Model UN Background Guide

Committee: SOCHUM (Third Committee of the General Assembly)
Topic: Disinformation and Freedom of Expression
Conference Year: 2025

Topic Background

Disinformation—the deliberate spread of false or misleading information—has emerged as a critical challenge to democratic societies, social cohesion, and human rights worldwide. Historically, states and actors have manipulated information for political or ideological gain, but the rise of digital platforms and social media has dramatically amplified the scale and speed at which disinformation can spread. This phenomenon threatens freedom of expression, a fundamental human right enshrined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), by creating a paradox: efforts to curb harmful disinformation risk encroaching on free speech, while unchecked disinformation can undermine informed public discourse and democratic processes.

The urgency of addressing disinformation has increased due to recent global events. The COVID-19 pandemic underscored how health-related disinformation can jeopardize public safety. Elections and referenda in various countries have been accompanied by sophisticated disinformation campaigns aimed at influencing outcomes and sowing distrust in institutions. Furthermore, authoritarian regimes have leveraged anti-disinformation rhetoric to justify crackdowns on independent media and dissenting voices, complicating the balance between regulation and rights protection.

The United Nations has recognized the dual challenge of combating disinformation while safeguarding freedom of expression, making this topic a pressing agenda item for SOCHUM in 2025. Delegates must navigate complex issues including digital governance, human rights standards, state sovereignty, and the responsibilities of private sector actors.

Key Actors

States:

• United States: Emphasizes combating foreign interference and election-related disinformation while advocating for robust protections of free speech. Supports multi-stakeholder approaches involving civil society and tech companies.
• European Union (represented by member states such as Germany and France): Has taken legislative steps like the Digital Services Act to regulate online platforms, balancing disinformation mitigation with rights protections. Advocates for international standards on transparency and accountability.
• Russia and China: Often accused of state-sponsored disinformation campaigns; prioritize state sovereignty and resist external regulation of information flows. Emphasize combating “illegal” or “harmful” content, sometimes at the expense of freedom of expression.
• India: Faces challenges with misinformation on social media affecting communal harmony and public health. Supports regulatory frameworks but is cautious about censorship concerns.
• Brazil and South Africa: Emerging democracies dealing with disinformation’s impact on elections and social stability; advocate for capacity-building and international cooperation without infringing on free speech.

International Organizations:

• United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC): Provides normative guidance on the right to freedom of expression and its limitations, including through special rapporteurs.
• International Telecommunication Union (ITU): Engages on technical aspects of digital infrastructure and cybersecurity, relevant to disinformation spread.
• Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE): Active in election observation and combating election-related disinformation.
• Council of Europe: Has developed recommendations on combating disinformation while protecting human rights.
• Civil Society Organizations (e.g., Reporters Without Borders, Article 19): Advocate for press freedom and monitor government actions affecting information rights.

Bloc Positions

Western Democracies (e.g., United States, Canada, EU states):
Typically emphasize the protection of freedom of expression as a cornerstone of democracy. Support transparency and accountability measures for online platforms, digital literacy programs, and international cooperation to counter foreign interference. Generally wary of broad government censorship but favor targeted action against harmful disinformation, especially related to elections and public health.

Authoritarian and Semi-Authoritarian States (e.g., Russia, China, Iran):
Prioritize state sovereignty and control over information. Often frame disinformation as a threat to national security and social stability, supporting stronger government regulation and restrictions on online content. Skeptical of international norms that may limit their ability to control domestic information environments. Frequently accuse Western states of using disinformation narratives to justify interference.

Global South and Emerging Democracies (e.g., India, Brazil, South Africa):
Face significant challenges from disinformation impacting social cohesion and democratic processes. Advocate for balanced approaches that include capacity-building, media development, and access to technology. Support international cooperation but emphasize respect for national contexts and caution against overregulation that could suppress dissent or minority voices.

Civil Society and Human Rights Advocates:
Although not a formal bloc, these actors influence debates by stressing the importance of protecting freedom of expression and press freedom. They caution against government overreach and call for transparency and accountability from both states and private companies. Promote digital literacy and public awareness as essential tools to combat disinformation.

Past UN Action

• Resolution 68/167 (2013): Reaffirms the right to privacy in the digital age and the importance of freedom of expression online.
• Resolution 73/179 (2018): Addresses the promotion, protection, and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet, underscoring the need to combat disinformation without violating rights.
• Reports by the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression: Provide detailed analyses on the impact of disinformation and state obligations.
• Human Rights Council Resolutions on the right to freedom of expression (various years): Emphasize the need to balance combating harmful content with protecting fundamental rights.
• General Assembly debates and side events: Increasingly focus on disinformation’s impact on peace, security, and human rights, reflecting its growing importance on the agenda.

Questions a Resolution Should Answer

1. How can states effectively combat disinformation while fully respecting international human rights standards, especially freedom of expression?
2. What role should private sector actors (e.g., social media platforms) play in preventing the spread of disinformation, and how can their accountability be ensured?
3. How can international cooperation be strengthened to address cross-border disinformation campaigns without infringing on state sovereignty?
4. What measures can be implemented to support media literacy and public awareness as tools to build resilience against disinformation?
5. How can vulnerable groups, including minorities and journalists, be protected from both disinformation and potential government overreach?
6. What mechanisms can the UN develop or enhance to monitor and report on disinformation trends and their impact on human rights?
7. How should the balance be struck between combating disinformation related to public health crises and protecting freedom of expression?

Further Reading

• UN Documents: Official reports and resolutions from the General Assembly and Human Rights Council, including reports by the Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression and relevant GA resolutions on digital rights and privacy. These provide authoritative legal frameworks and UN member states’ positions.
• Think-Tank Reports: Analyses from policy institutes specializing in digital governance, human rights, and international law (e.g., the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the Brookings Institution, or the Center for Democracy & Technology). These offer in-depth research on disinformation trends, regulatory models, and human rights implications.
• News Outlets and Investigative Journalism: Reputable international media sources and investigative reports that track disinformation campaigns, government responses, and social media platform policies. These sources provide real-world examples and case studies relevant to current debates.

This background guide aims to equip delegates with a nuanced understanding of the challenges and opportunities in addressing disinformation while upholding freedom of expression in the 2025 SOCHUM session.