It’s easy to scroll past a shocking headline about an election, feel a flash of anger or fear, and hit share before thinking twice. But in the run-up to South Africa’s Local Government Elections on November 4, that reflex is exactly what the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC) is asking everyone to resist. The commission has issued a clear and urgent warning: the information landscape around the vote is already crowded with fake voting details, AI-generated images and videos, impostor accounts, and coordinated efforts to make lies look popular. Voters are being urged to treat election-related content with the same care they would treat a formal document or a financial commitment — because democracy itself depends on the ability of people to make informed decisions, not manipulated ones. To help stem the tide, the IEC has introduced an Electoral Code of Conduct on Countering Disinformation. This code is aimed squarely at political parties and candidates contesting the election, setting out exactly what they may and may not do when spreading information online and offline. It remains in force until election results are declared, and parties and candidates are due to formally commit to it at a signing ceremony on September 23. In essence, the IEC is saying: we all share responsibility for the truthfulness of the public conversation, and those with the biggest platforms have the biggest duties.
Understanding the difference between disinformation and misinformation is the first step toward being a more thoughtful voter. Disinformation, as the IEC defines it, is false or misleading information shared by someone who knows it is not true, or who has no reasonable basis for believing it is true, with the intention of misleading voters or disrupting the election. This could be aimed at the electoral process itself, at political contestants, or at the Electoral Commission and its staff. Misinformation, on the other hand, is false information shared without the intention to mislead — often because the person sharing it simply has not checked whether it is accurate. Imagine a family member forwarding a voice note claiming that voting hours have changed, or a friend posting a screenshot of a fake IEC announcement. They may not mean any harm, but the damage is done before the correction arrives. The IEC is careful to point out that satire, opinion, fair criticism and genuine political debate do not count as disinformation. This matters because a healthy democracy needs sharp and lively discussion, not censorship of uncomfortable views. But when falsehood is weaponized to deceive or disrupt, the line is crossed. The new code gives voters and authorities a shared framework for identifying that line, and for holding political actors accountable when they cross it. For ordinary people, this means we are not merely passive consumers of political communication; we are also participants in a shared information environment, and our choices about what to believe and share carry real weight.
What exactly should voters be looking out for? The IEC has identified several categories of content that should raise immediate red flags. False claims about voting dates, times, venues, or who is allowed to vote are among the most dangerous, because they can directly suppress participation. A person who believes the polls are closed, or that they need to bring a document they don’t have, may simply stay home on election day. Another major concern is the spread of fake statements or announcements attributed to the IEC or its staff. Scammers posing as the commission — including fake job advertisements designed to collect personal information — have also been flagged. Then there is the newest and perhaps most troubling frontier: manipulated or AI-generated images, audio and video. Deepfakes can make a candidate appear to say something they never said, or place someone at a scene they never attended, with terrifying realism. Fake accounts and bot networks are another tool in the disinformation playbook, engineered to make a particular viewpoint seem more popular than it really is. When you see thousands of identical replies under a post, or a stream of accounts with no real history all repeating the same slogan, you may be looking at a coordinated operation rather than genuine public opinion. The IOC also mentioned doxxing — sharing someone’s private information without consent to cause harm — as a serious concern. Finally, political advertisements and AI-generated content that are not properly labelled are covered by the code. The common thread is transparency: voters have the right to know who is speaking to them, whether it is a human or a machine, and whether the content is paid for or organic.
The good news is that every voter can develop simple habits to check whether something is fake before it spreads further. The IEC advises people to start by examining where the information came from. Is it from an official IEC channel, a credible news outlet, or an unfamiliar account with a strange name? Comparing content directly with official sources is often enough to expose the lie. Another powerful signal is emotional manipulation. If a post is designed to make you angry, scared or anxious, the IEC encourages you to pause before sharing it. Disinformation thrives on outrage because it short-circuits our critical thinking. Ask yourself: why is this content trying to make me feel this way? What is the evidence? You can also search for the claim across other credible news sources to see whether it is being reported anywhere legitimate. For suspicious photographs, a reverse-image search can show where the image appeared previously and whether it is being reused out of context. Looking closely at the account that posted the material is also revealing. A brand-new account, very little posting history, or a username that closely resembles an official account are all warning signs. None of these checks requires special technical expertise. They are just habits of careful attention — the same kind of attention we bring to reading a contract or following a recipe. The more people practice these habits, the harder it becomes for bad actors to manipulate public opinion. The IEC is not asking everyone to become a digital forensics expert. It is simply asking us to slow down, to breathe, and to remember that a moment of doubt is far less costly than a chain reaction of falsehood.
The rise of AI-generated content makes this verification work even more important. The IEC has warned voters to look closely at images and videos for signs of manipulation: unnatural movement, mismatched lighting, unusual hands, blurred edges around faces or objects, or inconsistencies in shadows and reflections. While AI tools are becoming more sophisticated, they are not perfect, and training ourselves to spot these imperfections can help. Under the Disinformation Code, AI-generated “synthetic” content must be clearly labelled before it is distributed, and political advertising must also be clearly identified. This is a significant step toward transparency, but labels only work if people understand what they mean. When a video is marked as synthetic, that label should serve as a signal that the content is not a factual recording, no matter how realistic it appears. For those who do come across suspected election disinformation, there is a clear reporting pathway. The IEC has pointed to Real411, a platform administered by Moxii Africa, which independently investigates complaints and can recommend action to the IEC or to digital platforms. Complaints require the complainant’s name and contact details — anonymous submissions are not accepted — but the complainant’s identity is kept confidential. You should provide a link or screenshot of the content, along with details about why you believe it is disinformation. Political parties and candidates have a particularly urgent duty: they have 36 hours to report online disinformation to Real411 and to publicly correct false or misleading information they have shared. Once a complaint is lodged, it is handled in any of South Africa’s 11 official languages, and the outcome is published after a decision is reached. Those who disagree with a decision can appeal to the Appeals Committee through the secretariat. This system gives ordinary citizens a concrete way to fight back against lies, not just by ignoring them, but by actively reporting them and helping to protect the integrity of the election.
What happens if the Electoral Code is breached? The consequences are serious, and they underline how important the IEC considers this issue to be. When a breach is found, the matter can be referred to the Electoral Court, which has the power to impose sanctions that range from a formal warning to a fine of up to R200,000. A party or candidate can also lose their electoral deposit, which is a significant financial blow. Other possible penalties include restrictions on political activities and advertising, exclusion from a voting station, a reduction in the number of votes cast in favour of a party or candidate, disqualification of a candidature, and even cancellation of a party’s registration. These are not trivial measures. They reflect a determination to protect the democratic process from those who would undermine it with lies. But ultimately, the IEC cannot do this alone. Voters also have a role to play in countering disinformation. The simplest and most powerful thing you can do is to refuse to share suspicious content. When you see a friend or family member sharing something false, you can gently share the confirmed correction or the outcome of a Real411 complaint. You do not have to argue or lecture; a simple, factual response can be enough. The political parties who sign the code are making a commitment, but so are we, as citizens, when we choose to value truth over spectacle and community over manipulation. In the end, the fight against disinformation is not just about stopping bad content. It is about building a culture in which people feel empowered to ask questions, to demand evidence, and to treat each other with enough respect to share only what is true. The upcoming local government elections will determine the shape of municipalities across South Africa, but they will also be a test of the country’s digital maturity. By staying calm, verifying facts, and supporting the systems that keep elections honest, voters can ensure that the only thing that spreads on election day is a collective commitment to democracy.