Misinformation and disinformation in the time of a global pandemic

Introduction

At the time of writing, the world is gripped in the throes of a global pandemic due to the ongoing spread of the coranavirus known as COVID-19 with the number of known infected cases eclipsing more than 1.5 million, the number of deaths at close to 90,000, and those numbers continue to accelerate daily (Worldometer, 2020). Just as concerning as the rampant spread of the disease is the viral propagation and infection of misinformation and disinformation, which the World Health Organisation (WHO) has labelled an "infodemic"; that is, ‘an over-abundance of information – some accurate and some not – that makes it hard for people to find trustworthy sources and reliable information when they need it’ (WHO, 2020a).

This essay will respond to the question: “how can information professionals help society identify and avoid various kinds of disinformation and misinformation”. Firstly, this will be achieved by untangling the definition problem and interrogating the relationship between the various concepts including information, misinformation and disinformation. Next through the lens of the ‘fake news’ problem, a discussion will be provided that highlights how misinformation and disinformation is a serious concern for society, and how technology companies pose a socio-technical problem and are challenged in stemming the tide of harmful and misleading information. In an effort to overcome the technical limitations of technology platforms, this paper will ultimately argue that through adopting a critical information literacy stance, information professionals have an important role in helping society identify and avoid disinformation and misinformation.

The definition problem

Attempts to define information, disinformation and misinformation have been problematic. Brock and Dhillon (2001, p. 46), provide an exhaustive review of the literature on the definition problem of information and conclude that it means ‘almost everything and anything’ and compare it to the “ether” of the middle ages. Efforts to define and understand misinformation and disinformation are understudied and have also suffered from a definition problem due to the interdisciplinary nature of LIS research, which uses terms that are also used in other disciplines; for example, psychology, philosophy and computer science (Karlova and Lee, 2011, para. 6). So, while information may surround us and be part of our daily lives, there has been a struggle to define what information means, and disinformation and misinformation have been understudied by information scientists in attempts to understand the nature of information (Karlova and Fisher, 2013, Extending information section, para. 1).

Fox’s (1983) work on information and misinformation examines the relationship between these two terms and suggests that misinformation is information that is false, such that misinformation is a species of information. Examples of misinformation include honest mistakes, negligence, unconscious bias, or intentional deception, and it is this latter, that is also called disinformation (Fallis, 2014, p. 621). According to Fallis (2016, p. 333), disinformation is a ‘species of misinformation that is intended to mislead people.' This relationship can be seen further in Floridi’s (2011, p. 260) work, where he suggests that misinformation is ‘well-formed and meaningful data (i.e. semantic content) that is false’. ‘Disinformation is simply misinformation purposefully conveyed to mislead the receiver into believing that it is information.’ Examples include forged documents, doctored photographs, deceptive advertising, deliberately falsified maps, and government propaganda, and relevant to this paper, “fake news”.

Buckland (1991) examines the informativeness of information, which he posits as situational, whereby different situations can imbue different meanings on the thing being communicated and meanings may be dependent on the knowledge of the receiver. This further highlights the definition problem, because ‘what is misinformation in one situation might not be in another because the meanings might be different’, which also makes it hard to identify (Karlova and Fisher, 2013).

The fake news problem

The advent of the Internet and widespread use of social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, has enabled information to be spread faster than any other time in history. Inundated with such massive volumes of information, individuals are challenged with information overload, and a rapid pace of news production and dissemination (Khan and Idris, 2019, p. 1196). In this environment, misinformation can thrive because through simply clicking, forwarding, or resharing, information can be spread at the speed of thought, and individuals either don’t have the time to fact check or lack the skills to distinguish false or inaccurate information from accurate information, so can more easily be misled.

In recent times, “fake news”, which is defined as ‘news articles that are intentionally and verifiably false, and could mislead readers’, has emerged as a critical issue for information quality and poses a challenge for individuals and society (Allcott and Gentzkow, 2017, p. 213). This is because, increasingly, more people are getting their news from online platforms, particularly social media (Tandoc et al, 2018, p. 138). According to the Global Digital Report (2019), 45% of the global population are social media users (We Are Social, 2019). Statistics in the Digital News Report: Australia 2019, show that out of 38 countries that were surveyed, 54% of news consumers used social media as a general source of news. Concerningly, the same report showed that when it came to fact-checking, Australians are more likely to share a dubious story without checking it, and even if they suspect they’ve encountered fake news, are less likely to check the veracity of a story by cross-checking it with other sources (University of Canberra, 2019).

The proliferation of fake news poses real threats to society as it has the potential to spread misinformation with serious consequences; for example, economic (stock price fluctuations), political (US election, Brexit), and public health crises (Ebola, COVID-19 pandemic). In relation to the latter, some are describing the current COVID-19 pandemic as ‘the first major pandemic of the social media age’ (Ko, 2020). As governments force their populations into nation-wide quarantines, or adopt social distancing measures, and people are trapped in their homes to avoid contracting or spreading the virus, social media has become more important than ever, not just for connecting socially, but in fulfilling the information needs of individuals with demands on timely and local information (Donovan, 2020).

