Democracy is a fragile thing. It depends not only on well-run voting stations and secure ballot counts, but also on something harder to measure: the trust of ordinary people in the information they receive. In the weeks leading up to South Africa’s local government elections on 4 November, voters will be scrolling through news feeds, sharing WhatsApp messages, watching TikTok videos, and reading posts on Facebook and other social platforms. Some of what they see will be true. Some of it will be false, deliberately misleading, or designed to sow confusion and division. That is why the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC) has decided to fight back, and it is not doing so alone. The commission has announced a powerful new partnership with some of the biggest digital platforms in the world — Google, Meta, Microsoft and TikTok — as well as the non-profit organisation Moxii Africa. These partners have committed to helping the IEC keep election information accurate, credible and trustworthy before polling day, and to respond quickly when false content emerges. This alliance builds on a similar agreement the commission made with the same platforms during the 2024 national and provincial elections, suggesting that this is not a one-off event but an ongoing effort to protect democratic processes from the growing threat of online disinformation. At its heart, the initiative is an admission that the battlefield for voters’ minds has moved online. In earlier decades, misleading political messages had to be printed, approved and distributed, but today a single fake screenshot, a manipulated video or a cleverly worded smear can reach millions of people within hours. For a democracy like South Africa, with its vibrant media landscape and deeply engaged citizens, the stakes are enormous. Local government elections determine who will run municipalities, manage service delivery, choose ward councillors and control budgets. They affect whether your street gets repaired, whether your tap has water, whether your clinic is properly staffed. If voters base their choices on false information, the damage can last for years. The new partnership is designed to make sure that does not happen, while also recognising that technology companies have become the new public squares where democracy is tested every day.
At the heart of this effort is a recognition that even the most technically perfect election can be undermined by lies. Sy Mamabolo, the Chief Electoral Officer of the IEC, put it plainly: “Our partnership with digital platforms is critical to ensuring that voters have access to credible, accurate and trustworthy information to make informed political choices.” He added a warning that should resonate with everyone who cares about democracy: “A technically flawless election can still lose public trust if citizens are overwhelmed by disinformation.” Mamabolo’s words matter because they shift the focus from machinery to minds. It is not enough for ballots to be printed, polling stations to be staffed and votes to be counted accurately. Voters must also feel confident that what they are hearing about candidates, parties and issues is honest. If a malicious rumour spreads on election eve, it can cast a shadow over the entire result. Mamabolo explained that the partnership gives the commission direct contact with the platforms, removing the usual barriers that slow down complaints and allowing the IEC to take instant action against those who spread false information. This means that instead of sending legal letters and waiting for responses, the commission can work with technology companies quickly to flag harmful posts, correct the record, or, in serious cases, refer matters to authorities. Digital disinformation often preys on people who are already frustrated or fearful. It promises simple answers to complex problems, blames scapegoats for service failures, or tells citizens that their votes do not matter. In a country with profound inequalities, those messages can be dangerously persuasive. The IEC’s direct line to platforms is not a luxury; it is a necessity. When a video with misleading election news starts trending, or a message claims that voting stations have been moved without official confirmation, every minute of delay increases the damage. Under the new arrangement, the commission has a faster route to demand action, while still operating within the law. This is about accountability: technology companies have unprecedented power over what people see and believe, and with that power comes a responsibility to assist public institutions in defending the truth.
Behind the partnership is a new legal foundation. On 4 September, the commission gazetted a code of conduct specifically designed to counter disinformation in the election period. The code is not only aimed at social media users or anonymous trolls; it applies directly to political parties, candidates and anyone working on their behalf. This is a significant step because it treats disinformation as an electoral violation, not just an annoying online trend. If a candidate or party knowingly shares false information, they can face the same penalties as those who break other rules in the electoral code. That means the code carries real weight. It creates a clear standard of behaviour and puts parties on notice that they cannot use lies as a campaign strategy without consequences. At the same time, the partnership between the IEC and the technology companies is built on good faith. During the election period, platforms are expected to cooperate with the commission while respecting existing laws, such as privacy regulations and freedom of expression protections. Importantly, the companies will not be required to hand over confidential user data. This balance is crucial. The aim is not to spy on citizens or monitor opinions, but to stop the spread of harmful falsehoods. The approach recognises that disinformation is a collective problem requiring a collective response, but one that does not sacrifice fundamental rights. For ordinary voters, the code is a reminder that political lies are not simply “spin” or “PR.” They are a serious matter, especially when they are deliberately engineered to distort an election. The new rules also send a message to party agents and campaign workers: you cannot hide behind the claim that you were just sharing a post. If you are involved in spreading disinformation, you are accountable. This is a powerful deterrent, and it makes it easier for the IEC to act. But the code alone cannot solve the problem. The technology companies, for their part, are promising to do more than just react. They are expected to monitor, flag and, where necessary, remove content that violates electoral rules, all while cooperating with the commission in good faith. It is an ambitious arrangement, but one that reflects the realities of modern elections, where information is the oxygen of democracy.
