It’s not that “the misinfo problem” is made up. It is just harder – and messier – than we thought. Rather than throw up our hands, we MUST adapt our paradigms to meet the moment.

Read more -> www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

2 – Study behavior - not just belief
Many ppl see falsehoods, but who acts and when? Esp harmful acts like dangerous alt medicine or mob vandalism

3 – Test interventions in fuzzy settings, not just black/white true/false content

This means 3 shifts for misinfo researchers:

1–Discover misleading content from the bottom up. e.g. sample climate messages test which increase disbelief in climate change

It’s time to reframe “the misinfo problem”: Instead of “Why do people believe fake news?” we need to study
- What leads to misperceptions
- How do they impact real-world behavior
- What interventions actually help reduce misperceptions

There IS a problem: Misperceptions–eg election denialism, vax and climate skepticism–are common & impactful. But problem is less “Pope Endorses Trump” style fake news, more stories like these 👇

Not false, but misleading – and massively popular (see
www.science.org/doi/10.1126/...)

People are worried re fake news, BUT studies show that outright false news is rare w limited impact. Critics say this means misinfo is a not a problem and we should stop studying it.

We disagree!

This is my real account! I guess I have a BlueSky impersonator 😮