How disinformation networks amplify online xenophobia in SA

A video appears on your social media feed. Red emojis flash across the screen. The caption warns of a crisis. The comments are angry. Within minutes, hundreds of people have shared it. You watch. You react. You share.

But before doing so, there is another question worth asking: Why did this content reach you in the first place?

Social media research by non-profit organisation Tales of Turning suggests that some anti-foreign-national narratives circulating on social media in South Africa are not simply the result of spontaneous public anger.

Tales of Turning is a local organisation that uses social media and online conversations to prevent violence, hate speech and help communities heal.

The organisation analysed a randomised sample of publicly available social media posts from 30 May and 30 June 2026, using artificial intelligence alongside human analysis to identify patterns of misinformation, disinformation, hate speech and coordinated amplification.

The report found that “27% of the anti-foreign-national narrative analysed was linked to a disinformation network of disruptor and bot accounts”.

The observations raise a difficult question about the online information environment: how much of the outrage people encounter is organic, and how much is being deliberately amplified?

Divide-and-rule strategies

Disinformation campaigns use divide-and-rule strategies to erode social trust and force people into opposing sides. They present one group as a serious threat to another, making it harder for people to find common ground or consider different perspectives. The aim is to turn disagreement into fear and hostility, encouraging people to see those on the other side as enemies rather than people with different views.

Tales of Turning’s research identified a recurring narrative in which South Africans are portrayed as citizens, taxpayers and patriots under threat, while foreign nationals are characterised as illegal invaders, criminals or economic threats.

That framing is often connected to genuine social problems: unemployment, crime, housing shortages, pressure on public services, failing infrastructure and difficulties faced by small-scale businesses.

These problems are real. But they are also complex.

Reducing them to a single explanation, that foreign nationals are responsible, can turn legitimate frustration into hostility towards an entire group.

The research demonstrates that anti-foreigner sentiment can also be presented through seemingly legitimate appeals for “law enforcement”, “sovereignty enforcement” and compliance with immigration laws.

Coded language, altered spellings and symbols may further allow users to communicate hostile messages while attempting to avoid content moderation.

The distinction matters because changing the language does not necessarily change the underlying message.

The illusion of consensus

Social media can make repeated claims appear more credible simply because they are encountered repeatedly.

The same slogans, hashtags and messages may appear across numerous accounts. To a user scrolling through their feed, that repetition can create the impression that a large section of society shares the same view.

But coordinated amplification can manufacture the appearance of consensus.

That makes the distinction between genuine public opinion and artificially amplified content increasingly difficult to see.

The problem is compounded by emotionally charged videos and posts.

Words such as “URGENT” and “BREAKING”, combined with dramatic imagery and emergency emojis, encourage immediate reactions before users have established where a video originated, when it was recorded or whether its accompanying claims are accurate.

Misinformation does not necessarily spread because people believe everything they see. Sometimes it spreads because the message confirms what they already suspect.

The grievances are real

This is what makes the issue particularly difficult.

South Africans have legitimate concerns about exclusion, unemployment, crime and public services. However, those concerns cannot simply be dismissed as products of online manipulation.

The danger arises when genuine grievances are redirected towards a particular group.

Tales of Turning warns that when online campaigns contribute to street-level violence or the closure of local businesses, the underlying causes of hardship remain unresolved.

Not every angry post is coordinated. Not every person sharing an anti-foreigner message is part of a disinformation network.

The challenge is identifying when legitimate public frustration is being exploited.

So, before sharing the next post that makes you angry, pause.

Ask what evidence is being presented. Ask whether you are being offered a solution or simply someone to blame.

And perhaps ask the most important question of all: Who benefits if I believe this?

In an information environment where outrage can travel faster than verification, sometimes the most powerful response is simply to pause before pressing “share”. DM

Thandile Xesi is a research consultant at Tales of Turning.