Counting the Benefits of Fact-Checking Training for Ethiopian Journalists

Journalists play a crucial role in informing citizens and shaping public opinion in Ethiopia. However, in recent years, the proliferation of disinformation and hate speech has become a significant challenge. The surge in disinformation is undermining social cohesion, promoting conflict, and leading to growing threats against journalists and human rights defenders.

Accordingly, it is crucial to conduct fact-checking training  for Ethiopian journalists so as to safeguard the integrity and reliability of journalism in the country. A number of Ethiopian journalists have undergone training in understanding disinformation and hate speech. However, most of them lack practical skills in conducting fact-checking. It is against this background that, in May 2024, CIPESA organised a fact-checking and ethical reporting workshop for 20 Ethiopian journalists in the capital Addis Ababa.

Two months later, journalists and media development actors point to the benefits of that training. 

“The fact-checking and verification training was crucial for Ethiopian journalists and content producers, as it provided them with valuable tools to combat daily misinformation and produce reliable news stories,” notes Kirubel Tesfaye, one of the experts that conducted the training. “The training equipped them with the most essential and current tools in the industry, allowing them to produce credible and trustworthy news and reports.” 

By equipping journalists with fact-checking skills, they can serve as gatekeepers of truth, helping to counter disinformation and to ensure that accurate information reaches the public. Ethiopia has experienced an explosion in disinformation over the last five years, with the armed conflicts which have plagued the country being key drivers of disinformation. 

Selam Mulugeta, a journalism lecturer at Addis Ababa University who participated in the training, enumerates the benefits of the fact-checking training. “One of the most important things was to learn how to recognise dis/misinformation on different websites and social media sites, and to learn [about] fact-checking tools to debunk disinformation,” she says. She adds that after gaining fact-checking knowledge, journalists will contribute to minimising the amount of false information in the public domain. This will in turn lessen the harms of disinformation.

According to Konjit Zewdie of NBC TV, there is a need for more practical training workshops focussed on fact-checking as there is a dire shortage of fact-checking skills among journalists amidst the deluge of illegal and harmful content, including hate speech. She says the training was crucial in capacitating journalists to identify sources of disinformation and to use various fact-checking tools. 

Konjit notes that Ethiopian journalists are often unable to get reliable information from concerned bodies, which presents a challenge for fact-checking. The training gave the journalists alternative ways of verifying information even when they face blockages in accessing information from official sources.

“The training added great value to the journalists because it covered several topics with practical exercises, from the basics of fact-checking to advanced fact-checking techniques. The participants gained insights into the motivations behind the sharing of disinformation, the actors responsible, and the tactics employed by them. Furthermore, the training highlighted prevalent disinformation trends in Ethiopia and provided participants with online tools and techniques to effectively combat disinformation.” – Kirubel Tesfaye, fact-checking trainer

The May 2024 training built on an earlier one CIPESA conducted in November 2023 that equipped 21 Ethiopian journalists, bloggers, and activists with knowledge to navigate the country’s law on hate speech and disinformation and skills to call out and fight disinformation and hate speech.

Mulugeta says that by honing their fact-checking skills, journalists are better positioned to deliver factual information and live up to their duty as mouthpieces of the masses. Moreover, journalists and content creators would become more responsible and accountable for the content they create, and play a role in developing media literacy among the general population.

Tiblets Tesfaye, a senior journalist with Wazema Media, said the training “offered significant value by equipping journalists and content creators with essential skills to identify and correct misinformation, fostering a culture of accuracy and ethical reporting”.

According to her, the training also enhanced the journalists’ ability to recognise and mitigate hate speech, thereby contributing to more reliable and responsible media practices that support social cohesion and peacebuilding in the country. Tesfaye adds: “The benefits are huge because most social media influencers are based in Addis Ababa, but it would be good to extend this training to regional cities as well.”

See more about the training focus here

Is Foreign Malign Influence Inspiring Digital Authoritarianism in Uganda?

By CIPESA Writer |

A new policy brief by the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) on the deteriorating state of digital rights in Uganda examines whether the east African country is drawing inspiration from China for its brand of digital authoritarianism.

