Fighting Digital Suppression: The New Frontier for Abortion Rights in the Americas and Beyond

By Dilly Severin, Executive Director, Universal Access Project, in conversation with Jane Eklund, Tech and Reproductive Rights Fellow, Amnesty International USA and Martha Dimitratou, Digital Strategist, Women on Web and PLAN C.

It has been more than a year since the Supreme Court decision Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturned Roe v. Wade and reversed the constitutional right to abortion in the U.S. The fallout was swift and continues to be devastating for the health and bodily autonomy of Black and Brown women and other systematically excluded communities.

While the deepest impact is felt here at home in the U.S., the effects of the fall of Roe and the U.S.’s regression on sexual and reproductive health, rights and justice (SRHRJ) have reverberated globally and bled into the borderless and rapidly-evolving digital space. Certainly, misinformation was rampant before the fall of Roe; But activists have seen this opposition tool explode in the year since and are working tirelessly to navigate this new frontier in the fight for abortion rights.

Digital suppression and rampant misinformation as it relates to SRHRJ is part of a larger issue of gendered disinformation. A report earlier this year from She Persisted identified gendered disinformation as an “early warning system” for backsliding on women’s rights and the erosion of democracy, and even a national security threat. It also found that women with intersecting identities who are already marginalized face some of the most “vicious” gendered misinformation.

There is also the consideration of algorithmic justice, or who controls the narrative and the inherent biases embedded in this process.

Digital suppression has also been a topic of discussion in global normative spaces and multilateral fora like the UN General Assembly and the Commission of the Status of Women, the latter which focused on innovation and technological change. This includes how to ensure that online spaces are open to all, free from bias, discrimination, and violence. As this issue evolves, it’s increasingly clear that civil society spaces are closing, particularly for marginalized groups, and particularly online.

Why is this so dangerous in a post-Roe world? How is it impacting abortion access? And what levers can we use to halt it in its tracks? To understand more about this new landscape, we spoke with experts Jane Eklund, Tech and Reproductive Rights Fellow, Amnesty International USA and Martha Dimitratou, Digital Strategist at Women on Web and PLAN C, whose organizations are at the forefront of the fight to end digital suppression of abortion information:

1. We have heard a lot about what is at stake for abortion rights and access in the U.S. post-Dobbs. How does this show up in the digital space?

Jane Eklund: We’ve seen many emerging digital threats to abortion access following the Dobbs decision:

• On social media, sexual health and reproductive rights organizations have had posts with medically accurate information about abortion censored on platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok.

• In the state of Nebraska, a teenager’s Facebook messages to her mother were used as evidence against her in court after she had a self-managed abortion with pills.

• States are starting to introduce bills that would stop residents from even being able to access information about abortion, and prohibit them from accessing websites where they can access abortion pills.

These threats have made digital spaces the next frontier in the battle for abortion rights. Activists are fighting back to ensure that everyone can find medically accurate information, advocate for the protection of reproductive rights, and access safe abortion care when they need it.

Martha Dimitratou: Since the fall of Roe v. Wade, the number of people searching for abortion information online has drastically increased. At the same time, sexual health and reproductive rights organizations face more and more content suppression on vital and lifesaving healthcare information.

For example, several of PLAN C’s Instagram posts were taken down by the platform right after the fall of Roe. At the same time, TikTok suspended our account for almost a month after we told our audience to remember to vote to protect abortion access in the November midterm elections.

As researchers, such as those at the Center for Intimacy Justice, have demonstrated, we can recognize algorithmic bias when it comes to abortion and sexual and reproductive health content. Far more organic content is being taken down or even receiving less reach than ads about Viagra that target men. However, Big Tech and their engineers who build and maintain these algorithms, actively chose not to do anything, impacting millions worldwide. Not to mention, when anti-abortion groups flag our content and our accounts are subsequently taken down, there is no institutional memory and protection of our accounts from Big Tech, which makes us go through the same length of appeal processes each time, to prove the legitimacy of our organizations.

We also see a growing disinformation online and an ever-expanding number of anti-abortion fake clinics ranking on top of search results. Not only is this digital suppression of abortion information and the propagation of disinformation supported by Big Tech very dangerous, but it also contributes to further reinforcing abortion stigma.

People are also rightly more concerned about how their data might be used to build criminal cases against them, as we saw with the case in Nebraska that Jane mentioned above; as well as who their data is sold to, where it is stored, who can re-use it, and the extent of their data history.

Many of our organizations are small, and constantly fighting digital suppression of online information requires us to dedicate a lot of our time and resources, which we would instead like to use to ensure everyone has access to safe abortion.

