Module Overview:
This module provides a critical and interdisciplinary examination of the pervasive issues of misinformation and disinformation within digital ecosystems. It distinguishes between these two phenomena—misinformation as unintentionally inaccurate information and disinformation as deliberately deceptive content—and explores their overlap and societal impacts. A key focus is the role of social media algorithms and echo chambers in amplifying false information, creating polarized environments, and shaping public perceptions.
.jpg)
Learning Outcomes
By the end of the module, students will:
- Accurately define and differentiate between misinformation and disinformation within digital contexts.
- Critically evaluate the impact of algorithms, social media platforms, and echo chambers on the dissemination of false narratives.
- Apply fact-checking methodologies to real-world examples of misinformation, demonstrating an ability to discern credible sources and validate information.
- Develop community-specific strategies to mitigate the spread of disinformation, fostering a more informed and media-literate public.
Core Readings
- Shin, D. (2024). Introduction: The Epistemology of Misinformation—How Do We Know What We Know. In Artificial Misinformation. This reading explores the philosophical underpinnings of misinformation and how it intersects with knowledge production in digital spaces.
- Rubin, V.L. (2022). The Problem of Misinformation and Disinformation Online. A comprehensive overview of the challenges posed by false information in online environments, grounded in contemporary case studies and research.
- Statistics Canada (2023). Retail Trade, November 2023. This statistical report is a real-world example used to illustrate how data can be misrepresented or misinterpreted in digital discourse.
- Lim, X. J., et al. (2024). Fact or Fake: Information, Misinformation, and Disinformation via Social Media. This article examines the strategic dissemination of information and disinformation in the context of marketing and consumer behaviour.
Mini-Assignment: Fact-Checking with a Partner
Students will collaborate to analyze a recent viral instance of misinformation, applying fact-checking techniques to debunk or confirm the claim. The assignment emphasizes critical thinking, evidence-based reasoning, and effective communication of corrected information.
This hands-on activity is designed to deepen students’ understanding of misinformation’s lifecycle, from creation to correction, while fostering skills in digital literacy and ethical responsibility.
One of the things that alarms me the most about fake news, misinformation, and disinformation is how badly it erodes objective truth. The Lim et al. (2024) reading notes that ‘fake news’ is a term touted by anybody who wants to discredit any fact or piece of journalism they disagree with. It gives free license for people to create their own reality, which I believe has very real and dangerous consequences. There is a certain orange-tinged billionaire whose win-at-all-costs attitude, and blatant use of misinformation and disinformation has twice put him in one of the most powerful positions in the world thanks to his ability to manipulate a population susceptible to false information. But just so I don’t leave this on a dour note- I think the Lim article does a great job of making the infodemic tangible through its ‘Framework for Causes and Interventions’. I hear about how bad it is, but I rarely see solutions. I understand that it’s easier said than done when it comes to education, regulation, and autodetection. Still, they do sound like realistic solutions to a problem that is wildly out of hand. I will echo the end of the chapter in saying that I think the real burden is on educating ourselves and others to become our own fact-checkers. Having algorithms work for us rather than against us would be great, and I don’t hold much hope for regulation. Still, education should always provide a strong defense against the information of the mis and dis variety.
ReplyDeleteLim, X. J., Quach, S., Thaichon, P., Cheah, J. H., & Ting, H. (2024). Fact or fake: information, misinformation and disinformation via social media. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 32(5), 659–664. https://doi-org.login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/10.1080/0965254X.2024.2306558
The prevalence of misinformation is a significant issue today, as highlighted by Statistics Canada (2023), Ruben (2022), and Lim et al. (2024). To effectively combat this problem, we need comprehensive strategies to reduce and prevent the spread of misinformation. Ruben (2022) proposes several potential solutions, but I believe that these slightly oversimplify the issue. As addressing misinformation can be more complex in practice.
ReplyDeleteOne of the solutions Ruben suggests is the "stop-and-think" or "think-before-you-click" approach, which aims to slow the spread of misinformation by encouraging individuals to reflect before sharing content online. While I agree that digital media literacy programs are essential, this approach overlooks important aspects of human cognition. It assumes that people will actively reflect on and critically assess the information they encounter and share. However, this assumption may be unrealistic. Social media is often used for relaxation and entertainment (Lauri et al., 2022), meaning people are frequently driven by emotional responses rather than deliberate reasoning (Tang et al., 2023). This emotional engagement can lead to more impulsive sharing of information (Tang et al., 2023). Misinformation is specifically designed to exploit these cognitive tendencies, playing into emotional states and making it harder for individuals to recognize misleading content (Tang et al., 2023). Statistics Canada (2023) also notes that 43% of people struggle to identify misinformation, further highlighting the complexity of this issue.