Uganda is ranked as “Partly Free” by Freedom House’s annual Freedom on the Net report, with the biggest contributing factor being the repressive laws governing the digital civic space and surveillance, particularly those that enable internet censorship, network disruptions, and deployment of surveillance technologies such as spyware and video surveillance.

China has been a notable source of support in developing Uganda’s digital communication and other infrastructure. For example, Chinese telecom firm Huawei helped set up a video surveillance system for the Uganda Police, and reportedly aided security agencies to spy on political opponents in the country. China has also organised numerous study tours for Ugandan officials and journalists that are centred on popularising its economic and governance systems.

The brief illuminates how China and its model of governance and state surveillance may be influencing or inspiring retrogressive laws and undermining digital rights in Uganda. It explores the legal reforms necessary to advance digital rights in Uganda and the role that legislators, civil society organisations, human rights defenders (HRDs), and journalists should play.

Uganda has mirrored some practices from China, a country which various global indices consider a leading player in digital authoritarianism. While it is not patently clear whether China has directly influenced legislation in Uganda, the brief notes that “it has arguably inspired some of the legal frameworks and practices that fuel digital authoritarianism in the east African country.”

There is ample evidence indicating that African autocracies are exploiting the adoption of Chinese technology and model of internet controls to roll back democratic gains through surveillance and censorship.

China invested more than USD 110 million in Uganda’s National Backbone Data Transmission Project and also supported the National Fibre-Optic Project. There are suggestions that the national backbone and fibre-optic projects are part of a digital infrastructure that has enhanced the Uganda government’s surveillance capabilities that violate the right to privacy and freedom of expression.

China has continually buttressed its influence over Uganda’s social-economic development through the seemingly no-strings-attached loan schemes that have often been acknowledged and praised by President Museveni. This non-interference policy in the internal affairs of other countries allows their governments greater leeway to suppress dissent and democratic processes without facing criticism or repercussions from China.

By contrast, the Uganda government or senior public officials have during 2023 and 2024 attracted sanctions by the United States of America, the United Kingdom, and the World Bank over governance and human rights concerns. As such, the Chinese no-governance-strings-attached model is criticised for emboldening authoritarian tendencies in the countries it partners with.

However, the brief states that claims of China actively seeking to export its governance model and influencing local laws and practices in Africa are often anecdotal and inconclusive. Moreover, such claims and, often, the evidence they advance, assume that African governments are incapable of developing home-grown systems of governance and thoughtlessly rely on models from other continents.

Recommendations

Uganda should resist all foreign influence and models that promote digital authoritarianism and undermine democracy. The country’s laws must respect internationally recognised human rights standards and promote the use of a free, open, and safe internet.

The brief makes several recommendations, such as:

  • Parliament should strengthen legal and regulatory frameworks by amending or repealing regressive and oppressive frameworks to ensure responsible and ethical use of surveillance technology.
  • Parliament should enact laws that specifically protect journalists, whistle-blowers, human rights defenders, and activists from wanton threats, arrests, and prosecutions over legitimate online communications and activism that advances social accountability, respect for human rights, and good governance.
  • Civil society should conduct evidence-based research into the actions of foreign actors and how they adversely impact local laws, policies, and democratic governance.
  • Various stakeholders, including academia, the media, and lawyers, should engage in public interest litigation to challenge provisions in legislation that limit the exercise of digital rights.

See the full policy brief here.

The ADRF Awards USD 134,000 to 10 Initiatives to Advance Tech Accountability in Africa

Announcement |

The grant recipients of the eighth round of the Africa Digital Rights Fund (ADRF) will implement projects focused on Artificial Intelligence (AI), hate speech, disinformation, microtargeting, network disruptions, data access, and online violence against women journalists and politicians. The work of the 10 initiatives, who were selected from 130 applications, will span the breadth of the African continent in advancing tech accountability.

“The latest round of the ADRF is supporting catalytic work in response to the urgent need to counter the harms of technology in electoral processes,” said Ashnah Kalemera, the Programmes Manager at the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) – the administrators of the Fund. She added that for many of the initiatives being supported, tech accountability was a new area of work but the various projects’ advocacy, research and storytelling efforts would prove instrumental in pushing for tech justice

Established in 2019 as a rapid response and flexible funding mechanism, the ADRF aims to overcome the limitations of reach, skills, resources, and consistency in engagement faced by new and emerging initiatives working to defend and promote rights and innovation in the face of growing digital authoritarianism and threats to digital democracy in Africa. The sum of USD 134,000 awarded in the latest round, which was administered by CIPESA in partnership with Digital Action, brings to USD 834,000 the total amount awarded by the ADRF since inception to 62 initiatives across the continent.

