They said they will cooperate with the authorities to remove content deemed to be in violation of the laws.

Facebook said the company was in touch with a variety of stakeholders, academics and electoral organisations to collect their feedback, viewpoints and ideas on how to protect the integrity of the election experience and to encourage civic participation in local elections.

“Our Community Standards outline what is and isn’t allowed on Facebook. We will remove content that violates these standards when we are made aware of it,” Facebook told The Nation.

“We have a clear and consistent government request process, which is no different in Thailand than in the rest of the world, and we report the number of pieces of content we restrict for contravening local law in our Transparency Report,” the company said.

The Election Commission recently set up a war room to monitor whether content on social media violated election laws or spread fake news.

Facebook said it is focused on building an informed electorate and aimed to empower people in Thailand with helpful tips to help them identify false news.

Tackling misinformation is a complex issue and is a shared effort involving academics, civil society and the government, news media and technology organisations, the social media giant said.

As part of this effort, Facebook, in partnership with the Election Commission, the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society, Chulalongkorn University’s Faculty of Mass Communications and Arts, and Thai News Agency’s Sure and Share Center, recently provided tips to help people spot false news online.

“This is part of our ongoing commitment to the community in Thailand and we aim to build on these efforts through local initiatives,” Facebook said.

Thailand is ranked the eighth biggest user of Facebook with 52 million accounts, according to a survey by Hootsuite and We Are Social as of April 2018.

Meanwhile, Google said the company has reviewed requests from courts and government agencies around the world closely to determine if content should be removed from Google products because it violates a law or its product policies, a Google spokeperson told The Nation.

In its Transparency Report, Google disclosed that in the first six months of 2018 Thailand sent 150 requests to the company to remove content. Google, however, did not disclose information on removal of content.

According to a report from Google, content that Google removed from its platform in 2017 were mostly related to national security and almost 18,000 contents out of 35,793 requests were removed.

It said governments contact Google with content removal requests for a number of reasons.

“Governments ask us to remove or review content for many reasons. Some requests allege defamation, while others claim that the content violates local laws prohibiting hate speech or adult content,” the company said.

It said that often times, government requests target political content and criticism of the government.

Governments cite defamation, privacy and even copyright laws in their attempts to remove political speech from the company’s services.

The company said it also includes government requests to review content to determine if it violates our own product community guidelines and content policies.

However, the laws surrounding these issues vary by country.

“Our teams assign each request a category, such as hate speech, obscenity and defamation,” the spokesperson said.

The teams evaluate each request and review the content in context in order to determine whether or not content should be removed due to violation of local law or its content policies, it said.

Note that we did not begin providing a reason for the request until the December 2010 reporting period, said Google.

Meanwhile, Line Thailand said that all information on Line Today came from its content publishers, hence it was believable.

Sunday’s election has been cast as a battle between authoritarian and democratic forces to determine whether members of the military junta will be able to legitimately cling to power through the ballot.

Among key factors standing in the generals’ way is the younger generation. Some seven million first-time voters have indicated they oppose the establishment elite and military-dominated politics and want a fresh start for the future.

Veteran politician Suthep Thaugsuban of the pro-junta Action Coalition for Thailand (ACT) knows this. The man who led the massive street protests that paved the way for military intervention in 2014 has asked his limited support base to persuade their kids to vote for him.

“Give them a wai, tell them this is the only thing you’ll ever ask them to do for you – ‘Please go vote for Loong Kamnan’,” Suthep begged on Monday while campaigning in Bangkok.

For an adult to wai a youngster suggests a desperate appeal for a favour or kindness. Suthep was referring to himself by his nickname, Loong Kamnan. He was once a tambon chief in the South. And he would love to have a share of the youth support enjoyed by youthful billionaire Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, leader of the Future Forward Party.

Thanathorn, a newcomer to politics apart from his student activism long ago, has based his campaigning on championing democracy, rights and a more open society, as well as improving the economy.

Opinion polls and observers give Future Forward little chance of winning the election, but junta chief Prayut Chan-o-cha, eager to hang on to the Prime Minister’s Office, realises that voters are drawn to what’s new. He’s modified his look and gestures and has tried to appear less gruff and rigid.

The pro-junta Phalang Pracharat Party, which nominated Prayut as its PM candidate, mimics Suthep’s tactic for attracting the youth vote, espousing the belief that “parents know best” and children should honour their parents’ wishes.

Prayut actually said last week he regards himself as the father of all Thais – a figurehead role most commonly associated with His Majesty the late King Bhumibol.

Phalang Pracharat, which takes its name from the junta-led government’s popular Pracharat series of public welfare schemes, is anxious to continue what observers refer to as the “Prayut regime”, which began with the 2014 coup.

The party has enjoyed electoral privilege, with the Election Commission and Ombudsman accepting Prayut’s candidacy on the grounds that despite being prime minister he is not a “state official”. Yet surveys suggest Phalang Pracharat cannot win a majority of House seats on Sunday.

To continue in government, Prayut and the party will need allies, because not even the 250 senators to be appointed by the junta will be enough to maintain the status quo. Potential allies abound, though, ready to vote for Prayut’s return to high office in exchange for Cabinet portfolios and other influential posts.

Surveys and analysts tend to view Pheu Thai as the frontrunner in the polling, despite the dissolution of its major ally, the Thai Raksa Chart Party, over its daring nomination of Princess Ubolratana as a PM candidate.

The Democrats, Thailand’s oldest party, have a significant chance to do well in the election, although their former secretary general, Suthep, will be funnelling off support for the ACT.

Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva’s stated refusal to support Prayut’s continuance in office reflected his confidence of victory in the polls, but his party has a slim chance of beating Pheu Thai.

Debate over specific policy proposals has largely faded from Thai electioneering since 2006. All of the parties have announced policies this time, but the public’s attention has mainly focused on personalities and the question of who might support whom as premier.

That is to date the key question for voters old and young – whether the triumphant party on Sunday will then enable General Prayut to continue his rule.