How big tech should react to the FBI’s conspiracy theories memo

Conspiracy theories have been radicalizing believers across the country, and finally, the FBI is connecting the dots between conspiracy theorists and real-world violence. According to a new report from Yahoo! News, the FBI has published a document warning that conspiracy theories constitute a domestic terrorism threat.

“The FBI assesses these conspiracy theories very likely will emerge, spread, and evolve in the modern information marketplace, occasionally driving both groups and individual extremists to carry out criminal or violent acts,” the document states. 

The FBI also specifically calls out internet companies’ role in proliferating the QAnon and Pizzagate theories, which led to violence. 

But whether internet companies will take the FBI bulletin to heart and expand their terms of service in response remains to be seen.

“The advent of the Internet and social media has enabled promoters of conspiracy theories to produce and share greater volumes of material via online platforms that larger audiences of consumers can quickly and easily access,” the document reads.

The internet’s role in spreading conspiracy theories is where things get tricky, for both the FBI and social media companies themselves. None of them police ideologies. Social media companies allow people to talk about whatever they want — inclusive of conspiracy theories — as long as they’re not inciting violence or breaking the companies’ terms of service in other ways, like through hate speech.

Now, these companies might want to reassess that stance to include the sorts of conspiracy theories that could lead to violence.

“Most people accept that hate propaganda can lead to violence, but it’s also true that there is a connection between conspiracy theories and violence,” Heidi Beirich, the director of the Intelligence Project — which tracks extremism across the internet — at the Southern Poverty Law Center, said. “It’s time for them to also consider violence and conspiracy theories and how their systems spread these ideas.”

Could the FBI’s stance — that conspiracy theories constitute a real-world threat — get the companies providing the platforms where those conspiracy theories flourish to pay attention?

Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit did not respond to Mashable’s questions about whether the FBI’s bulletin would impact policy changes. Google (regarding YouTube) declined to comment, but pointed Mashable to YouTube’s existing policies around what it calls “borderline content” and its efforts to promote videos from credible sources around controversial topics. YouTube noted that some conspiracy theory videos might violate their policies and qualify for removal when videos contain hate speech, harassment, or incitements to violence.

There’s also a question of what qualifies as an incitement to violence. It might seem like something overt, but the FBI says some conspiracy theories can do this even when they’re not literally telling people to grab the anti-government pitchforks. Beirich says there’s a way to tell the innocuous conspiracy theories apart from the ones that can — and have — sparked real-world violence.

“You’re only going to have violence if the conspiracy theory identifies the target,” Beirich said. “When you have a target who’s named, that’s when a conspiracy theory opens you up to potential violence.”

Pizzagate became a real-world event because the conspiracy theory identified a specific place as the seat of the conspiracy. The FBI considers QAnon a threat because the group specifically names people in government as the alleged perpetrators of a vast child trafficking ring. Anti-semitic and racist conspiracy theories are easier to identify as dangerous specifically because they name their targets, as well. 

Whether a conspiracy theory identifies a person or group as an enemy is one way social media companies can distinguish between the nutty and the dangerous. But this is still painting with a bit of a wide stroke. Beicher added that, if social media companies are to adequately address the threat of conspiracy theories, it will be crucial for them to investigate specific theories, groups, and other verbal markers. That will mean speaking with or bringing on researchers and other experts at internet companies themselves. They may do just that. After all, many have updated their policies in recent months and years to address misinformation and hate on their platforms. 

However, thanks to conservative critics of supposed political bias at tech companies, these companies are still attempting to walk a line between moderating content and appearing politically neutral. Meanwhile, the conspiracy theories are coming from inside the White House (the recent Trump appointee to director of national intelligence is a land rights conspiracy theorist himself). Because of the right’s increasingly cozy relationship with people who hold fringe, unhinged beliefs, incorporating conspiracy theories into the companies’ terms of use policies may prove more delicate than it should be.

Beicher thinks that’s no excuse.

“These are companies that make billions of dollars,” Beicher said. “It shouldn’t be such a big deal to go ahead and investigate this.”