According to Kalemera, the growth in the number of applicants to the ADRF reflects the demand for seed funding for digital rights work on the continent. Indeed, whereas the call for proposals for the eighth round was limited to tech accountability work, many applicants submitted  strong proposals on pertinent issues such as digital inclusion, media and information literacy, digital safety and security, surveillance, data protection and privacy, access and affordability – underscoring the cruciality of the ADRF. 

Here’s What the Grantees Will be Up To

In the lead-up to local government elections in Tanzania, Jamii Forums will engage content hosts, creators and journalists on obligations to tackle hate speech and disinformation online as a means to safeguard electoral integrity. In parallel, through its Jamii Check initiative, Jamii Forums will raise public awareness about the harms of disinformation and hate speech.

Combating hate speech and disinformation is also the focus of interventions supported in Senegal and South Sudan. Ahead of elections in the world’s youngest nation, DefyHateNow will monitor and track hate speech online in South Sudan, host a stakeholder symposium in commemoration of the International Day for Countering Hate Speech as a platform for engagement on collective action to combat hate speech, and run multi-media campaigns to raise public awareness on the harms of hate speech. Post elections in Senegal, Jonction will analyse the link between disinformation and network disruptions and engage stakeholders on alternatives to disruptions in future elections.

In the Sahel region, events leading up to coups in Chad, Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger have been characterised by restrictions on media and internet freedom, amidst which disinformation and violent extremism thrived. As some of the states in the region, notably Burkina Faso and Mali, move towards an end to military rule and head to the polls, the Thoth Media Research Institute will research disinformation and its role in sustaining authoritarian narratives and eroding human rights. The learnings from the research will form the basis of stakeholder convenings on strategies to combat disinformation in complex political, social, and security landscapes. Similarly, Internet Sans Frontières (ISF) will study the role of political microtargeting in shaping campaign strategies and voter behaviour, and the ultimate impact on the rights to privacy and participation in Mali. 

In South Africa, the Legal and Resources Centre (LRC), will raise awareness about the adequacy and efficacy of social media platforms’ content moderation policies and safeguards as well as online political advertising models in the country’s upcoming elections. The centre will also provide legal services for reparations and litigate for reforms related to online harms.

A study has found that Africa’s access to data from tech platforms, for research and monitoring electoral integrity, was below that in Europe and North America. Increased access to platform data for African researchers, civil society organisations, and Election Management Bodies (EMBs) would enable a deeper understanding of online content and its harms on the continent, and inform mitigation strategies. Accordingly, the ADRF will support Research ICT Africa to coordinate an alliance to advocate for increased data access for research purposes on the continent and to develop guidelines for ethical and responsible access to data to study elections-related content.

The impact of AI on the information ecosystem and democratic processes in Africa is the focus of two grantees’ work. On the one hand, the Eastern Africa Editors Society will assess how editors and journalists in Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Ethiopia have adopted AI and to what extent they adhere to best practice and the principles of the Paris Charter on AI and Journalism. On the other hand, the Outbox Foundation through its Thraets initiative will research the risks of AI-generated disinformation on elections, with a focus on Ghana and Tunisia. The findings will feed into tutorials for journalists and fact checkers on identifying and countering AI-generated disinformation as part of elections coverage, and awareness campaigns on the need for transparency on the capabilities of AI tools and their risks to democracy. 

Meanwhile, a group of young researchers under the stewardship of the Tanda Community-Based Organisation will research how deep fakes and other forms of manipulated media contribute to online gender-based violence against women journalists and politicians in the context of elections in Ghana, Senegal, and Namibia. The study will also compare the effectiveness of the legal and regulatory environment across the three countries in protecting women online, hold consultations and make recommendations for policy makers, platforms  and civil society on how to promote a safe and inclusive digital election environment for women.

