ABSTRACT
Social media’s defining characteristics of openness, lack of censorship, and consumer controlled gatewatching have long been celebrated as beneficial to political discourse and the spread of ideas. However, more recently, these characteristics have been criticized for providing a fertile ground for the spread of misinformation. This has led to confusion and polarization in political discussions, as well as public relations (PR) crises for political brands, journalists, and social media platforms alike. In May 2019, Facebook followed the lead of Twitter, YouTube, and Apple’s Podcasts app in banning several high-profile individuals in the political sphere from its social media platforms. Alex Jones, a well-known conspiracy theorist and operator of fringe media empire Infowars, was one of these individuals. The policy and Facebook’s subsequent actions raise important questions about whether social media platforms should be responsible for deciding what types of political content are permissible on its platforms, and whether attempts to regulate content and pages are an ethical practice. In this chapter, the spread and consequences of political misinformation on social media using the Alex Jones/Infowars case as a primary example are explored. Implications for social media consumers, political leaders, and PR practitioners are also discussed.
