Social media might feel like an endless stream of dance videos and conspiracy theories, but in Southeast Asia, it’s also at the heart of commerce, education, and the battleground of facts and lies. Nowhere is this more evident than in a region rapidly going digital, where social media isn’t just a pastime—it’s the town square, the political arena, and, for many, the primary source of information.

Over 60% of the population relies on social media for news, shaping public opinion and influencing political landscapes. This growing dependence has made regulation an urgent concern. Governments argue that regulation is necessary to protect the public from harmful falsehoods, yet their proposed solutions often come with significant drawbacks. This raises the question: is regulation genuinely safeguarding democracy, or is it expanding state control over information?

When false information is labeled a national security threat, it can lead to laws granting authorities broad powers, supposedly to protect the nation—but often at the cost of limiting dissent. Hastily developed regulations driven by panic and fear are easily misused by those in power to stifle criticism and consolidate political control.

In countries like the Philippines and Indonesia, social media plays a pivotal role in elections. Political campaigns use these platforms to engage voters and secure support. However, political leaders and their allies have also been observed spreading misleading narratives, while foreign entities—particularly in contentious geopolitical issues like China—leverage online platforms to advance their interests. In the Philippines, pro-China disinformation campaigns seek to shape public opinion on the South China Sea dispute, while in Indonesia, platforms like TikTok influence electoral outcomes. Governments claim stricter regulations are necessary to counter these threats, but when those who benefit from disinformation are also the ones crafting the rules, it raises serious concerns about democratic integrity.

The Securitization of Disinformation

Across Southeast Asia, the problem of “fake news” is increasingly treated as a national security issue, granting governments authority to censor online spaces. Singapore’s POFMA law (2019) allows officials to order content corrections or removals, framed as a safeguard against falsehoods—but critics argue it disproportionately targets opposition figures and journalists. Myanmar’s military junta passed a cybersecurity law criminalizing “false information” after the 2021 coup, suppressing dissent. Thailand’s Computer Crimes Act similarly uses vague language to prosecute activists and journalists. Instead of building public trust, these laws centralize power with governments, raising the question: are they about fighting fake news or silencing opposition?

Another concern is how political factions exploit fears of foreign election interference to justify crackdowns on dissenting opinions. China’s influence in the Philippines is a contentious issue, with Beijing using online disinformation campaigns to push territorial claims. Yet, public attitudes toward China have steadily declined over the years, suggesting these campaigns have had little impact. So where is the urgency? While addressing foreign interference is important, overreacting to national security concerns by tightening control over online spaces risks stifling free speech.

In Indonesia, election-related misinformation has fueled demands for stricter content moderation, which could ultimately be used to suppress criticism of those in power. President Prabowo Subianto, for instance, has faced backlash for targeting academics critical of his leadership. Governments frequently introduce regulations during crises, but these laws often extend beyond the immediate threat. The Duterte administration in the Philippines, for example, passed pandemic-related legislation allowing the imprisonment of individuals accused of spreading “false information.” This is particularly alarming in a region experiencing democratic stagnation, with governments shifting toward more autocratic leadership.

Southeast Asia needs effective solutions to combat digital manipulation, but greater government control over digital platforms isn’t the answer. Rather than treating misinformation as a security issue, governments should focus on transparency, independent fact-checking, and digital literacy programs. Laws regulating online content should include independent oversight to prevent abuse and ensure they genuinely serve the public. ASEAN could create regional guidelines to curb government overreach while still addressing disinformation threats.

Regulation is fundamentally important for social media, but so is preventing the misuse of anti-disinformation laws that enable censorship. To protect democracy, Southeast Asia must balance tackling false information without enabling political repression. The key question remains: can we trust Southeast Asian governments to regulate social media fairly, or are these laws just a means of securing more power?