no censure and for promoting “free speech.”

It is difficult to ask governments to intervene in social media policy when politicians themselves can benefit from the spread of misinformation online. Forty percent of the funding for Canadian protestors has come from the US, where politicians such as Ted Cruz and Marjorie Taylor Greene have lauded the protestors as “heroes” and “patriots.” Given that many Republicans face midterm elections in November, some appear to be using the Canadian protest as cannon fodder to appease their electorates. In Australia as well, some parliamentarians have offered moral support to anti-vaccination rallies.

Though some elected officials might benefit from people’s mistrust over scientific advice, this will come at a great cost for democracy. While governments take seriously the threat terrorists halfway across the world pose to their national security, they are much slower in recognising the danger their own population can pose if armed with deranged conspiracies and a platform for crowdfunding their anarchist aspirations.

Concerns about protecting freedom of speech and expression can be accommodated within discussions about social media policies. After having witnessed repeated instances of the malicious ways in which social media harms democracies, it would be injudicious to not take serious steps and make laws about its regulation. The termination of the pandemic rests on and entrusting that people will believe in scientific advice, which will be impossible to achieve if this level of mistrust and misinformation is allowed to run rampant on social media platforms.

Arushi Ganguly is a Masters of International Relations (Advanced) student at the Australian National University and the assistant commissioning editor for Australian Outlook. Her research focuses primarily on feminist international relations.

This article is published under a Creative Commons License and may be republished with attribution.