Â鶹ÒùÔº

As the world grapples with the dynamic tech environment that shapes public perceptions, trust in governance, public and private institutions, and the media has become topical. As these conversations unfold, researchers caution that trust in public institutions and governance mechanisms will continue to deteriorate if regulatory developments fail to keep up.

Much of the concern stems from the rise of AI and the monetization of social media content that drives an "attention-seeking economy" and fuels political polarization and division.

"Governance is at the core of maintaining public trust and this requires decisions that are made by organizations to be inclusive and equitable," explains Dr. Thelela Ngcetane-Vika, a Lecturer in the Wits School of Governance.

Crucial to good governance is leadership that is answerable and accountable for the decisions and actions that it takes, demonstrating a level of transparency that creates an environment in which the public can trust its organizations and institutions.

Gendered governance

Ngcetane-Vika's research looks at how gender impacts power dynamics, representation and the distribution of resources within governance systems. She says that gender should be a permanent feature on the agenda of institutions that are serious about good governance, social justice and gender equality. The inclusion of gender in governance will not only reverse past injustices but redefines the face of effective leadership, altering the current systems.

"With the genderization of governance, a new functional paradigm could emerge to promote truly inclusive organizations, not only through well-written speeches and political rhetoric, but through the intentional implementation of gender equality policies," she says.

The equitable distribution of power through the genderization of governance is one way through which to restore trust and reduce skepticism—especially in the current climate of misinformation, political polarization, corporate scandals, malfeasance and devalued ethics.

In South Africa, the failure to address social issues like poverty, unemployment, inequality, health care, education disparities and climate change—compounded with high levels of corruption, incompetence and lack of responsiveness to citizens' concerns—further erodes trust.

Renegade resource-management

However, a skeptical public that questions any information that is shared by politicians, governance institutions, the media, academia and business, is a sign of a maturing democracy, says Professor Keith Breckenridge from the Wits Institute for Social and Economic Research (WiSER). He explains that trust is tied to resources, where the failure to protect or govern the resources can lead to distrust and skepticism.

Trust infrastructures

WiSER's Trust Project interrogates the collapse of public trust. Most recently, its research has been on trust infrastructure, which includes digital tools such as biometric identification systems, predictive machine learning, credit scoring systems, bank account information and geological tools.

"The banking system is an example within the trust infrastructures where trust and mistrust coexist. By emphasizing vigilance, banks have created an environment in which their systems are seen to be reliable and trustworthy by users. Mistrust between the central banks, however, is concerning," explains Breckenridge.

He says that if the Chinese and the U.S. central banks mistrust each other, that can create all sorts of problems. This can be seen with the gold price, which has increased more than tenfold since 2001. We have also seen the global economy shake in the last two to three years because of mistrust."

Economy of mistrust

The emergence of the "economy of mistrust" that incentivizes social media users for posting attention-seeking content (that sometimes peddles misinformation) is another concerning issue for Breckenridge.

Better regulation and accountability measures for the likes of Meta, Google and X (formerly Twitter) should be in place to prevent a monopoly in this economy that erodes trust and fuels skepticism created by misinformation, according to Breckenridge.

"If somebody says something that is untrue on these platforms, Meta should share some of the liability, as would be the case for newspapers which, if they publish something that's libelous, are held responsible and the journalist is basically protected," says Breckenridge.

He concludes that while the expression of democratic skepticism on digital platforms is good, the monopolization of these spaces should be curbed.