By Jude Dinesh Koduthor –

Jude Dinesh Koduthor

The Digital Threat to Democracy

In an era where information is just a click away, democracy, once considered the pinnacle of governance, is increasingly under strain. Around the world, political manipulation, media influence, and public apathy are accelerating the erosion of democratic norms (Freedom House, 2022). The platforms that promised to democratise information are now being weaponised, leaving citizens vulnerable to misinformation, polarisation, and disengagement.

This crisis is particularly evident in Western democracies, where well-funded interest groups, digital technology giants, and new media platforms exert disproportionate influence over public discourse (Chedia, 2020). The internet’s structural characteristics, such as zero marginal cost distribution, real-time interactivity, and deep integration into daily life, pose novel threats to epistemological authority and public reason (Ellingsen, 2024). Moreover, the datafication of interpersonal interactions is shifting the balance of power between individuals, states, and markets, creating new challenges for civic education and democratic participation (Sefton Green, 2020).

At the same time, democracy in Sri Lanka has faced severe disruptions, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic and longstanding political instability. The pandemic catalysed executive aggrandisement and de-democratization (Fonseka et al., 2021), while economic turmoil led to mass protests, such as the Rambukkana shooting incident in April 2022 (Jayamaha, 2022). Yet, digital technologies have also provided opportunities for citizen mobilisation, offering new ways to counteract state repression and promote democratic discourse (Hattotuwa, 2009).

With these global and local challenges in mind, this article explores how digital disinformation, traditional media biases, and public disengagement are contributing to democratic erosion. Furthermore, it highlights the dual role of technology both as a tool for manipulation and as a potential instrument for democratic renewal.

The Digital Disinformation Crisis

Social media platforms once hailed as tools of empowerment, have become breeding grounds for misinformation and propaganda. In Sri Lanka, the spread of false narratives through Facebook, WhatsApp, and Twitter has had serious implications for communal harmony and electoral processes. The Centre for Policy Alternatives (2018) highlights that more than 50% of Sri Lankan social media users have encountered false political information online. The problem extends globally, as digital technology giants have contributed to the datafication of political discourse, allowing interest groups to exploit social media for targeted manipulation (Sefton-Green, 2020).

Misinformation is not just an unintended byproduct of the digital age; it is often deliberately orchestrated by political actors to sway public opinion and silence dissent. During election cycles, this is particularly evident. Findings from qualitative research, including focus group discussions and interviews conducted in 2019, indicate that misinformation campaigns on WhatsApp significantly shaped voter perceptions. Participants frequently encountered narratives falsely claiming that Sajith Premadasa planned to remove Buddhist heritage sites and introduce foreign influence into Sri Lanka’s cultural policies. These claims, widely circulated on social media, were strategically crafted to provoke nationalist fears and influence electoral decision-making (Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2020).

A content analysis of election-related disinformation further highlights how manipulated news clips and deepfake videos were disseminated across digital platforms, reinforcing false claims of electoral fraud and ethnic favouritism. The circulation of these materials contributed to widespread confusion among voters and intensified political divisions (Mirza, 2024). Reports from independent fact-checking organisations and social media monitoring initiatives confirm that Facebook was used to systematically spread anti-Muslim disinformation, including fabricated allegations that Muslim-owned businesses were poisoning Sinhalese consumers. The amplification of these narratives, which led to instances of communal violence, underscores the role of digital platforms in fostering real-world tensions (Wall Street Journal, 2021).

Beyond Sri Lanka, Western democracies have also struggled with disinformation. For example, the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election saw Russian-backed misinformation campaigns spread through social media, leading to mass polarisation and distrust in electoral processes. Similarly, the Cambridge Analytica scandal exposed how political parties used harvested Facebook data to manipulate voter behaviour in both the Brexit referendum and U.S. elections (Christina and Grayce, 2020).

Analysis from Benkler et al. (2018) indicates that in the 2016 US presidential election, Russian-backed misinformation disproportionately targeted social media users, influencing public discourse and exacerbating partisan polarisation. Similarly, investigative reports on the Cambridge Analytica scandal exposed how harvested Facebook data was exploited to manipulate voter behaviour during the Brexit referendum and U.S. elections (Christina and Grayce, 2020)

Research on post-truth politics demonstrates that misinformation operates by undermining traditional sources of epistemological authority. Culloty and Suiter (2021) argue that political disinformation strategies leverage emotional appeals and ideologically driven narratives to override evidence-based reasoning. The proliferation of such tactics, evident in both electoral misinformation and conspiracy theories surrounding global events, has significantly eroded public trust in democratic institutions.