Past and present supporters of the ADRF include the Centre for International Private Enterprise (CIPE), the Ford Foundation, the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), the German Society for International Cooperation Agency (GIZ), the Omidyar Network, the Hewlett Foundation, the Open Society Foundations, the Skoll Foundation and New Venture Fund (NVF).

Towards Ethical AI Regulation in Africa

By Tusi Fokane |

The ubiquity of generative artificial intelligence (AI)-based applications across various sectors has led to debates on the most effective regulatory approach to encourage innovation whilst minimising risks. The benefits and potential of AI are evident in various industries ranging from financial and customer services to education, agriculture and healthcare. AI holds particular promise for developing countries to transform their societies and economies. 

However, there are concerns that, without adequate regulatory safeguards, AI technologies could further exacerbate existing governance concerns around ethical deployment, privacy, algorithmic bias, workforce disruptions, transparency, and disinformation. Stakeholders have called for increased engagement and collaboration between policymakers, academia, and industry to develop legal and regulatory frameworks and standards for ethical AI adoption. 

The Global North has taken a leading position in exploring various regulatory modalities. These range from risk-based or proportionate regulation as proposed by the European Commission’s AI Act. Countries such as Finland and Estonia have opted for a greater focus on maintaining trust and collaboration at national level by adopting a human-centric approach to AI. The United Kingdom (UK) has taken a “context-specific” approach, embedding AI regulation within existing regulatory institutions. Canada has prioritised bias and discrimination, whereas other jurisdictions such as France, Germany and Italy have opted for greater emphasis on transparency and accountability in developing AI regulation. 

On the other hand, China has taken a more firm approach to AI regulation, distributing policy responsibility amongst existing standards bodies. The United States of America (USA) has adopted an incremental approach, introducing additional guidance to existing legislation and emphasising rights and safety. 

Whilst there are divergent approaches to AI regulation, there is at least some agreement, at a muti-lateral level, on the need for a human-rights based approach to ensure ethical AI deployment which respects basic freedoms, fosters transparency and accountability, and promotes diversity and inclusivity through actionable policies and specific strategies. 

Developments in AI regulation in Africa

Regulatory responses in Africa have been disparate, although the publication of the African Union Development Agency (AUDA-NEPAD) White Paper: Regulation and Responsible Adoption of AI for Africa Towards Achievement of AU Agenda 2063 is anticipated to introduce greater policy coherence. The White Paper follows the 2021 AI blueprint and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights Resolution 473, which calls for a human-rights-centred approach to AI governance. 

The White Paper calls for a harmonised approach to AI adoption and underscores the importance of developing an enabling governance framework to “provide guidelines for implementation and also keep AI development in check for negative impacts.” Furthermore, the White Paper calls on member states to adopt national AI strategies that emphasise data safety, security and protection in an effort to promote the ethical use of AI. 

The White Paper proposes a mixed regulatory and governance framework, depending on the AI use-case. First, the proposals encompass self-regulation, which would be enforced through sectoral codes of conduct, and which offer a degree of flexibility to match an evolving AI landscape. Second, the White Paper suggests the adoption of standards and certification to establish industry benchmarks. The third proposal is for a distinction between hard and soft regulation, depending on the identified potential for harm. Finally, the White Paper calls for AI regulatory sandboxes to allow for testing under regulatory supervision. 

Figure 1: Ethical AI framework

However, there are still concerns that African countries are lagging behind in fostering AI innovation and putting in place the necessary regulatory framework. According to the 2023 Government AI Readiness Index, Benin, Mauritius, Rwanda, Senegal, and South Africa are ahead in government efforts around AI out of the 24 African countries assessed. The index measures a country’s progress against four pillars: government/strategy, data & infrastructure, technology sector, and global governance/international collaboration.  

The national AI strategies of Mauritius, Rwanda, Egypt, Kenya, Senegal and Benin have a strong focus on infrastructure and economic development whilst also laying the foundation for AI regulation within their jurisdictions. For its part, Nigeria has adopted a more collaborative approach in co-creating its National Artificial Intelligence Strategy, with calls for input from AI researchers. 

Thinking beyond technical AI regulation 

Despite increasingly positive signs of AI adoption in Africa, there are concerns that the pace of AI regulation on the continent is too slow, and that it may not be fit for purpose for local and national conditions. Some analysts have warned against wholesale adoption of policies and strategies imported from the Global North, and which may fail to consider country-specific contexts.