While the institutional arrangements are important, the system only works if ordinary citizens know how to use it. That is where the Real411 platform comes in. The IEC has chosen Real411 to help reduce the impact of disinformation during the elections, and it is open to everyone. If you see something suspicious — a political meme that seems too outrageous to be true, a fake message claiming that voting times have changed, a doctored photograph of a candidate, or a viral rumour about election fraud — you can report it. The process is simple: visit real411.org.za or download the Real411 app. The service is available in all 11 official languages, which is especially important in a country as linguistically diverse as South Africa. You do not need to be a lawyer, journalist or tech expert to make a report. Imagine you receive a WhatsApp forward claiming that a polling station in your area has been closed because of violence, and that you should instead vote at a different location three towns away. The message sounds official, but something feels off. In the past, you might have shrugged and shared it with your family group. Under the new system, you can pull out your phone, open the Real411 app, and file a report in the language you are most comfortable with. Once a complaint is submitted, Real411 assesses it independently. That means the decision is not made by the IEC or by a political party, but by a body that specialises in evaluating claims about disinformation. After the assessment, Real411 recommends action to the commission and to the relevant digital platform. In serious cases, the IEC can refer matters to the Electoral Court, which has the power to impose sanctions. In less urgent situations, the commission can send the matter directly to the platform for quick action, or issue a public statement to correct the false information. This two-track system ensures that small problems are dealt with quickly and big problems are dealt with legally. It also transforms ordinary citizens from passive recipients of information into active guardians of election integrity, giving people a constructive way to respond when they encounter harmful content rather than simply feeling angry or hopeless.
The technology companies have publicly welcomed the partnership and promised to do their part. This is not a symbolic gesture; it involves concrete commitments. Microsoft’s Director for Government Affairs in South Africa, Abongile Vanda, acknowledged that no single organisation can tackle disinformation alone. In his words: “Ahead of the 2026 local government elections, we will work alongside the commission, civil society and industry to help voters find authoritative election information.” Vanda’s comment highlights the need for a broad coalition. The private sector, public institutions and non-governmental organisations all have distinct strengths, and disinformation can only be defeated when those strengths are combined. TikTok’s Government Relations and Public Policy Lead for Southern Africa, Tholoana Ncheke-Mahlaela, announced that the platform has set up an in-app Election Centre where South Africans can find reliable information about the elections. This is a practical tool that puts trustworthy content directly in front of users, making it easier for them to avoid misleading videos and false claims. Moxii Africa Director William Bird also emphasised the importance of teamwork. He said that protecting voters from false information requires cooperation across institutions, technology platforms, civil society and citizens. Bird described the partnership as “an important commitment to ensuring that South Africans can access accurate, trustworthy election information.” These statements are significant because they show that the companies are not simply reacting to criticism. They are acknowledging their role as gatekeepers of digital information and have agreed to work with the IEC in good faith. In practical terms, this could mean adjusting algorithms to boost authoritative sources, labelling official election content, slowing the spread of viral hoaxes, and providing transparency around political advertising. For example, when a user searches for a candidate or polls, the platform might show an official IEC resource at the top. When a video mentions election dates, an information notice might appear. These features are not magic; they will not stop every lie from being shared. But they create a layer of friction for disinformation and a layer of support for truth. The partnership also gives the IEC a direct channel to raise concerns with the companies, so that action can be taken before false narratives take root. The companies, in turn, benefit from the commission’s expertise and its authority to correct the public record. It is a mutually reinforcing relationship, and it reflects the reality that social media platforms have become the new public squares. If South Africans are to make informed choices, these public squares must be policed fairly and efficiently.
Ultimately, the fight against disinformation cannot be won by institutions alone. The IEC, the technology companies, the political parties and the Electoral Court all have important roles to play, but so does every individual voter. South Africans can find guidance on how to spot, check and report disinformation at www.elections.org.za/pw/Elections-And-Results/Report-Election-Disinformation. This resource is designed to help people become more discerning consumers of information. It teaches simple questions: Who created this message? Does it come from an official source? Is it designed to make me angry or afraid? Have I seen it reported anywhere credible? Before sharing anything, voters should pause and ask whether they would bet their vote on its truth. The partnership between the IEC and the major platforms is a step forward, but it is not a substitute for personal responsibility. In many ways, the battle against disinformation is a battle for attention. The people who create false stories count on us being too busy, too tired, too anxious or too distracted to check the facts. They count on the fact that outrageous lies travel faster than patient corrections. The best way to defeat them is to build a culture of verification, a society where people refuse to be passive carriers of propaganda. When a falsehood reaches your phone, you can be the point where it stops. South Africa has been through many difficult moments in its democratic journey, but it has never stopped fighting for the principle that the people shall govern. Elections are the most direct expression of that principle. They are the moment when citizens, regardless of race, class or political allegiance, take part in deciding who will hold power. That power is only legitimate if it is based on informed consent. Fake news, manipulated images and deliberately misleading rumours undermine the very idea of informed consent. They turn voters into pawns in a game they do not fully understand. This new code of conduct, the Real411 reporting system and the partnership with digital platforms are all attempts to protect that founding idea. They are not perfect, and they will not answer every question. But they represent a serious, practical commitment to doing better. As election day approaches, every voter has a choice. They can passively accept whatever appears in their feed, or they can become an active participant in safeguarding the truth. The tools are already there. The partnership has been signed. The reporting platforms are live. The only missing piece is the willingness of ordinary South Africans to use them, to question what they see, and to demand honest information. If that happens, the 4 November election will be not only administratively sound, but morally credible.