Yilin Su

Yilin Su

PhD Candidate at
University College London

Research

Fake News Labels and Public Opinion in Nondemocracies: Evidence from Singapore

Su, Y., Working Paper, 2025

R&R with Comparative Political Studies

Abstract: In democracies and nondemocracies alike, the share of content flagged as “fake” on social media is on the rise, yet we know little about how fake news labels shape public opinion. This study examines the use of fake news labels in nondemocratic contexts and argues that authoritarian regimes employ them to reduce alignment with and trust in opposition messages. Using a pre-registered survey experiment conducted in Singapore, I find that government-sponsored fake news labels lower agreement with evidence-oriented posts from opposition channels, especially among government supporters. Meanwhile, rebuttals produced by targeted opposition accounts are ineffective in counteracting this negative effect. In addition, fake news labels do not significantly alter perceptions of the content’s trustworthiness or the reliability of its sources. I conclude that the opinion effects of government-sponsored fake news labels vary depending on the attributes of targeted posts, as these labels have limited influence when applied to politically sensitive messages that already attract low support from the masses or when individuals may hesitate to reveal their true opinions. This research contributes to a deeper understanding of the strategies used by authoritarian regimes to crack down on online dissent and their consequences. It offers timely insights into how modern autocracies adapt to the digital age and informs debates on democratic backsliding, where attacks on media freedom often serve as the first step in eroding democracy.

When Do Nondemocracies Legalize Online Information Control?

Su, Y., Working Paper, 2025

Abstract: Why do some authoritarian regimes adopt Internet laws to control online information while others do not? I argue that nondemocratic governments use Internet laws to communicate commitment to governing the online space. The adoption of new legislation requires investing time, resources, and legislative effort. In addition to allowing authorities to punish online behaviour with greater specificity and to create legal threats, the legislation adoption process communicates regime priorities. Using cross-national panel data and survival analysis, I find that nondemocratic regimes adopt Internet regulation legislation when they have high regulatory capacity and face increasing threats from offline mobilisation. The findings also show that the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of one type of such legislation, online disinformation laws. By identifying the conditions under which autocracies legalise online control, this research provides valuable insights for studies of democratic backsliding, particularly regarding how populists weaponise legal instruments to constrain opposition.

How Do Fake News Laws Impact Online Opposition in Nondemocratic Regimes? Evidence from Singapore

Su, Y., Working Paper, 2025

Abstract: Internet regulations enforced in nondemocracies, such as “fake news” laws, have been widely criticised by media and human rights defenders for their repressive potential and the likelihood of inducing self-censorship among online outlets and social media users. However, there is limited empirical evidence on their impact on direct targeted groups that typically include political opposition. This study investigates how the adoption and enforcement of state-sponsored disinformation laws influence opposition behaviour online. I analyse 8,751 social media posts created by online activists before and after the enactment of Singapore’s fake news law, as well as after their content was labelled under such a law as “false”. Using k-means clustering, an interrupted time series design, and word embeddings, I find that after the online disinformation law was adopted, online activists engaged in political discussions less often and adopted a more neutral tone when discussing political content, compared to before the law. The first direct application of the law against an activist account elicited further moderation in topic composition but little additional shift in tone. In their subsequent discussions of political topics, online activists engage less with domestic politics and focus more on international issues. This research is among the first to examine the direct impact of legal repression on online activists’ accounts. Findings from this research provide insights into how the adoption of fake news legislation and targeted attacks against users shape patterns of digital activism under authoritarian rule.