We’re proud to partner with Timothy Caulfield and the University of Alberta’s Health and Law Institute to provide these additional resources.
Fighting misinformation: Why pausing before you share really works!
Dealing with the misinformation surrounding COVID-19 will require us to come at it from every possible angle. We need trusted voices to provide strong, clear and sharable counter-messaging on social media. And we need regulators to go after those who are deliberately spreading misinformation for personal gain. But perhaps the most important strategy will be to empower people with the tools necessary to be more critical consumers of information. This should include teaching both critical thinking skills and media literacy, such as inoculating (or “pre-bunking”) people against misinformation.
A simple and effective “pre-bunk” approach is to remind social media users to pause and think about accuracy before sharing. Research has found that people want to be accurate and want to share only factual material. Most users do not fall for or share misinformation due to a personal agenda or, even, a partisan bias. As such, if we can nudge people to think about accuracy prior to sharing social media content (which is the goal of the MediaSmarts’ #CheckThenShare campaign!) we could have a significant impact on the spread of misinformation. A 2020 study found that simply asking people to consider why a headline might be true or false – which forced research participants to pause and think about accuracy – “can reduce shares of false information.” And another recent study that specifically looked at misinformation in the context of the coronavirus found this same effect.
Pausing and thinking about accuracy works!
Science evolves! And so does (and should) health policy and the scientific consensus
Studies have shown that communicating the scientific consensus on a topic can be a helpful strategy in the fight against misinformation. For example, a 2015 study found that “emphasizing the medical consensus about (childhood) vaccine safety is likely to be an effective pro-vaccine message..” And the strategy has been found to work, at least to some degree, for other controversial issues, such as the science of climate change. This approach is especially effective if it is utilized by trusted voices, such as healthcare professionals, scientific experts and public health authorities.
But what happens when both the science is in constant flux and trust in relevant institutions is eroding? What happens when the scientific consensus seems to be quickly evolving and some of the relevant science is less-than robust, as it is with the current pandemic?
In such times it is important to be explicit about the ambiguities of the evidence. Indeed, there is some evidence that being transparent about uncertainties can actually heighten credibility, trust and public understanding. Perhaps more importantly, we should view these situations of uncertainty as an opportunity to reflect on the nature of the scientific process. We need to remind others (and ourselves!) that “science” is not an immutable list of facts. It isn’t an institution or, even, a particular authoritative expert. It is a process. It is uncertain. And as such, the conclusions and recommendations that are informed by science will (and should!) change and evolve.
When science-informed decision makers change their mind due to new evidence, they aren’t flip-flopping, they’re doing their job!
Researchers, academics and journalists across the globe are working hard to unpack the complicated issue of misinformation, especially as it relates to COVID-19. We’ve compiled the latest articles for further reading on the subject, from the reasons why misinformation about the virus is spreading, to how best to respond to false information about COVID-19.
Verifying health information
- “Why the Coronavirus is so Confusing.” Ed Yong. The Atlantic, April 29 2020.
“‘Our understanding oscillates at first, but converges on an answer,’ says Natalie Dean, a statistician at the University of Florida. ‘That’s the normal scientific process, but it looks jarring to people who aren’t used to it.’”
- “Why Coronavirus Conspiracy Theories Flourish And Why It Matters.” Max Fisher, The New York Times, April 28 2020.
“‘We’ve faced pandemics before,” said Graham Brookie, who directs the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab. “We haven’t faced a pandemic at a time when humans are as connected and have as much access to information as they do now.’”
- “COVID 19 has intensified concerns about misinformation. Here’s what our past research says about these issues.” J. Scott Brennen and Rasmus Kleis Neilsen, Reuters News Institute, March 16 2020.
“This post provides a short overview of this research with seven highlights that can help us understand how people navigate information (and misinformation) and what role journalism and news can play in a crisis like the current pandemic.”
- “Who Benefits from Health Misinformation?” Erin McAweeny, Data & Society, March 30 2020
“Different groups with different motives are exploiting the COVID-19 pandemic in different ways.”
Communicating good information
- “You Can Help Slow the Virus if You Talk About it Accurately Online.” Emily Falk and Molly Crockett, Washington Post, April 28 2020.