Some Global South academics and civil society organisations have raised questions regarding the importation of regulatory standards from the Global North, some even referring to the practice as ‘data colonialism’. The apprehension of copy-pasting Global North standards is premised on the continent’s over-reliance on Big Tech digital ecosystems and infrastructure. Researchers indicate that “These context-sensitive issues raised on various continents can best be understood as a combination of social and technical systems. As AI systems make decisions about the present and future through classifying information and developing models from historical data, one of the main critiques of AI has been that these technologies reproduce or heighten existing inequalities involving gender, race, coloniality, class and citizenship.” 

Other stakeholders caution against ‘AI neocolonialism’, which replicates Western conventions, often resulting in poor labour outcomes and stifling the potential for the development of local AI approaches.  

Proposals for African solutions for AI deployment 

There is undoubtedly a need for ethical and effective AI regulation in Africa. This calls for the development of strategies and a context-specific regulatory and legal foundation, and this has been occurring in various stages. African policy-makers should ensure a multi-stakeholder and collaborative approach to designing AI governance solutions in order to ensure ethical AI, which respects human rights, is transparent and inclusive. This becomes even more significant given the potential risks to AI during election season on the continent. 
Beyond framing local regulatory solutions, stakeholders have called for African governments to play a greater role in global AI discussions to guard against regulatory blindspots that may emerge from importing purely Western approaches. Perhaps the strongest call is for African leaders to leverage expertise on the continent, and promote greater collaboration amongst African policymakers. 

Africa Commission Resolution A Boon For Fight Against Unlawful Surveillance

By CIPESA Writer |

The Collaboration on International ICT Police for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) welcomes the resolution by the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which urges African governments to cease undertaking unlawful communications surveillance.

The resolution is timely, as it comes amidst an unprecedented spike in the scale and nature of state surveillance that is often unlawful, excessive, and inadequately supervised by oversight bodies. As CIPESA research has found, the expansion in state surveillance in various African countries is denying citizens their rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly, and undermining their participation in democratic processes.

The Resolution on the deployment of mass and unlawful targeted communication surveillance and its impact on human rights in Africa, adopted last November at the Commission’s 77th Ordinary Session held in Arusha, Tanzania, expresses concern about the unrestrained acquisition of communication surveillance technologies by states without adequate regulation. It also notes the lack of adequate national frameworks on privacy, communication surveillance, and personal data protection. 

Furthermore, the resolution notes the Commission’s concern about the disproportionate targeting of journalists, human rights defenders, civil society organisations, whistleblowers and opposition political activists by state surveillance.

CIPESA welcomes the resolution, which reflects the findings of our research and the recommendations we have variously made to African governments regarding the conduct of state surveillance. CIPESA has previously called upon stakeholders, including governments, to take all measures that buttress the right to privacy in order to guarantee and enhance free expression, access to information, freedom of association, and freedom of assembly in accordance with international human rights standards.

Notably, the African Commission resolution urges African countries to ensure that all restrictions on privacy and other fundamental freedoms are necessary and proportionate, and in line with international human rights law and standards. It also urges states to consider safeguards such as the requirement for prior authorisation of surveillance by an independent and impartial judicial authority and the need for effective monitoring and regular review by independent oversight mechanisms.

According to CIPESA’s Legal Officer Edrine Wanyama, “The resolution is a step forward to buttressing data rights and privacy on the continent. States should take advantage of the resolution and overhaul regressive surveillance practices while embracing all internationally recognised efforts and standards for strengthening the right to privacy.”

According to the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information in Africa, states should only engage in targeted surveillance in conformity with international human rights law (principle 41), and every individual shall have legal recourse to effective remedies in relation to the violation of their privacy and the unlawful processing of their personal information (principle 42 (7)). In addition, principle 20 requires states to guarantee the safety of journalists and other media practitioners by taking measures that prevent threats and unlawful surveillance.
See related CIPESA resources: Privacy Imperilled: Analysis of Surveillance, Encryption and Data Localisation Laws in Africa; Effects of State Surveillance on Democratic Participation in Africa; Compelled Service Provider Assistance for State Surveillance in Africa: Challenges and Policy Options; Mapping and Analysis of Privacy Laws in Africa.