Therefore, a promising strategy to address misinformation is inoculation, which Ruben (2022) briefly mentions. Inoculation involves exposing individuals to weakened doses of misinformation along with preemptive refutations to help them recognize and resist future misleading information (Van der Linden & Roozenbeek, 2024). Research has shown that inoculation can have lasting effects, with benefits lasting at least three months (Maertens et al., 2021). This approach differs from the "think-before-you-click" strategy in that it actively trains individuals to recognize misinformation and resist it, rather than relying solely on reflective thinking. Developing media literacy programs grounded in inoculation theory could be an effective way to combat misinformation.
The second solution Ruben (2022) highlights is the need of algorithms for detecting misinformation. However, current algorithms face significant challenges that limit their effectiveness. A recent study shows that algorithms achieve 94% accuracy in controlled environments, but they struggle when applied in real-world settings where the conditions are less predictable (Jbara et al., 2024). As a result, these algorithms often fail to detect fake news and have trouble generalizing content (Jbara et al., 2024). The rapid development of techniques for generating fake content further complicates the detection process, as algorithms can't keep up with emerging methods (Jbara et al., 2024). Additionally, detection algorithms are often hindered by high false positive rates, scalability issues, and difficulties in distinguishing between nuanced language patterns such as satire, misinformation, and legitimate news (Divya et al., 2024; Ruben, 2022).
While I believe these algorithms are a promising step in reducing the spread of misinformation, they need further research and improvement. It’s concerning that AI has advanced so quickly to the point of effectively creating and spreading misinformation, yet detection algorithms are still not advanced enough to identify it. For now, I believe the focus should be on two key steps to reduce the spread of misinformation: integrating inoculation strategies into media literacy programs and improving misinformation detection algorithms.
The references I used are:
Delete• Divya, J., Ragul, M., & Srinivas, S. R. (2024). Enhanced detection of misinformation text-based fake news analysis. In Proceedings of the 2024 2nd International Conference on Sustainable Computing and Smart Systems (ICSCSS) (pp. 691-696). https://doi.org/10.1109/icscss60660.2024.10625391
• Jbara, W. A., Hussein, N. A.-H. K., & Soud, J. H. (2024). Deepfake detection in video and audio clips: A comprehensive survey and analysis (N. A.-H. K. Hussein & J. H. Soud, Trans.). Mesopotamian Journal of CyberSecurity, 4(3), 233-250. https://doi.org/10.58496/MJCS/2024/025
• Lauri, C., Farrugia, L., & Lauri, M. A. (2022). Online-Offline: An Exploratory Study on the Relationship between Social Media Use and Positive Mental Health during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 10(02), 155-170. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2022.102010
• Lim, X.-J., Quach, S., Thaichon, P., Cheah, J.-H., & Ting, H. (2024). Fact or fake: Information, misinformation, and disinformation via social media. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 32(5), 659-664. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2024.2306558
• Maertens, R., Roozenbeek, J., Basol, M., & van der Linden, S. (2021). Long-term effectiveness of inoculation against misinformation: Three longitudinal experiments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 27(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000315
• Rubin, V.L. (2022). The Problem of Misinformation and Disinformation Online. In: Misinformation and Disinformation. Springer, Cham. https://doi-org.tilburguniversity.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95656-1_1
• Statistics Canada. (2023, December 20). Concerns with misinformation online, 2023. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/231220/dq231220b-eng.htm
• Tang, Y., Luo, C., & Su, Y. (2023). Understanding health misinformation sharing among the middle-aged or above in China: roles of social media health information seeking, misperceptions and information processing predispositions. Online Information Review, 48(2), 314-333. https://doi.org/10.1108/oir-04-2023-0157
• Van der Linden, S., & Roozenbeek, J. (2024). "Inoculation" to resist misinformation. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 331(22), 1961. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.5026
Why Misinformation Spreads and How I Fight It Personally
ReplyDeleteIn today’s digital age, misinformation is everywhere. It's shaping opinions, politics, and even public health policy ("cough" COVID). As someone who works in marketing, I've seen firsthand how false information and "trial by social media" can spread with serious consequences. But why do we fall for it? In this post, I’ll dive into the psychological triggers behind misinformation, share strategies I’ve learned to fight it, and discuss how I navigate the digital landscape of social media, especially in my work.