To combat these dangers, governments and technology companies must implement stronger regulations. Sri Lanka should adopt an approach similar to the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA), which mandates platform accountability for false content and requires transparency in political advertising. Additionally, independent fact-checking partnerships should be funded to identify and debunk viral misinformation in real-time. Germany’s NetzDG law, which imposes penalties on platforms that fail to remove harmful content, could serve as a model for Sri Lanka in holding tech companies accountable (Tworek & Leerssen 2019).

The Role of Traditional Media

While digital platforms dominate contemporary political discourse, traditional media is not without fault. In Sri Lanka, mainstream news outlets often have strong political affiliations, shaping their narratives to align with influential stakeholders. Reporters Without Borders (2021) highlights that state-controlled or politically aligned media houses engage in selective reporting, amplifying ruling party messages while omitting stories critical of the government.

The erosion of journalistic independence is a broader global concern. In many Western democracies, well-funded interest groups exert disproportionate influence over news coverage (Chedia, 2020), and in some cases, digital media conglomerates prioritise profit-driven sensationalism over factual reporting. This distortion of information weakens the public’s ability to engage in rational democratic deliberation.

Reforming media institutions is critical to restoring public trust. Sri Lanka should implement media ownership transparency laws, requiring all news organisations to disclose their political affiliations and funding sources (Fonseka et al., 2021). Public broadcasters should be placed under independent regulatory bodies to prevent them from becoming government propaganda tools. Furthermore, governments and private organisations should invest in investigative journalism funds, ensuring the financial sustainability of independent reporting.

Public Apathy and the Decline of Civic Engagement

As misinformation saturates the media landscape, many citizens have responded with growing apathy. International Republican Institute (2022) explores that trust in Sri Lanka’s political system has reached an all-time low, with only 35% of respondents believing elections lead to meaningful change. This disillusionment is particularly pronounced among young voters, who are increasingly disengaged from formal political processes. In the 2020 parliamentary elections, Sri Lanka saw record-low youth voter turnout, indicating a growing disconnect between younger generations and traditional political institutions.

This trend is not unique to Sri Lanka. In many Western democracies, young people are shifting away from institutionalised participation (e.g., voting) toward digital activism and protest movements. While movements like #GotaGoHome in Sri Lanka and Black Lives Matter (BLM) in the US demonstrate the political potential of online activism, they also reveal a fundamental shift in civic engagement strategies.

To address this challenge, civic education must be reimagined for the digital age (Sefton-Green, 2020). Governments should integrate critical media literacy programs into school curriculums, equipping students with tools to identify misinformation and engage in democratic dialogue. Additionally, political institutions must rebuild trust with young voters by addressing corruption and improving transparency.

A Collective Responsibility

The erosion of democracy is not an inevitable outcome-it is a challenge that can be mitigated through collective action. Governments, technology companies, journalists, and civil society must work together to uphold the integrity of democratic discourse. If Sri Lanka and other nations wish to preserve their democratic fabric, immediate steps must be taken to combat political manipulation, media distortion, and public apathy.

Citizens play a critical role in this process. By following fact-checking organisations, critically evaluating news sources, and participating in civic discourse, individuals can help safeguard democracy. The Sri Lankan government must establish independent regulatory bodies to oversee political digital advertising and misinformation, while media organisations must commit to greater transparency in ownership and funding. Without these efforts, democracies worldwide risk sliding toward oligarchy, authoritarianism, or technologically driven totalitarianism (Chedia, 2020).

With social media disinformation, traditional media bias, and public apathy all threatening democratic integrity, urgent reforms are needed. If citizens, policymakers, and journalists fail to act, democracy may soon be reduced to a mere illusion manipulated by powerful actors and sustained only in name.

Reference

Chedia, M. (2020). Democracy in Crisis, The Copernicus Journal of Political Studies.

Culloty, E., & Suiter, J. (2021). Media control and post-truth communication. In The Routledge Handbook of Illiberalism. Taylor & Francis.

Contucci, P., Omicini, A., Pianini, D., & Sîrbu, A. (2019). The Future of Digital Democracy. Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

Fonseka, B., Ganeshathasan, L., & Welikala, A. (2021). Sri Lanka: Pandemic-Catalyzed Democratic Backsliding.

Hattotuwa, S. (2009). New Media and Conflict Transformation in Sri Lanka. IDS Bulletin, 40, 28-35.

Enroth, H. (2023). Crisis of Authority: The Truth of Post-Truth. Int J Polit Cult Soc 36, 179–195

Jayamaha, J. (2022). The demise of Democracy in Sri Lanka: A study of the political and economic crisis in Sri Lanka (Based on the incident of the Rambukkana shooting). Spring Journal of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(05), 236–240.

Kluge, C. (2016). Sri Lanka Ethnic Fratricide And The Dismantling Of Democracy.