Summary
To address objections that modern worries about misinformation are a moral panic, researchers have broadened their focus to include true but misleading content. However, there can’t be a science of misleading content. It is too amorphous, too widespread, and judgements of misleadingness are too subjective.
The emergence of misinformation studies
According to a popular narrative, democratic societies are plagued by misinformation, which is driving the public to accept falsehoods about election fraud, conspiracies, climate change, vaccines, and more. Given the dangers associated with such falsehoods, misinformation threatens democracy, social harmony, the environment, and public health. As Joe Biden declared recently, it is literally “killing people.”
This narrative first gained popularity in 2016 after Brexit and the election of Donald Trump, and it gave birth to the field of modern misinformation studies, which researches the nature and causes of misinformation and designs interventions to limit its harms.
The field has been extremely influential, both scientifically and politically. It attracts big grants. It has fuelled a steady stream of publications in elite scientific journals. And its researchers are consulted by governments, international organisations, and corporations (Google, Meta, etc.) in their efforts to combat misinformation.