One of the most significant factors that make us vulnerable to misinformation is confirmation bias. This is the tendency to seek out or favour information that confirms what we already think or believe. It’s something I’ve noticed not only in myself but also in the clients and audiences I work with. Additionally, emotional triggers, such as fear and confusion, make false information even more compelling. Social media platforms, with their algorithms designed to keep us engaged, create echo chambers where misleading narratives can grow if left unchecked.
As Shin (2024) discusses in Artificial Misinformation, the digital age has blurred the lines between fact and fiction, making it harder to discern truth. Platforms are designed to promote content that generates engagement, regardless of its factual accuracy, amplifying the spread of misinformation.
Working in marketing, I’ve had to deal with the frustrating reality of “trial by social media.” A simple misstep, misunderstanding, or misrepresentation can spiral into a full-blown crisis for clients, often fuelled by misinformation. However, I’ve learned a few key strategies that help in combating misinformation:
Distinguishing Between Misinformation and Disinformation
It’s essential to differentiate between misinformation (false information shared without intent to deceive) and disinformation (deliberately deceptive content). Understanding this distinction helps me assess how to respond. Not every piece of incorrect information requires the same level of intervention, if any in some cases.
Evaluating Sources
Credibility is key. Through the years I’ve become more adept at evaluating sources to determine their reliability and potential biases.
Using Lateral Reading
One of the most effective tools in my arsenal is lateral reading—cross-checking claims across multiple trusted sources to verify their accuracy. Instead of simply relying on one source, this method allows me to gather a broader, more accurate picture.
Ethical Responsibility
As Rubin (2022) highlights in The Problem of Misinformation and Disinformation Online, we all have an ethical responsibility in the digital age to promote truth. I believe this is especially true in marketing, where misinformation can quickly escalate into a public relations crisis and cause real problems for a small business.
My Ethical Responsibility in the Digital Age
The responsibility falls on all of us to question what we see online, to verify information, and to challenge misleading narratives when we encounter them.
References
Rubin, V. L. "The Problem of Misinformation and Disinformation Online." Communication Research Reports, 2022.
Shin, D. "Introduction: The Epistemology of Misinformation—How Do We Know What We Know." In Artificial Misinformation, 2024.
Misinformation and disinformation have become everyday problems in our digital world, and navigating this landscape requires more than just common sense — it demands critical thinking and digital literacy. One of the things I really appreciate about this module is how it doesn’t just define misinformation and disinformation but also explores why we fall for them and how we can push back. False information today spreads so easily because social media platforms amplify content without verifying it first. Add in confirmation bias — our tendency to believe things that align with what we already think — and misinformation finds the perfect breeding ground (Shin, 2024).
ReplyDeleteThis metaphor of co-conspiracy between digital market and individual psychology behind misinformation fascinates me. Lim et al. (2024) show how this happens in marketing too, where brands use these same psychological tricks to influence consumer behavior. It’s scary to realize how easily misinformation can shape not just public opinion, but personal decisions as well.
The fact-checking aspect of this module is what I find most useful, which helps bridge that gap by teaching practical techniques to analyze, verify, and debunk false claims. I’ve definitely caught myself sometimes intend to trust information that “feels right” before stopping to question its accuracy. That’s why learning about social validation — the idea that we trust things more just because others do — felt like a wake-up call. We always hear that we should “check our sources,” but how do we actually do that in a world flooded with misleading headlines and out-of-context statistics? Take the investigation of Statistics Canada (2023), for example — real data can still be manipulated to serve a particular agenda, making fact-checking even more crucial.
That being said, individual fact-checking can only do so much. Social media platforms need to take more responsibility for their role in spreading misinformation. While it’s empowering to think we can combat misinformation one fact-check at a time, Shin (2024) reminds us that the issue is also structural. Algorithms designed to maximize engagement often prioritize viral (not necessarily truthful) content. Until platforms become more transparent and accountable, we’re all stuck in a system that makes misinformation hard to avoid.
