India’s 2024 Elections: A Battleground of Disinformation and Divisive Rhetoric
India’s 2024 general elections, culminating on June 1st, witnessed a contentious campaign marked by the pervasive use of disinformation and divisive rhetoric, particularly targeting the Muslim minority. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) repeatedly employed the term "Vote Jihad" to allege that Muslims were voting strategically against the ruling party, framing the election as a choice between this perceived threat and "Ram Rajya," or governance under the Hindu deity Ram. This rhetoric, amplified through social media platforms, played a significant role in shaping the electoral narrative and exacerbating existing communal tensions.
The term "Vote Jihad," initially used by an opposition politician, was swiftly appropriated by the BJP. A report by The London Story (TLS) documented numerous instances where the BJP’s official Facebook page and affiliated accounts propagated this narrative. These claims, often accompanied by Islamophobic rhetoric, painted Indian Muslims as a monolithic voting bloc intent on undermining the BJP’s electoral prospects. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), a Hindu nationalist organization, further fueled these sentiments by labeling Muslims as "Jihadis" engaged in "Vote Jihad." TLS argues that this campaign constituted a deliberate strategy to disenfranchise India’s 200 million Muslim voters, echoing similar tactics that have historically marginalized minority communities.
The rapid growth of internet penetration in India, with over 750 million active users, has transformed the landscape of political campaigning. Platforms like Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and YouTube became key battlegrounds for disseminating information, but also for spreading misinformation and hate speech. The BJP’s dominance on these platforms allowed them to connect directly with voters and control the narrative, while opposition parties struggled to mount an effective digital counter-strategy. Studies show the BJP’s extensive use of these platforms to reach voters, surpassing other parties in their digital outreach.
This rise in digital campaigning brought with it a concerning increase in electoral disinformation. An investigation revealed that Facebook approved ads containing anti-Muslim slurs and disinformation about political leaders, often accompanied by AI-manipulated imagery. While Meta, Facebook’s parent company, pledged to prevent the spread of such content, its systems failed to detect these violations. Meta’s defense, citing a commitment to free expression and the role of a free press in scrutinizing political speech, highlights the complexities of content moderation in a democracy where press freedom is under increasing pressure. India’s ranking of 161 out of 180 countries in the World Press Freedom Index underscores the challenges faced by independent media in holding power accountable.
The use of AI-generated content further complicated the information landscape. Deepfake videos of Bollywood stars criticizing the prime minister went viral, blurring the lines between reality and fabrication. Despite police investigations, these videos continued to circulate online. WhatsApp, with its vast user base in India, also played a significant role in disseminating political news and information, often with little regard for accuracy or context. Political parties leveraged WhatsApp groups to push targeted propaganda and engage in widespread disinformation campaigns, raising concerns about data privacy and the potential for manipulation.
The proliferation of electoral disinformation is governed by a complex interplay of laws, regulations, and platform policies. The Election Commission of India (ECI) issued instructions to officials to combat fake news, but its effectiveness in regulating social media platforms has been limited. Similarly, the "voluntary" code of ethics established by platforms has proven insufficient in curbing the spread of hate speech and misinformation. TLS highlights the inadequacy of relying on principles like the Rabat Plan of Action, which prioritizes open dialogue over censorship, arguing that this approach can inadvertently legitimize hate speech and contribute to real-world harm, such as institutionalized violence against Muslims and discriminatory legislation. The spread of "love jihad" narratives, for instance, has spurred the enactment of laws criminalizing interfaith marriage in several Indian states, demonstrating the tangible consequences of online disinformation campaigns. The challenge for India, and indeed for democracies around the world, is to strike a balance between protecting free speech and safeguarding against the harmful effects of disinformation, particularly in the context of elections. The 2024 elections serve as a stark reminder of the urgent need for greater accountability and more effective mechanisms to counter the corrosive influence of disinformation on democratic processes.
