Imagine a summer evening in the United Kingdom, right before the Brexit referendum. Social media was flooded with posts and advertisements, each one more eye-catching than the other. But among these, a campaign called ‘Leave.EU’ began to stand out. The messages played on fears, hopes, and a sense of lost identity. ‘Leave.EU’ harnessed digital platforms to target individuals with calculated and data-driven content, shaping their perceptions and pushing them towards voting to leave the European Union.
Today, as we look back at the Brexit referendum, it serves as a potent reminder of how the structure of democracy is increasingly being defined by technology. Digital platforms, once seen as great equalisers that empowered the masses and amplified previously unheard voices, have become a double-edged sword. We see a similar trend in India where digital campaigns are now central to electoral strategies not only by national parties but even by regional parties. The same tools that can empower voters can also distort public discourse, as shown by the growing use of digital political advertisements by political parties. This was highlighted by the Lokniti-Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) studies on digital campaigns during the 18th election to the Lok Sabha (April–June 2024).
Indian elections: Tracking misinformation, AI misuse and safeguards
The economics
The expenditure reports from the 2023 Karnataka Assembly election clearly illustrate the translation of economic power into digital influence. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) spent ₹7,800 lakh on digital advertisements, which is 52% of its total “party propaganda” budget. The Indian National Congress, on the other hand, spent ₹4,900 lakh, which is 55% of its total “party propaganda” budget. Conventional tools of publicity or propaganda such as flags, billboards, public meetings, and rallies, made up only 16% of the BJP’s and 7% of the Congress’s total propaganda spending. This shows a strategic shift toward digital platforms in the electoral strategies of political parties. Further underscoring this trend, the BJP became the first Indian political party to spend over ₹116 crore on Google ads in just five months, from January 2024. During the 2024 general election period from April 19 to June 1, 89,000 advertisements posted by the BJP were running on Google, on which more than ₹68 crore was spent. In contrast, 2,900 advertisements posted by the Congress were running during the same period, on which over ₹33 crore was spent.
An additional layer to this digital strategy is the use of micro-targeting, based on location, with parties reaching specific audiences all the way down to the panchayat level in each advertisement. The BJP, for instance, was found to micro-target more than 1,700 pin codes in a single advertisement, demonstrating the profound capability of digital platforms in shaping electoral narratives with precision. This new frontier in political campaigning, where financial resources translate directly into targeted digital influence, marks a transformative shift in the democratic process.
Also Read: Elections 2024 | How far will AI go?
The narrative
While the financial clout of major political parties is well documented, a more insidious force, or third-party campaigners, operates in the background. Although the information on Google Ads expenditure is publicly accessible, there is another ship at play, one not merely loaded with funds but armed with a potent mix of influence and manipulation — quietly anchored at the “offshore islands of parties,” and far from scrutiny and oversight. These ‘offshore islands’ represent third-party campaigners, a new phenomenon in Indian elections.
Another study conducted by the Lokniti-CSDS, analysing 31 third-party campaigners on Meta, showed that these entities spent over ₹2,260 lakh in just 90 days leading up to June 29, 2024. This brings up important questions about the motivations behind such substantial financial outlays. What makes these groups spend so much money on campaigns for certain parties or candidates? The modus operandi of these campaigners suggests a possible and covert quid pro quo with political parties, where the parties might be pulling the strings from behind.
Moreover, the content propagated by these campaigners is often more alarming than the money they spend on it. The study found that third-party campaigners also resorted to using Islamophobic language and derogatory slurs in their political advertisements. This contrasts sharply with the content of political advertisements posted by the official parties on Google, which, while critical, generally refrained from such inflammatory rhetoric. The proliferation of such content by third-party actors not only distorts the democratic discourse but also raises ethical and regulatory questions about the role of these entities in electoral processes. These entities blur the fine line between persuasion and manipulation, casting a shadow over the integrity of democratic engagement.
Explained | Why 2024 could be the ‘make-or-break’ year for democracy
This discussion points to three major issues that are emerging in the realm of digital campaigning that demand urgent attention: regulation of expenditure; content oversight, and the challenges posed by platformisation. First, the disparity in financial resources among political parties is manifested by their digital advertisement spending, particularly on platforms such as Google. Wealthier parties can dominate the digital landscape, creating an uneven playing field for existing and emerging players. This highlights the urgent need for ‘segmented caps’ on party expenditure, which would not only limit overall spending but also ensure balanced allocation across various campaign categories, such as digital campaigns and rallies..
Second, content regulation is brought into focus by the role of third-party campaigners. There must be strict expenditure reporting requirements for these non-contestants, similar to practices in the United Kingdom and Canada. Additionally, an independent agency should conduct an audit of their content after each election cycle to balance the right to free speech with the need for effective oversight. This audit would go beyond the current role of the Media Certification and Monitoring Committee (MCMC), which has proven to be less than ideal.
Lastly, platformisation has led to varied content strategies across digital platforms. For instance, on Google, political advertisements by parties and third-party campaigners typically avoid overtly derogatory content, and there was no significant spending by third-party campaigners. In contrast, on Meta, a large number of third-party campaigners were among the top spenders, often featuring inflammatory or problematic content in their political advertisements. This disparity highlights the need for uniform, harmonised regulatory frameworks to tackle problematic digital content across platforms, which will also ensure that all tech giants are held to the same standards of accountability.
Also Read | Radical democracy: why is it still relevant today?
Need for reforms
In the digital age, the rules of the game have changed, but the rulebook remains stuck in the past, leaving regulatory loopholes and shortcomings. The task before us is to navigate this complex terrain, ensuring that technology serves to enhance, rather than erode, the democratic ideals that we hold dear. This can only be achieved through comprehensive studies in India’s context, particularly in the emerging field of digital campaigning. To come up with robust solutions, we must move beyond the constraints of traditional political theories and build a body of literature that unravels the layers of the digital realm.
International Day of Democracy, celebrated globally on September 15 each year, has passed, but it is crucial to push for reforms that expand the definition of rule of law to encompass the digital realm. This expansion can ultimately bring the value of delight to our democracy by forging effective regulations in the domain of the digital.
Sanjay Kumar is a professor at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) and a political commentator. Abhishek Sharma is a researcher at the Lokniti-CSDS and a candidate at the Department of Political Science, University of Delhi. The views expressed are personal
Published – September 16, 2024 01:45 am IST