The recently released Royal Commission of Inquiry report about New Zealand’s COVID response highlights the harmful impact of misinformation and disinformation on public health.
While the report offers no solutions, it notes that disinformation campaigns fuelled division and loss of trust in government. It’s an age-old problem that has proved extremely difficult to counter.
Indeed, the practice of disinformation and propaganda has ancient roots, with some of the earliest recorded use of these techniques dating back to antiquity. The Greeks were among the first to study and formalise the art of rhetoric, a cornerstone of effective propaganda.
In 2010, colleagues and I published research that analysed vaccine narratives for the use of logical fallacies defined by Aristotle. We highlighted many common techniques of manipulation. It was a fun exercise in a more innocent time.
Understanding and analysing these manipulative tactics has evolved alongside their use in both political and military strategies. So have the tactics of mitigating the impact of such strategies.
Early approaches to counteract these effects typically involved promoting transparency, education and critical thinking. This still stands today, but the time for merely talking about the problem has passed.
What’s required now is decisive action and robust policy to address misinformation and disinformation as we navigate the ongoing impacts of the COVID pandemic.
How to recognise misinformation and disinformation
Misinformation refers to inaccurate information spread without harmful intent, often due to a misunderstanding or mistake. Disinformation, on the other hand, is deliberately deceptive and crafted to manipulate public sentiment or promote discord.
Research has meticulously mapped the contours of misinformation and disinformation surrounding vaccines. Experts highlighted that the conditions for the spread of misinformation were ripe before the pandemic.
Identifying misinformation and disinformation involves a critical evaluation of content and its source. A first question is the source credibility. Is the information from a recognised authority or reputable news source?
The next bit, logical consistency, is harder to detect. Does the information contain contradictions or logically impossible claims? Many false narratives are internally inconsistent or implausible.
Often there will also be at least some level of emotional manipulation. Disinformation frequently exploits emotions such as fear or anger to enhance engagement and sharing.
The subtle art of rhetoric
Logical fallacies are errors in reasoning that undermine the logic of an argument. For example, the ad hominem fallacy attacks the person making an argument rather than the argument itself. This is a common tactic to undermine credible sources.
Cherry picking is the practice of selecting data that support a particular argument while ignoring data that contradict it. This is harder to spot if you are unfamiliar with the topic.
Conspiracy theories are another major tool in the propaganda kit. During the pandemic, numerous conspiracy theories have misrepresented scientific evidence and the intentions of health authorities and experts. The claim of cover-ups is often the final go-to when there is no other convincing argument.
Studies have repeatedly shown how false claims spread across social media platforms and how this influences public perceptions and behaviours detrimental to health. From myths about vaccine ingredients causing harm to conspiracy theories about global surveillance, these untruths have a real impact.
Surveys have repeatedly highlighted a worrying trend: a segment of the public, including some health professionals, harbours scepticism about vaccines, fuelled by unmitigated misinformation.
How to counter disinformation
The consequences of disinformation campaigns are not abstract or random. It is crucial to recognise that such campaigns are meticulously designed and executed with specific goals in mind. One of the most insidious is the erosion of social cohesion.
This is achieved by injecting divisive and false narratives into public discourse. They exploit socio-political fissures, amplifying scepticism and opposition to public health measures such as vaccination.
These campaigns leverage sophisticated strategies and technologies to manipulate public perception. They exploit societal divisions and foster distrust in authoritative sources, particularly in science and medicine. Once consensus on basic facts is eroded, effective action becomes difficult.
Significant research efforts have aimed to understand how best to counter misinformation and sophisticated disinformation campaigns. These studies emphasise the importance of clear, consistent and credible communication from trusted sources.
Public health campaigns that engage directly with community leaders and employ tailored messaging have shown promise in increasing trust and positive health behaviours. “Pre-bunking”, which involves educating people on how to spot misinformation before they encounter it, is gaining traction.
Authorities and public health leaders must prioritise transparency to rebuild and maintain public trust. Being open about the uncertainties and evolving nature of science can help mitigate the impact of disinformation that exploits gaps in public knowledge.
Increasing media literacy is also important. By understanding the common tactics used in disinformation campaigns, people can become less susceptible to their influences.
Collaboration between governments, international organisations and tech companies is essential. These stakeholders must work together to detect and limit the spread of harmful content and promote accurate information appropriate to the audience (right message, right messenger, right platform).
Time to act
Despite these insights, a coordinated, large-scale and multi-pronged strategy to combat misinformation remains elusive. Governments and health organisations often react to misinformation rather than being proactive, or worse, leave a vacuum.
The challenge of misinformation is not insurmountable, but it requires more than ad-hoc responses. We need a strategic, well-resourced commitment from the highest levels of government and health leadership.
It takes courage and the ability to walk a tightrope between freedom of speech and protecting public health. Both are human rights.
As we continue to navigate the repercussions of the COVID pandemic, let us prioritise the integrity of our public health communications and bring all the facets we need to do this together. This includes media, tech companies, academics and community leaders.
Only through a united front can we hope to restore and maintain the public trust essential for overcoming this crisis and future public health challenges.
Helen Petousis-Harris has received research funding for vaccine effectiveness and safety studies from Health NZ and the US CDC. She has served on expert advisory boards for industry and provided expert testimony on legal cases involving misinformation and disinformation. She has been on COVID advisory groups and currently serves on the National Immunisation Technical Advisory Group.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
