TY - JOUR
T1 - Liars know they are lying
T2 - differentiating disinformation from disagreement
AU - Lewandowsky, Stephan
AU - Ecker, Ullrich K. H.
AU - Cook, John
AU - van der Linden, Sander
AU - Roozenbeek, Jon
AU - Oreskes, Naomi
AU - McIntyre, Lee C.
PY - 2024/12/1
Y1 - 2024/12/1
N2 - Mis- and disinformation pose substantial societal challenges, and have thus become the focus of a substantive field of research. However, the field of misinformation research has recently come under scrutiny on two fronts. First, a political response has emerged, claiming that misinformation research aims to censor conservative voices. Second, some scholars have questioned the utility of misinformation research altogether, arguing that misinformation is not sufficiently identifiable or widespread to warrant much concern or action. Here, we rebut these claims. We contend that the spread of misinformation—and in particular willful disinformation—is demonstrably harmful to public health, evidence-informed policymaking, and democratic processes. We also show that disinformation and outright lies can often be identified and differ from good-faith political contestation. We conclude by showing how misinformation and disinformation can be at least partially mitigated using a variety of empirically validated, rights-preserving methods that do not involve censorship.
AB - Mis- and disinformation pose substantial societal challenges, and have thus become the focus of a substantive field of research. However, the field of misinformation research has recently come under scrutiny on two fronts. First, a political response has emerged, claiming that misinformation research aims to censor conservative voices. Second, some scholars have questioned the utility of misinformation research altogether, arguing that misinformation is not sufficiently identifiable or widespread to warrant much concern or action. Here, we rebut these claims. We contend that the spread of misinformation—and in particular willful disinformation—is demonstrably harmful to public health, evidence-informed policymaking, and democratic processes. We also show that disinformation and outright lies can often be identified and differ from good-faith political contestation. We conclude by showing how misinformation and disinformation can be at least partially mitigated using a variety of empirically validated, rights-preserving methods that do not involve censorship.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85201219576&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1057/s41599-024-03503-6
DO - 10.1057/s41599-024-03503-6
M3 - Article
SN - 2662-9992
VL - 11
JO - Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
JF - Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
IS - 1
M1 - 986
ER -