Combating Disinformation

Community-based fact-checking is a promising approach to correct misleading posts. Exposing users to community notes reduces the subsequent spread of misleading posts by 61.2% (an increase the odds that users delete their misleading posts by 94.3%) Although community notes are effective in reducing the spread of posts once annotated, they usually appear too late to intervene in the early and most viral stage of the diffusion. As a result, their system-wide effect is modest. This is based on an analysis of 237,180 community fact-checked cascades reposted more than 431 million times https://lnkd.in/eWNRchek One reason I think they are effective is because they harness social norms--if other people *like me* find the comment misleading that is often more compelling that a simple fact check. We found that a more effective strategy might be adding a "misleading" button right on social media posts. This allows people to see social norms much faster (before content goes viral). This is 5X more effective than other strategies for fighting misinformation and does not require fact-checkers or official content moderation. In additional, it works really well for polarizing content--which community notes struggle to stop. https://lnkd.in/eAAVg6mP

The current energy shock makes the case for renewables more obvious than ever. It also generates the windfall profits and public anxiety that the architects of delay reinvest into manufactured doubt. As I argued in an earlier post, our information systems are structurally vulnerable to disinformation, mostly because of economic incentives. To fix that, we should apply the "polluter pays" principle to the information environment. There is a growing body of evidence showing how legitimate concerns are deliberately amplified and distorted by private and state actors whose revenues depend on prolonging fossil fuel dependence. Last week, a WindEurope report mapped 573 accounts spreading anti-wind power disinformation across Europe: 42,000 posts reaching tens of millions. Wind projects worth billions have been delayed or cancelled, sometimes violently, on the back of false claims. A recent DeSmog / POLITICO Europe investigation uncovered a Paris PR firm running fake Facebook accounts for a gas trade group, discrediting heat pumps with fabricated stories and AI-generated images. Sometimes so clumsily that even group members began questioning whether the accounts were real. Earlier this year, Clean Creatives documented 1,217 active contracts between ad agencies and fossil fuel companies in 2025. EUvsDisinfo and NATO have analysed how Russia, whose revenues remain tied to fossil fuel exports, is a major driver of climate disinformation in Europe. For Europeans, the consensus is there; people are not confused. 88% support more renewables, 81% back climate neutrality by 2050 (EU Commission). But when misleading narratives are produced and distributed on an industrial scale, even informed citizens struggle to know what is true. The energy transition involves real trade-offs that can only be navigated honestly in an information environment that is not deliberately distorted. Just as individual carbon footprint is sometimes used to shift the climate burden onto people rather than systems, we now risk shifting the burden of disinformation onto individual media literacy. The problem starts with an unregulated supply chain of falsehoods. The Declaration on Information Integrity on Climate Change, signed by 27 countries at COP30, provides a framework. Governments and the private sector must now act on it. Funding independent journalism; taxing windfall profits that fund delay; and regulating the intermediaries such as PR firms, platforms, even media outlets when they produce and distribute false narratives, are essential steps to take.

The federal inquiry into climate disinformation has wrapped, and its findings are stark: vested fossil fuel interests have systematically delayed climate action and the rollout of renewable energy in Australia—leaving all of us more exposed to worsening climate impacts. From influencers amplifying false narratives, to astroturfed groups distorting election debates, to generative AI being used to create and spread fake content—the report shows how deeply embedded these tactics have become. The inquiry’s recommendations include making tech companies liable for the disinformation spread on their platforms, better media literacy education in schools, and more funding for research into misinformation. Other recommendations go even further, including greater transparency around grassroots campaigns, and holding social media companies accountable for disinformation. This inquiry has exposed the scale of the rot of climate and energy misinformation in our society, and the heavy price we pay as a consequence. Tackling this scourge swiftly and at scale should be a top priority for the Albanese government, as the impacts of climate change mount, and our window to stay within the planet’s ecological boundaries shrinks. https://lnkd.in/euXm37vC

