Why Monitor social media?

Explanation:
Social media manipulation can target Election Day as a short-term attempt to change voter’s behaviour of whether to go to vote or not, without fundamentally targeting a voters’ opinion on a candidate or party.
In the period right after the end of the vote, a fight for public opinion on the credibility of an election may take place on social media. In many elections, the process and the results may be correctly or falsely questioned.

	What strategies may be used? False or misleading information about voting dates or polling locations Harassment campaigns targeted to a specific group in society to disengage them from voting Messaging that questions the integrity or results of an election
	Who may be the targeting of such messaging? Registered voters in an election A specific ethnic, religious or political group Winning candidates and parties
	Strategies and Short-term Impacts: Voter suppression Electoral integrity questions Electoral fraud questions Questioning the results by citizens

Examples:

• In the 2018 elections in Brazil, a fake video of voting machines automatically casting ballots for a left-leaning candidate spread online. (Source: Veja )
• In recent Mexican elections, fake exit polling has circulated on social media. This false information was then picked up and distributed by traditional news media outlets (Source: The Wilson Center).
• On the morning of the 2019 UK election, the Conservative party posted a debunked claim that the Labour party would allow “open borders” and introduce an “additional £2,400 tax bill per year” (Source: First Draft News).

Explanation:
During the electoral period, actors may try to influence political beliefs in the medium to short-term for the specific purpose of impacting the voter's choice on whom to vote for on a given election. 
Narratives may reinforce or activate existing beliefs rather than creating or changing them.

	What strategies may be used to play off citizen's pre-existing beliefs during the electoral period? Discrediting campaigns against candidates Reinforcing divisive narratives and creation of a sense of chaos Information aimed at confusing voters
	Who may be the targeting of such messaging? Registered voters in an election Supporters of a specific candidate or cause (anti-corruption movements, pro-gun movements, etc)
	What are the impacts? Potential influence on democratic discourse and voter’s decision-making processes Voter suppression Electoral integrity questions Political polarization

Examples:

• During the 2019 Ukrainian elections, actors spread false information that one candidate was a drug addict. This content played upon existing fears and cynicism that government is corrupt.
• In the months leading up to Nigeria’s 2018 election, false rumours spread on social media that president Muhammadu Buhari had died and was replaced by a Sudanese imposter.

Explanation:
Deep grounded political beliefs may not immediately translate into electoral choices. They mainly affect the general positioning of a person in public discourse and has the potential to shape electoral choices in the medium to long-term.
Actors may publish genuine content, but provide a one-sided selection of topics to reinforce a citizen’s political beliefs (propagandistic purposes).

	What strategies may be used to impact citizens’ political beliefs? Bombardment of one-sided information on divisive issues Discrediting campaigns against political parties or a specific group in society Overall discredit of the political system and institutions
	Who may be the targeting of such messaging? Society as a whole: citizens, democratic institutions, organizations, specific groups in society.
	What are the impacts? Polarization Weakened democratic institutions Political apathy

Examples:

• An actor may report on crimes committed by immigrants 100% of the time, which reinforces a propagandistic narrative that immigrants commit more crimes than native citizens.
• In 2018, false information spread on Sri Lanka’s social media platforms stating that Muslims were adding infertility pills to the Sinhala peoples’ food. As noted by the WHO, “sterilization pills” do not exist, so this is not possible. The purpose of this claim was to stir religious tensions amongst society.

Explanation:
Finally, the worldview is the deepest level of a personal belief system, formed by a person’s rationality, religious, moral and ethical convictions.
Disinformation and online manipulation try to weaken democracies’ roots at the worldview level by turning citizens into cynics or paranoids, making them believe in a set of alternative facts, therefore challenging the democratic debate.

	What strategies may be used to impact citizens’ worldviews? Conspiracy Theories (i.e flat earth, chemtrails or anti-vaccination) Messaging promoting a broad distrust toward democratic institutions (i.e. “all journalists are liars”, “all politicians are corrupt”)
	Who may be the targeting of such messaging? Young people still forming their worldviews and political preferences Groups of society without strong media literacy skills Citizens with a sense of apathy towards politicians and institutions
	What are the long-term impacts? Polarization Weakened democratic institutions Rise in authoritarianism Political apathy

Examples:

• In recent years, a conspiracy theory that the world is flat has circulated, especially on YouTube. Such theories question established science and the basis of factual knowledge.
• COVID19 made several anti-vaxx groups on social media spread conspiracy theories that the virus does not exist, that social distancing measures do not work or spreading fears about a future vaccine. In a public healthcare crisis, lies and manipulation have the potential to threat the response of public authorities to the crisis and can cost lives.