Effective Debunking
“Free speech is not the cost but the key to counteract disinformation.” Chen Shih-chug, Minister of Health of Taiwan[1]
Because young people, in particular, frequently turn to the comments on a post or video to see whether any of their peers have responded,[2] it’s important to take action when we see false information.
Users of social networks are largely responsible for setting the tone and values of those spaces, and it's the voice of the loudest 10 percent that does that.[3] By responding to misinformation, we promote skepticism and accuracy as social norms, which have a strong impact on whether or not people recognize and believe false claims online.
Strategies for responding to misinformation
Research has identified three effective strategies for responding to misinformation: asking questions, correcting the misinformation and debunking it. Which one is the best choice in a situation depends on a number of questions:
Do you want to avoid saying the person is wrong? Is the topic something people feel strongly about, like politics? Does the person have a history of arguing and ignoring others or facts? Are people who see the post more likely to listen to the sharer than you?
If you’re not ready to correct or debunk bad information, question it. The idea is to nudge the sharer, and whoever else sees it, to really think about whether the content is accurate.
Try saying:
- "Are you sure that's true?"
- "Where did you hear that?"
- "Is that source reliable?"
Will a lot of people see the post? Did the person share it without checking to see if it was true? Do you have accurate info that corrects the bad info? Do other people see you as an expert or an authority?
Then correct it. That means giving accurate information without repeating the misinformation.
Try saying:
- "Health Canada has studied cellphone radiation for years and set guidelines to make sure it stays under safe levels."
- "Statistics Canada says that the crime rate is a lot lower than it was 20 years ago."
Are you okay with saying the person who posted it is wrong? Did the person share it because it supports something they strongly believe in, even though they knew it might be false? Can you clearly show that the info is false?
If so, then you can take the power away from bad information by debunking it: showing that it’s wrong and explaining how you found out it was wrong (such as by using MediaSmarts’ fact-checker search).
Try saying:
- "I checked Snopes and they say that video is fake."
- “I checked other sources and it turns out that picture is actually from after a rock concert, not a protest march.”
- “Fact-checkers have proven that the sign was Photoshopped.”
Best practices for debunking
When correcting or debunking, make sure to provide evidence for what you’re saying and make a clear and logical argument.[4] Keep your tone civil,[5] provide an alternate explanation for the misinformation if you can[6] and try to approach these issues in a way that either avoids an ideological frame or draws on the other person's values and viewpoint. For example, conservatives have been found to be more accepting of the idea when it's presented as a "carbon offset," avoiding the politically-charged word "tax,"[7] while Americans had very different attitudes towards the Affordable Care Act depending on whether the questioner used that name or the term "Obamacare."[8] Avoid shaming them, and if it's somebody you know try to keep the lines of communication open, even if you’re not able to change their minds.[9]
If you're citing experts, try to find ones whom the other person will see as authorities. This shows them that you respect their worldview and gives them an "excuse" to consider your argument.[10] Finally, it's good to frame things in a positive way – rather than pointing out that raw milk is dangerous, for instance, one might more effectively point out that pasteurization made it possible for city-dwelling children to drink milk safely – and to make a point of recognizing that the emotions that underlie their views are valid: acknowledging, for example, that most anti-vaccination proponents are motivated by their love of their children.[11] Opening with positive statements (e.g. "I can tell you're a very caring and committed person") about the person you're talking to can make them more open to considering the issue objectively.[12]
How do you know if someone is worth arguing with?
Most people overestimate how negatively others will respond to being corrected.[13] Don't count on convincing the person you're replying to; what's more important is to counter the bad information for the other people who've seen it. Even if you do change their mind, they probably won't say so right away.
Remember that while it's rare for people to openly change their minds, most people are more open to engaging with other viewpoints than generally imagined. When people do change their minds, it’s usually because they encounter new information they hadn’t been looking for.[14]
Though it may be hard to change the minds of individuals, remember that all of society's views have been changed, through patient (and sometimes impatient) effort, on issues as fundamental as whether 2SLGBTQIA+ people can marry, whether women should have full rights and whether or not slavery is wrong – often by framing the issue so that the new view seemed more in tune with people's basic values.
[1] Quoted in Aspinwall, N. (2024) Taiwan Learned You Can’t Fight Fake News by Making It Illegal. Foreign Policy.
[2] Hassoun, A., Beacock, I., Consolvo, S., Goldberg, B., Kelley, P. G., & Russell, D. M. (2023). Practicing Information Sensibility: How Gen Z Engages with Online Information. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-17).
[3] Xie, J., Sreenivasan, S., Korniss, G., Zhang, W., Lim, C., & Szymanski, B. K. (2011). Social consensus through the influence of committed minorities. Physical Review E Phys. Rev. E, 84(1). doi:10.1103/physreve.84.011130
[4] Ou, M., & Ho, S. S. (2024). Factors Associated With Information Credibility Perceptions: A Meta-Analysis. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 101(2), 346-372.
[5] Bode, L., Vraga, E. K., & Tang, R. (2023). User correction. Current Opinion in Psychology, 101786.
[6] Prike, T., & Ecker, U. K. (2023). Effective correction of misinformation. Current Opinion in Psychology, 101712.
[7] Cook, J., Lewandowsky, S. (2011), The Debunking Handbook. St. Lucia, Australia: University of Queensland. November 5. ISBN 978-0-646-56812-6. [http://sks.to/debunk]
[8] Dropp, K., & Nyhan, B. (2017). One-Third Don't Know Obamacare and Affordable Care Act Are the Same.
[9] Booth, E., Lee, J., Rizoiu, M. A., & Farid, H. (2024). Conspiracy, misinformation, radicalisation: understanding the online pathway to indoctrination and opportunities for intervention. Journal of Sociology, 60(2), 440-457.
[10] Mooney, C. (2011). The Science of Why We Don't Believe Science. Mother Jones.
[11] Don't give up on the fact-resistant: Tips to break the grip of misinformation. (2017). Retrieved April 05, 2018, from https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/fact-checking-project/should-we-give-up-on-facts/
[12] Cook, J., Lewandowsky, S. (2011), The Debunking Handbook. St. Lucia, Australia: University of Queensland. November 5. ISBN 978-0-646-56812-6. [http://sks.to/debunk]
[13] Gurgun, S., Cemiloglu, D., Arden-Close, E., Phalp, K., Nakov, P., & Ali, R. (2023). Challenging Misinformation on Social Media: Users' Perceptions and Misperceptions and their Impact on the Willingness to Challenge. Available at SSRN 4440292.
[14] McKay, D., Makri, S., Gutierrez‐Lopez, M., Porlezza, C., Macfarlane, A., Cooper, G., & Missaoui, S. (2024). I'm the same, I'm the same, I'm trying to change: Investigating the role of human information behavior in view change. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.