In 1997, I served in Bougainville as part of a military information support team, where rumours and an information vacuum threatened a fragile truce. Nearly three decades later, Australia’s digital information environment presents a strangely familiar challenge, despite the extraordinary technologies now available. We have democratised the production and distribution of information without developing equally effective ways to establish its reliability, credibility and accountability.
In Bougainville, information travelled mainly through face-to-face conversations and community networks. Rumours about the intentions of opposing groups could reinforce suspicion and undermine confidence in the peace process. What people believed was happening could become as consequential as what was actually happening.
Our task was to build awareness of the peace process and strengthen community confidence. We even established a printed newspaper. Its effectiveness rested on consistent delivery, relationships developed with communities and the local credibility of the Truce Monitoring Group (TMG). The newspaper provided dependable information, but the relationships and conduct of those delivering it gave communities reason to listen.
Canadian communications theorist Marshall McLuhan anticipated aspects of today’s predicament in the 1960s through his concept of the global village. Electronic communications, he argued, would transform social relationships, recreating aspects of the immediacy and interconnectedness of oral societies.
Today’s digital environment combines those dynamics with global reach, algorithmic amplification and artificial intelligence. Information circulates through networks shaped by familiarity, identity and shared beliefs. Repetition can confer apparent credibility before claims are verified. Corrections from outside those networks may struggle to gain acceptance when their sources are already distrusted.
Bougainville was emerging from armed conflict; Australia is a functioning democracy. One faced information scarcity, while the other confronts information abundance. Yet both demonstrate how uncertainty can undermine trust when communities struggle to assess competing claims.
Digital communications have delivered enormous benefits. Citizens can challenge authority, expose wrongdoing and participate in public debate. Healthy scepticism strengthens democracy. The danger emerges when people cannot distinguish credible evidence from manipulation, particularly when group identity determines which sources they will accept.
AI compounds this challenge. Convincing text, images and video can now be produced at extraordinary speed and scale, while verification still requires evidence, time and judgement. AI can also assist verification and improve access to knowledge. The problem is the growing imbalance between producing persuasive claims and establishing their reliability.
For much of the 20th century, newspapers, broadcasters, universities and governments played prominent roles in establishing and distributing information. Their authority was never absolute, nor was it always deserved. But they provided identifiable institutions whose claims could be scrutinised and whose failures could attract consequences. Digital communications have weakened their position without necessarily replacing those functions with equally accountable alternatives.
This is where Bougainville offers a lesson. The TMG’s newspaper worked because communities had relationships with the people and organisation behind it. Credibility emerged through consistent engagement and demonstrated conduct. Today’s digital platforms can generate enormous influence without requiring comparable relationships, transparency or accountability.
Australia cannot rebuild the information hierarchies of the Industrial Age, nor should it try. Instead, we need to strengthen the conditions under which credible information can compete in an open society.
That begins with institutions recognising that trust must be earned rather than claimed. Governments should explain decisions, acknowledge uncertainty and demonstrate how public engagement influences outcomes. Media organisations, universities and experts must make their evidence and reasoning accessible to scrutiny. Authority should flow from demonstrated credibility rather than institutional status alone.
Digital platforms also need greater accountability for the environments they create. Transparency about recommendation systems, automated amplification and synthetic content would help citizens understand why particular information reaches them and whose interests its circulation serves. Independent oversight and protections for freedom of expression are essential.
Australia must also strengthen the capacity for informed democratic participation. Education, independent journalism, local civic organisations and opportunities for constructive public debate help citizens evaluate competing claims and engage across differences. These are investments in democratic capability, not simply responses to misinformation.
Facts not Fakes, a report of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, recognises that information integrity requires institutional accountability, media independence and societal resilience. Australia should translate those principles into reforms that can be evaluated: more transparent public decisions, independently scrutinised digital platforms and stronger opportunities for informed civic participation.
The objective is not to restore unquestioning faith in government or eliminate disagreement. A resilient democracy depends on citizens being able to challenge authority, test evidence and disagree without losing the capacity to make collective decisions.
In Bougainville, the printed newspaper was useful, but the trust behind it was indispensable. Our technologies have changed beyond recognition. The human requirement for credible relationships has not.
Democratising communication was a profound achievement. Ensuring that democracy can sustain trust, accountability and informed collective judgement is the unfinished work of the information revolution.
Leave a comment