Unfortunately, with more people online than ever before, seeking information on the same thing, lacking clear authoritative sources, and not fact-checking, these conditions have created a perfect storm for misinformation (Breland, 2020). Fake news about COVID-19 is spreading faster and more easily than the virus, and much of the disinformation is being spread through social media bots (algorithmic software programs) with the malicious intent of spreading fear and fake news (Ko, 2020). Concerningly, misinformation around COVID-19 is out of control and spreading so quickly that the WHO has said that it is not just fighting an epidemic, but also an “infodemic” (WHO, 2020b).

The socio-technical problem

In times of confusion and crisis, ‘social media platforms continue to be a dangerous socio-technical vulnerability’, because, paradoxically, the same social media platforms, which profit off the unrelenting spread of information, and are perpetuating the spread of misinformation, are the same platforms that are being used to fight against the pandemic (Donovan, 2020). The types of misinformation circulating through these platforms include conspiracy theories about the origins of the virus, harmful advice about false treatments, and unreliable reports of vaccines (Gold, 2020).

To fight back against this infodemic, technology companies have been taking steps to help limit the spread of misinformation and disinformation on their platforms. Facebook, YouTube and Twitter have committed to moderate their sites by removing misleading information and are working with the WHO and other authoritative sources to ensure that individuals are directed to accurate information, and some are also providing the WHO free advertising space (Kassam, 2020). However, as technology companies struggle to take down misleading information using their existing tools, misinformation and disinformation is being spread through grass-roots channels, such as text and email, which poses a significant technical problem, because services such as Facebook Messenger and Whatsapp are effectively ‘locked boxes for content moderators’ (Kassam, 2020). Although these technology platforms are taking measures to limit the spread of misleading information, there is an absence of fact-checking standards, which is allowing misinformation to still slip through (Chakravorti, 2020).

A critical information literacy solution

Clearly, at times of crisis, and in normal everyday information seeking, technology companies can’t be relied on to stop the spread of misinformation and disinformation, therefore, to inoculate against this information contagion, individuals need to be equipped with the necessary skills to be able to discern false or inaccurate information from accurate information. In this environment, there is the dire need for information literacy, which has been a core service of libraries, and a core competency of information professionals, with standards and practices adopted by information organisations worldwide. In Australia, information literacy is a core competency for information professionals (ALIA, 2015).

Information literacy is defined as being ‘able to recognise when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate and use effectively the needed information’ (ALA cited in Garner, 2006, p. 56). It combines elements from a number of other literacies, including media literacy, digital literacy, news literacy, and critical thinking’. When combined, information literacy becomes

an integrated set of skills, knowledge and practices, and dispositions that prepares [individuals] to discover, interpret, and create information ethically while gaining a critical understanding of how information systems interact to produce and circulate news, information, and knowledge (Head et al, 2020).

In the context of helping society to identify and avoid misinformation and disinformation, information professionals have an important role in developing information literate users so they can evaluate information critically, question its validity, and assess the quality and credibility of messages before sharing (Khan and Idris, 2019, p. 1199).

However, whilst information literacy has been a core practice of information professionals since the 1970s, there is a growing body of discourse that has criticised it for a lack of research, with some arguing that, ‘[i]nformation literacy thus far has been more of a practical and strategic concept used by librarians and information professionals rather than the focus of empirical research’ (Tuominem et al, 2005, p. 330). This is further emphasised by the work of Downey (2016), which found that research into the effectiveness of information literacy has shown poor results from efforts made by information organisations in achieving the standards, as it has been overly simplified and mechanistic in the teaching of skills. In recognition of these failures, a new subset of information literacy has been called for; that is, critical information literacy (Downey, 2106, p. 18). According to Brisola and Doyle (2019, p. 282), critical information literacy

transforms information literacy from something mechanical into something more human…it is about raising consciousness to the fact that information is socially constructed; that people do not acquire skills, but learn to have the habit of questioning the origins, interests and contexts of information production.

Critical information literacy is also in harmony with UNESCO’s (2019) efforts to aggregate the various literacies into a unified concept, which it calls Media and Information Literacy (MIL). As a composite concept, MIL

recognises the primary role of information and media in our everyday lives. It lies at the core of freedom of expression and information - since it empowers citizens to understand the functions of media and other information providers, to critically evaluate their content, and to make informed decisions as users and producers of information and media content.

Finally, critical information literacy can be understood as a ‘state of alertness, always vigilant in dealing with information’; it is a state of continuous questioning of the information that we consume and choose to share (Brisola and Doyle, 2019, p. 283). As a set of vital competencies, critical information literacy has the potential to empower individuals with the necessary skills to be able to successful navigate the complex digital media environment, identify, and avoid the pitfalls of sharing misinformation, which is harmful to individuals and has serious consequences for society at large.

