Scapegoat summer + News/Analysis

The Spectrum of Misinformation returns with misinformation news, analysis & practical advice for communicators.

In News digest, get the latest on UK migration misinformation, the role of vaccine misinformation in the deadly CDC shooting, worries over AI-generated wildfire images in Canada, criticisms of a US report attempting to rewrite the scientific consensus on climate change, a backlash against claims about SSRI drugs used to treat depression in pregnancy, cuts to independent news, and Japan's new AI fact-checking platform. Learn about misinformer tactics in The usual scapegoats, before taking a break with Summer reading, and prep for the Final countdown...

News digest

An editorial in The Guardian argues the scapegoating of asylum seekers has skewed the UK migration debate. It cites a YouGov Poll showing 47% of Britons think more migrants are staying in the UK illegally rather than legally when official estimates suggest legal migrants outnumber irregular migrants by 10 to 1.

BBC reports UK police forces are being encouraged to disclose the ethnicity and nationality of suspects in high-profile cases to help counter disinformation, like that seen around the Southport stabbings.

The Guardian highlights concerns disclosing ethnicity data of suspects opens a 'Pandora's box', fuelling racist narratives and speculation where such details are not released.

ABC News covers the deadly shooting at the CDC campus in Georgia (US) with the shooter apparently blaming the COVID-19 vaccine for his depression. CDC Director Susan Monarez wrote to staff:

"… the dangers of misinformation and its promulgation has now led to deadly consequences. I will work to restore trust in public health to those who have lost it- through science, evidence, and clarity of purpose."

LA Times reports following the shooting The American Federation of Government Employees has urged leaders at the CDC and the US health department to provide a “clear and unequivocal stance in condemning vaccine disinformation".

AFP reveals trolls spread fake news about the identity of the CDC shooter as part of harassing a Canadian high school graduate.

CBC highlights concerns about inaccurate AI-generated wildfire images circulating in British Columbia, stoking people's fears and causing them to make decisions based on false information.

A new US Department of Energy (DoE) climate report is full of misinformation, according to experts. The Guardian highlights criticisms including cherry-picking of evidence, debunked findings, and lack of peer-review. An analysis in Carbon Brief found over 100 false or misleading statements in the report.

CBS covers environmental groups suing the Trump administration over the DoE report and the suggestion that previous National Climate Assessments may be rewritten to fit its misleading narrative.

NPR reports a backlash against an FDA panel making inaccurate and misleading claims about the SSRI drugs used to treat depression in pregnancy, including claims about links to miscarriage and autism, when pregnancy experts say the evidence is SSRIs are generally safe.

An opinion piece in Monocle argues cuts to NPR and PBS will silence independent news coverage on US regional radio with misinformation likely to fill the vacuum.

Japan Today reports a consortium involving Fujitsu Ltd and academic institutions is developing an AI fact-checking platform they say could help to make quick judgements about the accuracy of online content.

The usual scapegoats

Is one person's misinformation just another person's information?

As I've written before the claim that misinformation is in the eye of the beholder doesn't stack up.

Misinformation can be identified by common characteristics including: highly negative emotional language, presenting opinion as fact, impersonation, and conspiracy thinking.

Add to that list scapegoating: finding a group to blame, helping to distract from the real problem and giving people a focus for their hate.

Scientists, migrants, people with disabilities, trans people, charity workers, environmentalists, are among those regularly scapegoated by misinformers in the media/on social media, creating polarising false narratives used by politicians of all stripes.

Last summer we saw how the scapegoating of migrants fuelled violent disorder on Britain's streets following the Southport stabbings, with the threat of further violence hanging over recent protests outside hotels housing asylum seekers (and false claims children are writing 'Valentine's cards' to refugees or asylum seekers).

Meanwhile in the US the CDC's Director has suggested that the scapegoating of public health officials may have led to an attack in which two people died. RFK Jr has refused to acknowledge that vaccine misinformation may have been a factor.

Why scapegoat?

Scapegoats are rarely rich and powerful, are often from vulnerable groups with a limited ability to protect themselves or fight back.

Scapegoating is about 'punching down', giving simplistic easy answers, using the classic misinformer tactic of manipulating people's existing prejudices to stoke hate and outrage, drive engagement, and spread the false narrative.

Can the misinformer outrage machine on social media/in the media even function without such 'soft' targets?

It's telling that scapegoats are found for problems - for example broken health systems, housing crises, changing job markets, climate impacts, generational conflict - with complex underlying causes.

Create a scapegoat and maybe we'll forget how the people amplifying these false narratives are often those most responsible for trying to fix these intractable problems...

Conspiracy & language

I'd argue scapegoating is intrinsic to other common characteristics of misinformation, for example conspiracy thinking and highly negative emotional language.

Conspiracy theories rely on there being someone else to blame (other than spreaders of the theory). These are often framed as 'elites' a 'blob' or 'deep state'. But without any evidence-based definition of who these bad actors are anyone - scientists, public servants, charity workers - can be vilified and targeted.

Putting people in an emotional state can significantly increase susceptibility to fake news, with fearmongering and moral outrage particularly effective [see Foolproof - p.198]. Moral-emotional words such as ‘hate’ ‘punish’ and ‘evil’ are powerful emotional triggers, not just capturing our attention but driving engagement: studies of Twitter/Facebook suggest the presence of every additional moral-emotional word increases shares and retweets by at least 10-17%.

And how can you justify using this highly negative emotional language? By identifying someone to hate, someone to punish.

The search for scapegoats

As effective a tactic as scapegoating is I think it can also help those trying to resist misinformation.

After all, would trustworthy high-quality information sources single out and blame a vulnerable group? Shouldn't even good partisan sources admit the world isn't as simple as that?

Along with things like the use of highly negative emotional language, scapegoating is a big red flag that, as part of digital and media literacy campaigns, people should be taught signals a source is untrustworthy.

As part of fighting misinformation I think we have a duty to call out scapegoating wherever it occurs - whether it's in a politician's speech, arguments used by campaigners or media headlines. At every opportunity we should share high-quality information drawing attention back to the real issues, problems and potential solutions instead of staying silent while others play the blame game.

Summer reading

Looking for a holiday read? Try the recently-published UN Global Risk Report which ranks mis- and disinformation in its top 3 risks.

Before the UK parliamentary summer break The Communications and Digital Committee published a media literacy report that argues media literacy should be embedded in the national curriculum.

An internet matters report recommends more teaching resources to help children challenge misinformation as a survey shows 47% of children using AI chatbots have used them for schoolwork with 1 in 6 vulnerable children using them because they want a friend.

Focusing on more elaborate longer health misinformation could be an effective strategy according to a new meta-analysis.

Final countdown...

It's less than a month to go until our Health Misinformation UNPACKED event on 15 September at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM).

While it's now sold out in-person some tickets are still available online. I'm looking forward to welcoming our speakers, panellists, and fellow counter-misinformation communicators to LSHTM.

At the event LSHTM will also be launching a call for expressions of interest in an operational network to combat dangerous health misinformation in the UK.

Have a ticket? Join us in-person or online for what promises to be an inspiring series of sessions from top experts on misinformation challenges and solutions. I'll share some reflections on the event, as well as details of the network, next time.