“Social norms are powerful, and ideas are contagious — meaning we each can play a role in spreading the word.“
- “Vaccines Are Critical. Here’s How You Can Help Spread the Word.” American Society for Microbiology, April 27 2020.
“If you’re thinking about discussing vaccines with friends and family, or on social media, it helps to have an understanding of some of the varied reasons people may be hesitant about vaccines.”
- “Covering the Coronavirus Epidemic Effectively Without Spreading Misinformation.” Laura Helmuth, The Open Notebook, March 2 2020.
“Reporters who cover this beat learn to evaluate evidence, decipher jargon and statistics, find reliable experts, and humanize intimidating stories. Here are some tips to keep in mind.”
- “How Not to Lose the COVID-19 Communication War.” Dietram A. Scheufele, Nicole M. Krause, Isabelle Freiling, and Dominique Brossard. Slate, April 17 2020.
“The seductively simple directive to be “accurate,” which lies at the heart of science communication, obscures the reality that accuracy is a tenuous notion during a crisis such as this, in which uncertainty reigns.”
- “Want To Avoid Spreading Coronavirus Misinformation? Think Like A Science Journalist.” Rebecca Leber, Mother Jones, March 18 2020.
“No one wants to spread bad information—but for non-scientists, it can be hard to distinguish facts from rumors.”
- “Going viral: How to boost the spread of coronavirus science on social media.” Samantha Yammine, Nature, May 5 2020.
“Simply spewing scientific facts from a soapbox isn’t enough: research shows that it’s more important to start a dialogue.”
- “30 Tips to Message COVID-19.” Pathos Labs.
“To help influencers channel this power to fight COVID-19, we researched and tested the best messaging tactics for encouraging compliance with public health guidelines.”
Responding to bad information
- “How to Talk About the Coronavirus to Friends and Family.” Liz Neeley, The Atlantic, May 31 2020.
“You are already an influential source of information for the people closest to you. Even if they vehemently disagree with you, your family and friends likely pay more attention to you, and think more highly of you, than do people whom you’ve never met.”
- “How to Talk About Coronavirus Misinformation with the Older People in Your Life.” Rachel Kraus, Mashable, March 31 2020.
“Older people are ‘particularly targeted for misinformation’ because they tend to have more money, more civic engagement, more free time, and less experience with technology.”
- “Americans are Fighting Coronavirus Misinformation on Social Media.” Leticia Bode and Emily Vraga, Washington Post, May 7 2020.
“A majority of Americans agree that correction is important: 68 percent agree people should respond when they see someone sharing misinformation, and 67 percent agree that addressing misinformation on social media is everyone’s responsibility.”
- “What Role Should Newsrooms Play in Debunking COVID-19 Misinformation?” Claire Wardle, NiemanReports, April 8 2020.
“If you debunk a rumor too early, you can give it oxygen. If you leave the debunk too late, the falsehood and conspiracy takes hold, and it’s almost impossible to slow down its spread or to convince people it’s wrong.”
- “Does Debunking Work? Correcting COVID-19 Misinformation on Social” Timothy Caulfield, OSF Preprints, May 25, 2020.”
“While the data remains complex and, at times, contradictory, there is little doubt that efforts to correct misinformation are worthwhile. In fact, fighting the spread of misinformation should be viewed as vitally important health and science policy priority.”
- Authenticating Information
The internet is a never-ending source of information. But how do you know if that information is true, unbiased and relevant?
- Verifying Online News
Most of us turn to online sources for news, but news stories are one of the hardest things to verify. It’s important to pause for a moment when you’re about to pass a news story or some other urgent information on to your friends, and to make sure that it’s accurate and up-to-date.
- Finding and Evaluating Science and Health Information
Two of the most important kinds of information we look for online are about health and science. This section looks at how we get news and information about health and science topics, types of misinformation that are particularly common in those subjects, and steps we can take to determine how reliable a source or claim is.
- Ethics of Sharing Information Online
Thanks to the internet, today we’re not just consumers of news but broadcasters as well – and our friends and families are counting on us to only share accurate, reliable information.
Break the Fake: Fun fact-checking videos, tips and quizzes for all ages (featuring the house hippo!)
Reality Check: Info and activities for teens and adults to learn more about verifying info online