Notes from a talk By Vish Vishwanath (Harvard School of Public Health; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute), hosted by David Lazar and the Internet Democracy Initiative, December 18, 2024.
The surge of misinformation in science and health communication is not just a problem of individuals making poor choices or failing to fact-check. It’s a systemic issue deeply embedded in the structures of our modern information ecosystem. In his talk, Vish Vishwanath, chair of the National Academies committee on “Understanding and Addressing Misinformation in Science,” argued that we need to move beyond individual blame and examine the structural forces that create and amplify misinformation. Here’s a quick summary of how he unpacked the problem—and what we can do about it.
Vishnawath speaking at the event
The Problem: An Overloaded Information Ecosystem
The modern information landscape is overwhelming. With more channels and a greater volume of content than ever before, even science communication and translation experts struggle to make sense of the noise. This crowded ecosystem provides fertile ground for disinformation and misinformation—false information spread with or without malicious intent. Vishwanath broke down the key players shaping today’s science and health communication landscape:
- Journalists: Traditional media outlets, along with local and minoritized press, play a major role in communicating science. The minoritized press, Vishwanath noted, often takes on an advocacy role, contrasting with the gatekeeping tendencies of mainstream media.
- Activist groups and government officials: These actors produce content to inform, persuade, or advocate, often serving specific agendas.
- Social media platforms: Platforms like WhatsApp allow anyone to reach massive audiences, often through viral video content. These low-barrier tools can amplify both accurate and false information.
- The private sector: Commercial industries, like tobacco or sugary beverages, spend billions to shape public perceptions, often promoting narratives that align with their profit motives. For instance, tobacco companies spend $10 billion annually on marketing, creating a communication imbalance compared to public health efforts.
Amid this sea of content, making informed choices about what to trust requires effort, which many individuals may not have the time, tools, or skills to devote.
Misinformation spreads rapidly in this interconnected world, driven by factors such as:
- Social media algorithms that amplify sensational content, regardless of accuracy.
- The rise of AI-driven deepfakes that blur the line between fact and fabrication.
- Declining trust in institutions, which leaves people more susceptible to alternative, often incorrect, narratives.
One illustrative example Vishwanath shared related to cancer prevention. Despite robust evidence that lifestyle changes can reduce cancer risk, many people believe that cancer is inevitable and that “everything causes it.” These misconceptions are perpetuated by social media spirals, where inaccurate ideas are reinforced and mainstreamed.
Inequalities in Health Communication
Structural influce model from a related academic paper (CC BY 4.0)
Inequalities in how people access, interpret, and act on health information are deeply rooted in education, race, and socioeconomic status, with significant consequences for public trust and health outcomes. Education levels and racial identity intersect to shape science literacy, with certain groups, like white evangelical populations, being among the least likely to get vaccinated due to cultural and informational divides. During the COVID-19 pandemic, reliance on online tools for vaccine scheduling highlighted the digital divide, leaving those without internet access at a disadvantage. Marginalized groups are often labeled as “hard to reach,” but Vishwanath reframed this as “hardly reached,” pointing to systemic failures in outreach and inclusion. These data gaps and inequities perpetuate disparities in health communication, reinforcing a cycle of exclusion and misinformation.
Structural Solutions: Rebuilding Trust Through Community
Vishwanath called for a shift from individual-focused solutions to systemic, community-driven approaches to combat misinformation effectively. By adopting an ecological perspective, efforts should target structural barriers such as limited access to technology and educational disparities, rather than placing the onus solely on individuals to “read critically.” Community-engaged research emerges as a key strategy, involving collaboration with communities to co-define problems and co-develop relevant solutions. Examples of this approach include the MassCONECT Portal in Massachusetts, which provides localized resources and training to help communities adapt public health messages, and SANCHAR in India, which has trained over 200 journalists to critically assess and communicate scientific information. These initiatives illustrate how building structural and community capacity can amplify accurate, evidence-based science communication.
Ultimately, Vishwanath called for more participatory and inclusive approaches to science communication. Misinformation isn’t just an individual problem—it’s a structural challenge that requires systemic solutions. By leveraging community knowledge and resilience, we can create alternatives to misinformation and foster trust in evidence-based information. Vishwanath’s talk highlighted the urgency of rethinking how we produce, share, and consume science information. Only by addressing the root causes of misinformation can we build a healthier, more equitable information ecosystem.
Note: this post was drafted from my personal notes into a narrative using genAI tools and then reviewed and editing by hand
