2) Organizations must commit to building local capacities for digital resilience as a means by which to prevent, mitigate and counter the most urgent and harmful effects of weaponized social media.75 All actions within the response framework must be designed to support the digital resilience of affected communities as a cornerstone of the humanitarian, development and peacebuilding initiatives. Our efforts must resolve the tensions and trade-offs between remote-based, technologically driven capabilities (for example, those afforded by today’s digitally driven, multisourced, hyper-permeable information landscape) and the actual localization of protection, prevention and conflict resolution capacities of affected communities. 3) There is a need for much improved evidence of what does and does not achieve desired impacts. It is not clear, for example, if innovation processes such as hackathons are or are not producing technological solutions that are effective in addressing weaponization phenomena. There is a lack of evidence if programming responses such as media literacy training or counter-speech are achieving impacts that match the scale of the problem. The same question arises regarding the effectiveness of systems for reporting and mitigating electoral manipulation and violence. Response organizations pursuing further programs should invest more in and carefully design Unity State, South Sudan | Mathieu Rouquette for Mercy Corps monitoring and evaluation of these programs, to establish proof of concept and credibility in the eyes of donors and potential partners. 4) Lessons for countering weaponized social media can be drawn from the factors that make the problem itself so virulent. It’s clear, for example, that countering malicious and/or inaccurate information requires maximizing the salience of information alternatives among target populations. Salience (and ultimately uptake and practical usage) of information has increased by crafting content with human dimensions and emotional appeal, based on human-centered design principles. In the humanitarian space, for example, employing content creators and advisers that were refugees themselves supports the creation of content that is timely, linguistically accurate and culturally relevant. Facebook targeting by location, language and interests allows information to be delivered to the right people in the right place in a timely manner. Having dedicated moderators that allow for two-way communication, ensures that social media strategies for peace, development or humanitarian action are more responsive to individual concerns in a timely manner. 5) Addressing the weaponization of social media should build on existing good peacebuilding practice where possible, while recognizing that the unique challenges wrought by social media will require new and creative approaches. The spread of malicious or inaccurate information in general is not a new phenomenon — it has been used frequently to incite or stoke conflict using traditional media. Social media-related drivers, as with all drivers in conflict contexts, must be analyzed and framed within the complex web of underlying and proximate conflict causes. Peacebuilders should 75 As InterNews notes, because “information is vital to community resilience,”—defined as “the capacity of individuals, communities, and systems to survive, adapt, grow, and transform in the face of change, stress, shocks, and disruption”—we can posit that “a community with strong information ecosystem is a more resilient one.” MERCY CORPS The Weaponization of Social Media: How social media can spark violence and what can be done about it 27