Scientific Disinformation in Times of Epistemic Crisis: Circulation of Conspiracy Theories on Social Media Platforms

Abstract

The spread of disinformation about science in social media has been a major concern worldwide, especially at a time of crisis in which all institutions that produce knowledge and truth, including science, are delegitimized or discredited by society. Given this, the purpose of this research is to map the circulation of information on the most frequent conspiracy theories in Brazil, seeking to identify actors, discourses, and interactions on different digital platforms. Using a mixed methodology for identifying informational flows among supporters of conspiracy theories on Facebook, WhatsApp, and YouTube, the results show that, even though there is distrust about the relationship between science, government and industry, scientific authority is a symbolic capital of extreme importance for the circulation of information on conspiracy theories related to science.

COVID-19 Conspiracy Beliefs and Vaccination Intentions among Social Media Users

“…Social media will often simply amplify what has already been disseminated by traditional media. In fact, those who ascribe to conspiracy beliefs will often cite stories in traditional media in order to legitimate their claims (Oliveira, Wang, and Xu 2022). While social media platforms attempt to contain the spread of misinformation by flagging misleading posts and removing accounts associated with spreading misinformation (Puri et al 2020(Puri et al , p. 2589, the regulation of traditional media is typically left to national governments.…”

Who is who in fact-checked conspiracy theories? Disseminators, sources, and the struggle for authority in polarized environments

“…Indeed, conspiracy theories find their niche when people distrust their governments and feel dissatisfied with mundane, small-scale explanations for significant events (Craft et al, 2017; Stempel, et al, 2007). The Covid-19 pandemic has been particularly opportune for circulating conspiratorial narratives (Bruns et al, 2020; Papakyriakopoulos et al, 2020)—and even a few political leaders have endorsed such plots (Uscinski et al, 2020; Oliveira et al, 2022).…”

“…While some governments have considered the above actions insufficient to thwart the problem (Timmer, 2019), others have weaponized conspiracy theories to strengthen populist discourses (Oliveira et al, 2022). According to Kaltwasser (2021), even after coming to power, populist leaders need to keep the impression that they keep fighting the establishment-and this is where conspiracy theories can be helpful.…”

“…The spread of conspiracy theories in polarized settings such as Brazil (Lugo-Ocando, 2020; Fontes and Marques, 2022) has involved even government officials interested in disseminating deceitful content to criticize opponents (Oliveira et al, 2022). If the influence of such “theories” had been underestimated in past decades (Keeley, 1999), the increasing use of social media and the weaponization of false information now require multiple disciplinary perspectives to explain the topic (Douglas et al, 2019; Shahsavari et al, 2020).…”

A New Dark Age? Truth, Trust, and Environmental Science

“…Research on climate science denialism suggests that lay audiences' pre-existing ideological leanings can more effectively explain tendencies toward denialism, skepticism, and conspiracy thinking than the audiences' discerning and critical engagement with scientific claims (87). Studies have also looked at the influence of national political contexts as a long-running factor in how social media is used to spread both local and international conspiracy narratives (88). The role of social media platforms is evidently not so much constitutive of conspiracy thinking or beliefs as it is a possible facilitator of the rapid spread of conspiracy ideas such as claims about so-called climate hoaxes (89).…”