Conclusion

This essay has provided a discussion on how information professionals can help individuals identify and avoid misinformation and disinformation, which is ultimately harmful to society with serious consequences, including public health, as demonstrated through the current information crisis regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. As the world is brought to the brink of economic disaster and public health calamity, now is the most dangerous time to be ill-informed. Now, more than ever, we need a polity that is critically informed and equipped with the necessary skills to be able to navigate the torrents of information being shared, read and viewed across many media including, social media, news, newspapers, messaging apps, etc. At a time of life or death, the choice of media to consume could be deadly not only for oneself, but for society as a whole. While technology companies battle to try and stop the information contagion, information professionals also have an important role to play in fighting against this information crisis. Therefore, there is an urgent need for critical information literacy to help individuals recognise misinformation and verify its veracity before sharing. Finally, post-pandemic, there will be a need for further research to assess the efficacy of current information literacy practices, and identify gaps of opportunity for redefining standards and policies, so that citizens are better prepared not just for future information crises, but for information seeking in everyday life.

List of references

ALIA. (2015). Foundation Knowledge, Skills and Attributes relevant to Information Professionals working in Archives, Libraries and Records Management. Australian Library and Information Association. https://read.alia.org.au/file/642/download?token=pTZ8q8hE

Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211-36. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.2.211

Breland, A. (2020). Why coronavirus misinformation is out of control. Mother Jones. https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/03/coronavirus-misinformation/

Brisola, A. C., & Doyle, A. (2019). Critical information literacy as a path to resist “fake news”: understanding disinformation as the root problem. Open Information Science, 3(1), 274-286. https://doi.org/10.1515/opis-2019-0019

Brock, F. J., & Dhillon, G. S. (2001). Managerial information, the basics. Journal of International Information Management, 10(2), 45-59. https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/jiim/vol10/iss2/5

Buckland, M. K. (1991). Information as thing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(5), 351-360. https://doi-org.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199106)42:5<351::aid-asi5>3.0.CO;2-3

Chakravorti, B. (2020). Social media companies are taking steps to tamp down coronavirus misinformation – but they can do more. The Conversation (Australian Edition). https://theconversation.com/social-media-companies-are-taking-steps-to-tamp-down-coronavirus-misinformation-but-they-can-do-more-133335

Donovan, J. (2020). Here’s how social media can combat the coronavirus ‘infodemic’. MIT Technology Review. https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/03/17/905279/facebook-twitter-social-media-infodemic-misinformation/

Downey, A. (2016). Critical Information Literacy: foundations, inspiration, and ideas. Library Juice Press.

Fallis, D. (2014). A functional analysis of disinformation. iConference 2014 Proceedings, 621-627. https://doi.org/10.9776/14278

Fallis, D. (Ed.). (2016). The Routledge handbook of philosophy of information. Routledge.

Floridi, L. (Ed.). (2011). The philosophy of information. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199232383.001.0001

Fox, C. J. (1983). Information and misinformation: an investigation of the notions of information, misinformation, informing, and misinforming. Greenwood.

Garner, S. D. (2006). High-Level Colloquium on Information Literacy and Lifelong Learning. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. https://www.ifla.org/files/assets/information-literacy/publications/high-level-colloquium-2005.pdf

Gold, H. (2020). Inside the WHO's fight to stop false information about coronavirus from spreading. CNN Business. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/05/tech/facebook-google-who-coronavirus-misinformation/index.html

Head, A.J., Fister, B., & MacMillan, M. (2020). Information Literacy in the Age of Algorithms: Student experiences with news and information, and the need for change. Project Information Literacy. https://www.projectinfolit.org/uploads/2/7/5/4/27541717/algoreport.pdf

Kassam, N. (2020). Disinformation and coronavirus. The Interpreter. https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/disinformation-and-coronavirus

Ko, R. (2020). Meet ‘Sara’, ‘Sharon’ and ‘Mel’: why people spreading coronavirus anxiety on Twitter might actually be bots. The Conversation (Australian Edition). https://theconversation.com/meet-sara-sharon-and-mel-why-people-spreading-coronavirus-anxiety-on-twitter-might-actually-be-bots-134802

Tandoc Jr, E. C., Lim, Z. W., & Ling, R. (2018). Defining “fake news” a typology of scholarly definitions. Digital journalism, 6(2), 137-153. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1360143

Tuominen, K., Savolainen, R., & Talja, S. (2005). Information literacy as a sociotechnical practice. The Library Quarterly, 75(3), 329-345. https://doi.org/10.1086/497311

UNESCO. (2019). Media and information literacy. http://www.unesco.org/new/en/communication-and-information/media-development/media-literacy/mil-as-composite-concept/

University of Canberra. (2019). Digital News Report: Australia 2019. News and Media Research Centre, University of Canberra. https://apo.org.au/node/240786

We Are Social. (2019). Global digital report 2019. We Are Social. https://wearesocial.com/global-digital-report-2019

WHO. (2020a). Novel coronavirus (2019-nCov). Situation report – 13. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200202-sitrep-13-ncov-v3.pdf

WHO. (2020b). Munich Security Conference. https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/munich-security-conference

Worldometer. (2020, April). COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic. Retrieved April 9, 2020 from https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/