Succesul în combaterea dezinformării depinde de o abordare cuprinzătoare din partea întregii societăți  

 Parafrazați și traduceți următorul conținut în limba română. Extindeți-l într-un articol complet, adăugând informații reale și relevante. Asigurați-vă că furnizați exclusiv conținutul tradus și parafrazat ca rezultat, fără alte explicații, introduceri sau formatare suplimentară. Întregul text trebuie să fie în română, scris fluent și adaptat pentru o audiență locală. The session titled “Democracy at Risk: Fact-Checking and Content Moderation on Social Media—Facing Challenges by Creating Enabling Environment” discussed the state of fact-checking in the Western Balkans. Jona Plumbi, from the fact-checking organization Faktoje, noted that Albania is particularly vulnerable to disinformation.“We are not prepared to combat disinformation. We are trying to prepare for the parliamentary elections in May, but it is not enough. A multifaceted approach to the problem is needed,” Plumbi said.That is why, as Plumbi noted, Faktoje has started a collaboration with the University of Tirana to integrate media literacy into education, as the level of media literacy is very low. Plumbi also addressed another problem, how to reach an audience that is not interested in accurate information, that is, those who consume short content such as that found on TikTok. “When we wrote long analyses about disinformation regarding migrants in Albania, was anyone interested? No. We reached the most activity on 40-second videos,” Plumbi said.Maida Ćulahović, from “Why Not” in Bosnia and Herzegovina, followed up with their own experience. Through the fact-checking services “Istinomer” and “Raskrinkavanje,” they tried to address the problem together with the platforms by following the code of practice, but without success:“Without clear legislation, the platforms will do nothing, i.e. they will not voluntarily implement measures to address disinformation. During the last elections, we tried to work with the platforms for posts and content that violate the code of conduct [of Meta’s platforms], illegal content or one that contradicts the electoral code, and there was very little responsiveness. Out of 119 reported content, we received a response for only 25 of them. And only 3 were removed, but only after we appealed the initial decision,” shared Ćulahović. Nacho Strigulev, from Blue Link, Bulgaria, followed up on the same topic, saying that we cannot rely on platforms to defend the information space, because they are, at the end of the day, profit-oriented companies:“Platforms have no problem transforming themselves into weapons against democracy and the democratic order because such content brings clicks and interaction with the content. On the other hand, they make a profit through it.”Strigulev further mentioned that such algorithms are everywhere and quoted Alexandra Giese, saying that such algorithms [e.g. “For You” pages] should be regulated, and turned off during election periods. Strigulev also drew attention to various chatbots that use artificial intelligence (AI) technology, and said that between 6 and 50 percent share disinformation that we know is linked to the Kremlin, including sharing sources from the “Pravda” network of pages. The network published an astronomical 3.6 million articles in 2024 alone.The last speaker was Despina Kovachevska, from the Metamorphosis Foundation, and sh