The BBC was left red-faced after quoting a parody account in its Zimbabwe coverage, exposing the danger of journalists relying on social media

The trouble that the BBC got itself into on Wednesday morning, when both online and on air it referred to tweets from a parody Zanu PF account, illustrate the complexities of using social media as a reporting resource. This can be especially true in fast-moving news situations, where news organisations may have few reporters directly on the ground.

While many parody accounts on social media are used simply for humour, they can frequently be utilised for deliberate mischief.



The story behind the fake Manchester attack victims Read more

The South African mobile phone operator MTN has been targeted by parody accounts that look like the real thing but reply to customer services queries with unhelpful and rude answers. The JD Wetherspoon pub chain in the UK recently faced uproar after a fake account announced there would be a ban on staff wearing Remembrance Day poppies.



In the aftermath of any terrorist attack or mass shooting, fake accounts often spring up purporting to be witnesses claiming there is a “second shooter” or “second device”. Fake appeals for missing relatives or friends can generate thousands of retweets.

Another tactic has been to try to smear people through disinformation. In 2015 the Spanish newspaper La Razón apologised to Veerender Jubbal for putting his face on their front page as a suspected terrorist, after a photoshopped image of the Canadian was widely shared online with claims he had been involved in terror attacks in Paris.

Political parties are also obvious targets for mischief-making. In 2016, South Africa’s ANC was issued a statement saying “we reject, with the contempt they deserve, the disturbing views as posted on the parody account” after someone mimicked their official account.

The Zanu-PF parody account that has been making the news this week claims to be the “only official handle” of Zimbabwe’s ruling party, and has been active on Twitter for more than six years. Twitter’s terms and conditions say parodies should label themselves as such, which it does not.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest @zanu_pf account on Twitter Photograph: Twitter

Parody accounts are not entitled to the Twitter verification mark, which is supposed to help users understand whether accounts are genuine or not. But this policy can create confusion with the inconsistent way it is applied. The official WikiLeaks account on Twitter is verified, for example, while Julian Assange’s personal account remains without the blue mark.

Twitter recently suspended its programme of awarding blue verified checkmarks to specific accounts after it verified Jason Kessler, organiser of the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville where Heather Heyer was killed. The company stated that “verification was meant to authenticate identity & voice but it is interpreted as an endorsement or an indicator of importance. We recognise that we have created this confusion and need to resolve it.”

With suspicions heightened after revelations about Russian disinformation activity on the web, it seems more important than ever for journalists not to take social media postings at face value.