2. Why does this matter in a global context?

Martha: The U.S. has a massive influence worldwide, whether through its policies and legislation or its cultural impact and power to shift popular culture and opinion. Most Big Tech companies are based in the U.S., and many of their policies are very U.S.-centered, implemented with a U.S. focus, and motivated by U.S. politics. Blanket policies are thus often applied uniformly without understanding the international landscape of abortion access and its local context.

The global press and public often start paying attention to an issue when it has impacted the U.S. That is also the case with digital suppression of abortion information. Many organizations, such as Women on Web, have been facing censorship for years. Yet, it is only recently and after the fall of Roe that the issue started being understood as a global crisis and battleground for abortion rights.

Jane: The U.S. does not exist in a vacuum. It has a significant global influence on policy, and the laws passed in the U.S. can serve as models or justifications for similar legislation in other countries. Because of this, some advocates fear that new state-level restrictions will embolden anti-abortion activists abroad and further stigmatize abortion. It is vital that efforts are made to prevent a domino effect in other countries following the Dobbs decision, and that global access to abortion care is not hindered by the U.S.’s new reality.

3. What are specific actions advocates can take to address digital suppression? What other players are critical in this fight and how can they take action?

Jane: As advocates, one of the most important things that we can do is raise awareness of this issue, ensure that medically accurate information about abortion is not removed from digital spaces, and fight the rise of abortion misinformation and disinformation. Sexual health and reproductive rights advocates are working towards these goals through advocacy campaigns that target Big Tech platforms and expose the ways in which abortion disinformation spreads online. Advocates are also engaging in ongoing conversations with representatives at Big Tech companies to share their experiences and challenges with censorship on platforms. While abortion rights activists are at the forefront of this battle, this is a fight that needs to be tackled from several fronts. Any social media user can share information about how to spot mis/disinformation; doctors can share medically accurate and unbiased information about abortion online; activists across the digital rights movement and abortion rights movement can collaborate on initiatives and find power in numbers. Stopping the digital suppression of abortion information is everybody’s fight.

Martha: We should continue to raise awareness and put pressure on Big Tech to stop systematically suppressing accurate healthcare information about abortion on their platforms and to stop actively enabling the circulation of harmful disinformation, including the ones sponsored by fake clinics.

It has been very encouraging to see sexual and reproductive health organizations, as well as our digital community at large, coming together to fight censorship and shedding light on this issue through digital campaigns, panels, and open conversations with Big Tech, as well as by asking the press to keep reporting on this critical issue.

Big Tech companies can become intimidating when asked to report and be held accountable; they often avoid providing transparent and accurate answers to our questions or simply deny our claims, so we need to keep standing together and calling them out. Women on Web’s Instagram account got reinstated in less than 24 hours after our community called them out on social media and asked them for an explanation. Similarly, PLAN C’s TikTok account was back up just a few hours after we made a post asking everyone to tag the company and demand they reinstate the account. This was after a month of trying in vain to reach anyone at the organizations.

We all can play an equally important role in fighting digital suppression. For example, many healthcare providers are creating amazing content with accurate abortion information, which is being seen and shared by millions across social media platforms. Great organizations such as the Center for Intimacy Justice and Reproaction are creating campaigns pushing policy changes. The innovative reporting and research of the Center for Countering Digital Hate revealed many insides on Big Tech and its modus operandi, such as how Google received millions of dollars from fake clinics to advertise on its platform.

4. What is the next frontier in the digital fight for health and rights for all? What brings you hope in your work?

Martha: The fight for access to accurate healthcare information on abortion for all is the next frontier in ensuring digital health and rights. It is so important that everyone can find the accurate, stigma-free information they need on abortion to make the informed decisions, without fear of running into harmful disinformation and without the threat of data privacy violations and possible criminalization.

I find a lot of hope in seeing organizations focused on sexual and reproductive health and internet freedom and a growing digital community from all over the world coming together to fight Big Tech censorship. I feel solidarity within the global community and the energy, incredible strength, and unity in building a movement to stand up against the Big Tech information monopoly.

If you’d like to learn more about our work, please reach out to us at repro.uncensored@gmail.com.

Jane: Right now at the frontier of the fight for health and rights for all, fighting censorship of abortion information online is central to ensuring people know and understand their rights, and know where they can access safe and legal abortion. The abortion rights landscape in the U.S. is evolving every day, so advocates are continuously adapting to the new obstacles anti-abortion activists use to hinder access to essential reproductive healthcare. It is vital that we continue to raise awareness of this issue to keep pressure on Big Tech companies and ensure that this issue is not ignored.

I feel hopeful for the future because every day I see the tireless efforts of reproductive health and rights activists across the U.S. working to ensure that everybody can access safe abortion when they need it, and they’ve shown that re-securing abortion rights for everybody in the U.S. is a matter of “when”, not “if”.

Want to learn more? Click here for resources and ways to take action.