Reading above materials makes me aware of my role as both a consumer and a potential spreader of all kinds of information (that are relate to financial and ideological purposes). We all have a responsibility to think critically before sharing, but we also need broader, community-based solutions. Digital literacy isn’t just a skill — it’s a form of self-defense in today’s information war. As misinformation continues to evolve, staying informed and challenging our own biases will be more important than ever.
Lim, X.-J., Quach, S., Thaichon, P., Cheah, J.-H., & Ting, H. (2024). Fact or fake: Information, misinformation, and disinformation via social media. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 32(5), 659-664. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2024.2306558
DeleteRubin, V. L. (2022). Misinformation and Disinformation Detecting Fakes with the Eye and AI. Springer.
Shin, D. (2024). Introduction: The Epistemology of Misinformation—How Do We Know What We Know. In Artificial Misinformation.
Statistics Canada. (2023). Concerns with Misinformation Online. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/231220/dq231220b-eng.htm
The Impact of Misinformation and Disinformation
ReplyDeleteIn this module, I learned so much about information and how the wrong ones are conveyed. They are either misinformation or disinformation, both of which are set up to mislead the public. Misinformation and disinformation have become critical issues in the digital age, particularly with the widespread use of social media and online platforms. While misinformation refers to false or misleading information shared without harmful intent, disinformation is deliberately deceptive content designed to manipulate public perception. The impact of both phenomena extends across multiple domains, including politics, public health, and social trust. In this post, I will explore the consequences of misinformation and disinformation, drawing on statistical data and scholarly research.
According to Statistics Canada (2023), approximately 39% of Canadians aged 18 and older encountered misinformation online in the past year, and 15% admitted to sharing potentially misleading information unknowingly. These statistics indicate the pervasiveness of misleading content and the challenge of discerning credible sources in an information-saturated environment.
Lim et al. (2024) emphasize that social media has amplified the reach of misinformation and disinformation, with users often engaging with and spreading false information without verifying its accuracy. The interactive nature of social platforms, driven by algorithms that prioritize engagement, contributes to the viral spread of misleading narratives. This phenomenon is particularly concerning in areas such as politics and health, where misinformation can influence decision-making processes.
One of the most significant consequences of misinformation and disinformation is their impact on public perception. Rubin (2022) argues that the rapid dissemination of false information erodes trust in institutions, including governments, media organizations, and scientific bodies. When individuals are exposed to conflicting or deceptive narratives, they may develop skepticism toward legitimate sources of information, leading to reduced compliance with public health guidelines or civic engagement.
In the realm of public health, misinformation has been particularly damaging. During the COVID-19 pandemic, misleading claims about vaccine safety and effectiveness led to vaccine hesitancy, undermining public health efforts (Rubin, 2022). Similarly, misinformation regarding climate change has influenced public attitudes, delaying necessary policy actions.
DeleteEfforts to mitigate the effects of misinformation and disinformation require a multifaceted approach. Fact-checking initiatives, digital literacy programs, and platform accountability are essential measures. Lim et al. (2024) highlight the importance of educating social media users on how to critically evaluate online content and identify credible sources. Additionally, regulatory policies that hold platforms accountable for hosting and disseminating false information can help curb the spread of disinformation.
Government and non-governmental organizations have also played a role in combating misinformation. For instance, Statistics Canada (2023) notes that initiatives to promote media literacy and public awareness campaigns have been implemented to encourage critical engagement with digital content. However, the effectiveness of these measures depends on sustained efforts and collaboration among policymakers, educators, and technology companies.
Misinformation and disinformation pose significant challenges in the digital age, affecting public trust, decision-making, and societal stability. The prevalence of false information, as documented by Statistics Canada (2023), and its amplification through social media, as discussed by Lim et al. (2024) and Rubin (2022), underscore the urgency of addressing this issue. A combination of digital literacy education, policy interventions, and platform responsibility is necessary to mitigate the harmful effects of misinformation and disinformation. As technology continues to evolve, ongoing research and adaptive strategies will be essential in safeguarding the integrity of information ecosystems.
References
DeleteLim, X. J., Quach, S., Thaichon, P., Cheah, J. H., & Ting, H. (2024). Fact or fake: information, misinformation and disinformation via social media. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 32(5), 659–664.
Rubin, V.L. (2022). The Problem of Misinformation and Disinformation Online. In: Misinformation and Disinformation. Springer, Cham.
Statistics Canada. (2023, December 20). Perceptions of and responses to misinformation in Canada. Retrieved from http://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/231220/dq231220b-eng.htm.