Navigating the Maze of Truth In a world where alternative facts often muddy the waters of truth, how can individuals and communities stay resilient and well-prepared for the challenges they face? As misinformation spreads and reliable news sources are sometimes overshadowed by sensationalism, maintaining resilience becomes not just a matter of personal vigilance but a collective responsibility. 1. Develop Critical Thinking Skills - In an era where alternative facts can easily infiltrate public discourse, honing critical thinking skills is essential. This means questioning the credibility of sources, cross-referencing information with multiple reputable outlets, and analyzing the motives behind the information being presented. Encourage a mindset that doesn’t just accept information at face value but actively seeks verification. 2. Prioritize Media Literacy - Educate yourself and others about media literacy. Understanding how media works, recognizing bias, and differentiating between fact-based journalism and opinion pieces are crucial skills. Schools, workplaces, and community organizations should incorporate media literacy training to empower individuals to navigate complex information landscapes effectively. 3. Seek Out Reliable Sources - Identify and rely on reputable news sources that adhere to strict journalistic standards. These sources prioritize accuracy, fairness, and transparency. Create a diverse media diet by following established institutions and experts in relevant fields. Avoid echo chambers by engaging with a variety of perspectives while focusing on sources known for their reliability. 4. Verify Information Before Sharing - Before sharing information on social media or within your community, take a moment to verify its authenticity. Use fact-checking websites and tools to confirm details and debunk myths. By being a responsible consumer and sharer of information, you contribute to reducing the spread of misinformation and helping others stay informed. 5. Advocate for Transparency and Accountability - Support and advocate for transparency and accountability in media and information sources. Encourage media outlets and public figures to adhere to high standards of accuracy and honesty. Demand accountability from those who spread misinformation and promote a culture of truthfulness in public discourse. Our collective resilience depends on our ability to discern truth from fiction. Equip yourself with the tools to critically evaluate information and promote media literacy in your community. Stay vigilant, stay informed, and together, let’s build a more resilient and informed society. #StayResilient #CriticalThinking #MediaLiteracy #VerifyBeforeYouShare #TruthMatters

In Lebanon, the war ended — but our silence never did. For too long, women’s experiences during the war have been erased from our collective memory. We were not just victims. We were fighters, organizers, healers, caretakers, negotiators. We suffered, yes — but we also acted. And yet, history books barely mention us. Oral history is a feminist act of resistance. It allows us to tell our stories in our own words, to challenge dominant narratives, and to document what official archives have ignored. If reconciliation is ever to be real in Lebanon, it must be rooted in truth — all of it. We cannot reconcile without acknowledging what we lived, what we lost, and what we contributed. Silence should not be a choice imposed on us. It should not be the cost of peace. It’s time to speak. It’s time to listen. It’s time to rewrite history — with women at the center. Here are some recent studies that document women’s war-time experiences and memories — powerful tools for truth-telling and justice. 🔗 https://lnkd.in/dFcZihHH 🔗https://lnkd.in/deDUia_G 🔗 https://lnkd.in/dkr3dC-R Follow Jumanah Zabaneh who is leading on the Dealing with the Past project, to learn more about UN Women Lebanon’s work on Women, Peace and Security. #WPS #Lebanon #genderequality

How can public health compete with misinformation? That’s the question Professor Matt Motta and I explored through our latest Boston University School of Public Health project: testing an influencer-based strategy to counter weight loss supplement misinformation on social media. Thanks to the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health’s Center for Health Communication and its Health Content Creator Program, we recruited 7 diverse creators with a combined reach of nearly 2 million followers. We provided creators with an evidence-based digital toolkit and gave them full creative freedom to deliver science-informed content in their own voice. The result? More accurate, engaging health messages that reached audiences public health often misses. Key takeaways: - Social media can be a credible public health tool when we work with creators, not against platforms. - Messages shifted: <1% of content mentioned the lack of FDA approval for supplements before our intervention. Afterward? Nearly 90%. - Mentions of serious risks (liver, cardiovascular damage) went from zero to frequent. - The model is scalable and adaptable across health misinformation domains, whether for mental health, climate-related threats, or food production and policy. We break it down in our Boston Globe Media op-ed here: https://lnkd.in/eNA9Tk3F Many thanks to our BUSPH team Willa R. and Selenne Alatorre, MPH; Dean ad interim Michael Stein for supporting the Dean's Innovation Challenge that funded this pilot; our Harvard CHC collaborators Amanda Yarnell, Elissa Scherer, Kate Fisher, and our amazing content creators who brought this work to life. Let’s keep reimagining what public health communication can look like. #PublicHealth #HealthCommunication #Misinformation #ScienceCommunication

Honored to submit this amicus brief, alongside other scholars of the fossil fuel industry and climate deception, to the US Supreme Court, which is considering a groundbreaking climate change lawsuit filed by the city of Boulder, Colorado. We outline the fossil fuel industry's decades-long - and ongoing - campaign of deception, a key cause of climate change and the climate damages facing Boulder and so many other places around the nation and world: https://lnkd.in/eFN-EHBy Robert Brulle Oreskes Naomi Stephan Lewandowsky Timmons Roberts Geoffrey Supran Union of Concerned Scientists University of Oxford School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment - University of Oxford Faculty of Law, University of Oxford Oxford Sustainable Law Programme

