1. Introduction: A New Kind of Election Battlefield
As South Africa gears up for its local government elections, the real battleground may not be in the streets, town halls, or even the usual campaign rallies—it’s increasingly taking place on our phone screens, in our group chats, and across social media feeds. Misinformation and disinformation are no longer just side effects of the digital age; they are deliberate tools, deployed to confuse, divide, and manipulate voters. That’s why, on September 1st, a diverse group of electoral stakeholders gathered at the Goethe-Institut in South Africa for a forward-thinking workshop aimed at getting ahead of the problem. This wasn’t your typical reactive session, where fact-checkers scramble to put out fires after a lie has already spread. Instead, it was a “pre-bunking” workshop—a proactive strategy designed to identify likely misinformation narratives before they gain momentum and to equip the right people with practical, coordinated responses. The event was hosted by the Partnership on Information and Integrity in Elections, better known by its acronym PIIE, and it brought together representatives from the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC), PIIE members, and other key partners. Imagine a fire brigade that doesn’t wait for the smoke to fill the building, but instead studies where fires are most likely to start, trains its crew, and educates the public on fire safety. That’s the spirit of pre-bunking. In a country with a complex political history and a vibrant, sometimes volatile information landscape, the stakes are incredibly high. The health of South African democracy depends not just on free and fair elections, but on whether voters can make informed decisions based on facts, not fiction. This workshop was a crucial step in that direction, acknowledging that in the digital age, the truth needs an early-warning system of its own.
2. Coming Together to Build a United Front
The workshop was not just another conference where people talk about problems without finding solutions. It was a deliberate, hands-on gathering designed to build a united front against a common enemy: the deliberate distortion of information intended to sway the electoral outcome. Sitting around the table were the very actors who often find themselves in the crossfire of these campaigns—the IEC, the body responsible for managing free and fair elections; members of PIIE, which includes media organizations, civil society groups, and technology partners; and other relevant stakeholders who all share a common interest in protecting the integrity of the vote. Their mission was two-fold. First, they needed to map out the types of false narratives that were likely to surface in the coming weeks. This meant thinking like the people who spread disinformation—anticipating their tactics, their targets, and the vulnerabilities in South African society they might exploit. Second, they needed to develop a coordinated playbook. In the past, the response to misinformation was often fragmented, with different organizations working in silos and sometimes inadvertently amplifying a lie while trying to debunk it. The pre-bunking approach flips the script. By identifying likely narratives in advance, stakeholders could agree on common messaging, timing, and channels. This collaborative environment was crucial, as it fostered a sense of shared responsibility. The IEC alone cannot police the entire internet, and the media cannot combat disinformation without the support of civil society and tech platforms. The workshop was a recognition that this is a collective challenge that requires a collective, well-orchestrated response. It also served as a powerful reminder that protecting democracy is not just about counting votes; it’s about ensuring that the conversation leading up to the vote is honest, robust, and grounded in reality.
3. What the Data Reveals: A Look at the Digital Trenches
Numbers often tell a powerful story, and the data presented at the workshop painted a stark picture of the challenges ahead. Ntsako Manganyi, the programme manager for community building and engagement, shared feedback collected through Real 411, an innovative, evidence-first tool used to monitor media in real time, report digital harms, visualize trends, and turn raw data into actionable intelligence for journalists, educators, and communities. The findings were telling. From July 31st to August 31st, Real 411 received 184 complaints, averaging out to 46 complaints every week. Perhaps unsurprisingly, a significant majority of these complaints—60%—were directly related to the elections. But it wasn’t just the volume that was concerning; it was the nature of the narratives. Manganyi identified several recurring disinformation themes that were already starting to circulate. There were claims of political collusion, designed to sow distrust in certain candidates or parties. There were fraudulent IEC recruitment posts, promising jobs in exchange for money or personal information—a cruel hoax that exploits people’s desperation for employment. There were also unverified corruption accusations, which, whether true or false, can cause irreparable damage to a candidate’s reputation when they go viral. Perhaps most insidious were the narratives that blended legitimate scrutiny with pure speculation. These are the hardest to combat because they are anchored in a kernel of truth, making the false or misleading parts harder to spot. This isn’t just about internet chatter; these narratives have real-world consequences. They can undermine public confidence in the electoral process, discourage people from voting, and even incite division or violence. The data from Real 411 serves as an early warning system, revealing the fault lines that malicious actors are trying to exploit.