I've been covering climate disinformation for a very long time and something that's been stuck in my craw the past couple of years is the fact that people often talk about it as something that happened in the past. But with so many of the climate "solutions" the fossil fuel industry proposes, the exact same issues are continuing to play out: they know these aren't really solutions, they know that they will never scale, and that is why they push them. It's part of the "discourses of delay" that social scientists talk about, or what Alex Steffen calls "predatory delay." The industry spends billions of dollars a year to fund university research, lobbying, advertising, and PR campaigns that create the illusion that its preferred "solutions" will work, even as its own scientists and technologists are telling it they won't. They hire management consultancies to draw up charts and graphs that lend credibility to these "solutions" too, and then those consultancies can throw up their hands and say "we just did the analysis they asked for, we didn't know they were going to use it to obstruct climate action!" Over the course of this summer we'll be running a new investigative series at Drilled Media digging into these efforts. Loads of both web and audio stories coming your way, but first up, a deep dive from me and Andy Rowell on how U.S. LNG producers are trying to position liquefied natural gas—a fossil fuel—as a climate solution, and use that "green" cred to lobby both EU and US politicians on increasing U.S. LNG exports to Europe. https://lnkd.in/gbFWNpcb

Misinformation can be particularly harmful when it comes to health. And as healthcare leaders, we can combat this issue head-on. Here are some strategies we can employ to nip disinformation in the bud: 1. Direct people to credible sources of information Recommend reliable websites and resources where they can get accurate information. Sites like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the World Health Organization (WHO), or reputable medical journals are great places to start. 2. Collaborate across disciplines Engage professionals beyond medicine, including psychologists, educators, and communication experts. Work together to combat misinformation. A multidisciplinary approach strengthens efforts to promote accurate health information. 3. Advocate for patient advocacy organizations and groups: Highlight the importance of community and shared experiences by recommending patient advocacy groups. Plus, disease-specific groups such as the American Diabetes Association or National Cancer Society can offer a wealth of support and tailored advice. 4. Community engagement and education: Actively engage with the community through workshops, town halls, and educational sessions. Provide accurate information about health topics, debunk myths, and address common misconceptions. Also teach them how to assess sources, fact-check claims, and recognize red flags. By fostering open dialogue and sharing evidence-based knowledge, healthcare leaders empower individuals to discern accurate information from falsehoods. Remember, misinformation often fills a void for those feeling uncertain. As healthcare leaders, we've got the power to fill that gap with facts and support.

How do we curb false news on social media without suppressing circulation of true information? In our (with Emeric Henry, Théo Marquis, and Ekaterina Zhuravskaya) paper “Curtailing False News, Amplifying Truth,”  https://lnkd.in/dUwDwC6M just accepted in Econometrica, we study which policies actually work and why.  Using large-scale randomized experiments during the 2022 and 2024 U.S. elections, we compare several widely discussed interventions that can slow down propagation of false news on social media: • fact-checking • confirmation clicks • prompts to assess content’s veracity and partisanship • a reminder about the spread of misinformation on social media The key finding is actually very simple: - A content-neutral reminder (“Please think carefully before you repost. Remember that there are a lot of false news circulating on social media.”) is the most effective intervention. - It reduces sharing of false news while preserving (and sometimes even increasing) sharing of true news. - Fact-checking also reduces reposting false news but at a cost: it discourages sharing of true information as well. Why does this happen? We combine the experiment with a structural model of sharing behavior. Our theory includes three motives for sharing:  (i) reputation for credibility (I want to convince my audience I can distinguish false from true) (ii) political persuasion (I want my audience to move in the direction of my political views) (iii) political signalling (I want to communicate to the audience what my political views are) Ours model helps identifying and quantifying three mechanisms: - Updating beliefs (on veracity and partisanship of the content) - Salience of reputation (will I look credible?) - Costs of engagement (frictions, mental effort of reading/thinking/reposting) The evidence points clearly to one dominant channel: the most effective policies are those that make reputation concerns more salient, rather than those that try to “correct” beliefs. Our analysis produces non-trivial policy implications: • Light-touch interventions can outperform heavy-handed ones • Expensive fact-checking may be less effective than simple nudges and prompts We also show that digital literacy and behavioral nudges are complements—not substitutes. At a time when misinformation is a central policy concern, the message is encouraging: we don’t necessarily need to restrict content; we can shift behavior with a reasonably simple intervention, somewhat similar to health warnings on cigarette packs or alcoholic beverage bottles.