4. Three Interconnected Trends: Migration, AI, and the Election
Digging deeper into the data, Manganyi highlighted a crucial insight: the disinformation landscape isn’t static, and its narratives don’t exist in isolation. Over the course of the monitoring period, three distinct but increasingly connected narrative trends emerged. First, and most prominently, were the election-related narratives themselves, with the IEC as a frequent target. These stories aimed to delegitimize the electoral process, often by claiming that the system is rigged, the voting machines are unreliable, or that certain communities are being disenfranchised. Second, and perhaps more worrying, was the intersection of these election narratives with migration-related issues. This is a classic disinformation tactic—using a complex, emotional issue like immigration to drive a wedge between communities and influence political allegiances. We’re seeing fabricated stories about immigrants being bussed in to vote illegally, or communities being promised resources at the expense of “outsiders.” These narratives are designed to exploit existing social tensions and redirect anger toward convenient scapegoats. Third, and adding a new layer of complexity, is the rise of AI-generated political content. We’re no longer just talking about a poorly-photographed meme or an out-of-context quote. Sophisticated deepfakes and AI-generated text, images, and audio are becoming increasingly common, making it harder than ever for the average person to distinguish fact from fiction. Imagine a fabricated audio clip of a politician making a racist comment, or a convincing but completely fake video of an electoral official admitting to fraud. These are not futuristic sci-fi scenarios; they are the new frontline of modern disinformation. What makes these three trends so dangerous is their convergence. A narrative might start as an AI-generated image, get shared in the context of a migration-related controversy, and ultimately serve to undermine trust in the upcoming election. This is the complex, fluid reality that electoral stakeholders are now having to navigate.
5. The IEC’s Response: Building a Digital Defense Force
In the face of these challenges, the Electoral Commission is not standing still. Anele Ngwenya, an IEC project manager, provided a clear update on the commission’s strategy to fortify its digital defenses. The most significant announcement was the expansion of the IEC’s digital team. This isn’t just a minor addition to the payroll; it’s a fundamental shift in how the commission operates. As Ngwenya astutely noted, misinformation “moves at platform speed; it doesn’t move face to face.” The days when a press release or a public statement would be enough to correct the record are long gone. By the time an official rebuttal is drafted and sent out, a lie could have been viewed, shared, and believed by millions of people. “Capacitating our organisation with a team that can be proactive in communicating,” Ngwenya explained, “is less expensive than fixing a crisis.” This is a crucial cost-benefit analysis. Investing in a proactive, agile communications team is far more effective than trying to manage the fallout of a viral disinformation campaign. The IEC is also focusing on establishing a dedicated WhatsApp channel. This is a smart move, given WhatsApp’s massive popularity in South Africa and its role as a primary vector for the spread of misinformation and disinformation, often through forwarded messages from family and friends. Having an official channel allows the IEC to push out accurate, verified information directly to voters, bypassing the rumor mill. Additionally, the commission is moving forward with a long-awaited disinformation code of conduct. This code will be formally promulgated soon, and its goals are ambitious. It aims to give practical effect to the constitutional rights to freedom of expression and political participation, while also fostering an informed, credible, and diverse information environment. Crucially, it will provide clear guidance to political parties, candidates, and other influential actors on what constitutes acceptable standards of conduct. It’s about setting the rules of the game so that everyone is clear on what is out of bounds.
6. Looking Ahead: Vigilance, Technology, and a Collective Responsibility
The fight against election disinformation is not a one-time battle; it’s an ongoing campaign, and the final piece of the puzzle involves continuous monitoring and adaptability. Keamogetswe Sere, a junior data scientist at Moxii Africa, outlined the organisation’s role in the effort. Moxii Africa will compile weekly social media brief reports throughout the election period, providing a real-time dashboard of online conversations, public sentiment, and emerging trends. This will be invaluable for the IEC and its partners, allowing them to track the health of the information ecosystem and identify new disinformation tactics as they emerge. “Through social media listening and data analytics,” Sere noted, “we can track public sentiment and also detect misinformation and disinformation.” This combination of human insight and technological firepower is essential. The social media reports will not only flag the false stories that are circulating but also provide crucial context on how and why they are spreading. Are they being amplified by bots? Are they getting traction in specific geographic regions? Are they targeting specific ethnic or linguistic groups? The answers to these questions allow responders to be more precise and effective in their counter-messaging. The pre-bunking workshop and the ongoing efforts of PIIE, the IEC, Real 411, Moxii Africa, and countless others represent a significant step forward in safeguarding South African democracy. But this responsibility doesn’t rest solely with experts and institutions. Every single citizen has a role to play. We must all become more critical consumers of online information, especially during election season. We must learn to pause and verify before sharing a sensational headline or a shocking video. We must be wary of accounts that appear too good to be true, and we must be willing to have uncomfortable conversations with friends and family who share disinformation, with patience and respect. The health of South Africa’s democracy depends on the willingness of its people to choose facts over fiction, truth over manipulation, and unity over division. The tools are being built, but the ultimate defense against disinformation lies in the hands of an informed, engaged, and resilient citizenry. The goal is not just to win an election, but to protect the very foundation of democratic society—trust itself.