Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Misinformation is rampant in America. Experts explain how to combat it.

Person being bombarded with disinformation
Pavlo Plakhotia/Getty Images

The spread of false and misleading information, whether intentional or not, is one of the most consequential issues in America and around the world. And this "information disorder" crisis exacerbates all other issues, from democracy to climate change, from health care to racial justice.

To explore this multipronged issue, the Aspen Institute brought together a group of experts from government, academia, philanthropy and civil society. Following six months of collaboration and research, the 16-person Commission on Information Disorder detailed its findings and recommendations in an 80-page report released Monday.

The report aims to call attention to an urgent issue and provide guidelines for how decision-makers can take immediate action to reduce the impacts of mis- and disinformation.


Because information disorder affects so many other issues, the Aspen Institute sought to have its commission be as diverse and wide-ranging as possible. The commission was led by journalist Katie Couric, Color of Change President Rashad Robinson and Chris Krebs, former director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.

Recognizing that the eradication of misinformation is an impossible task, the commission instead focused its report on three main priorities: increasing transparency and understanding, building trust, and reducing harms.

"Disinformation is a symptom to the disease of the complex structural inequalities that have plagued society," Robinson said during a webinar presenting the report. "And it's a tactic used to take advantage of things that are already broken and sometimes currently being broken in our society: racial bias, gender inequality, economic inequality, the decline in journalism and so much more."

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

One reason mis- and disinformation continue to run rampant in the United States is the lack of clear leadership and strategy from public and private entities, the report says. The federal government has been "ill-equipped and outpaced" by new technologies, while social media and tech companies often abuse users' trust and hide important data.

"I think it's incumbent upon any administration — the prior, the current or any future administrations — to be thinking about information disorder, and disinformation specifically, strategically," Krebs said during the webinar.

Additionally, news media plays an important role in providing the public with factual information. However, local news outlets — which people tend to trust most — continue to shut down due to financial constraints. Between 2004 and 2018, more than 2,000 newspapers have shuttered, leaving 65 million Americans in so-called "news deserts," according to a report by the University of North Carolina. Without access to credible information sources, disinformation and hyperpartisan messaging tend to take its place.

"Local news is such an important part of a well-informed electorate," Couric said during the webinar. "If people don't know what's going on in their community, they are less likely to be involved in the democratic process, in local elections. They're less likely to have an appetite and curiosity about what their government officials are doing, right or wrong."

To counter mis- and disinformation and achieve a better information environment, the commission outlined actionable items across its three main areas of focus.

To increase transparency and understanding, the commission recommends:

  • Implementing protections for researchers and journalists who violate platform terms of service by responsibly conducting research on public data of civic interest.
  • Requiring platforms to disclose certain categories of private data to qualified academic researchers, so long as that research respects user privacy, does not endanger platform integrity and remains in the public interest.
  • Creating a legal requirement for all social media platforms to regularly publish the content, source accounts, reach and impression data for posts that they organically deliver to large audiences.
  • Requiring social media platforms to disclose information about their content moderation policies and practices, and produce a time-limited archive of moderated content in a standardized format, available to authorized researchers.
  • Requiring social media companies to regularly disclose, in a standardized format, key information about every digital ad and paid post that runs on their platforms.

To build trust, the commission recommends:

  • Endorsing efforts that focus on exposing how historical and current imbalances of power, access and equity are manufactured and propagated with mis- and disinformation — and on promoting community-led solutions to forging social bonds.
  • Developing and scaling communication tools, networks and platforms that are designed to bridge divides, build empathy and strengthen trust among communities.
  • Increasing investment and transparency to further diversity at social media companies and news media as a means to mitigate misinformation arising from uninformed and disconnected centers of power.
  • Promoting substantial, long-term investments in local journalism that informs and empowers citizens, especially in underserved and marginalized communities.
  • Promoting new norms that create personal and professional consequences within communities and networks for individuals who willfully violate the public trust and use their privilege to harm the public.
  • Improving U.S. election security and restoring voter confidence with improved education, transparency and resiliency.

And to reduce harms, the commission recommends:

    • Establishing a comprehensive strategic approach to countering mis- and disinformation, including a centralized national response strategy, clearly defined roles and responsibilities across the executive branch, and identified gaps in authorities and capabilities.
    • Creating an independent organization with a mandate to develop systemic misinformation countermeasures through education, research and investment in local institutions.
    • Investing and innovating in online education and platform product features to increase users' awareness of and resilience to online misinformation.
    • Holding superspreaders of mis- and disinformation to account with clear, transparent and consistently applied policies that enable quicker, more decisive actions and penalties, commensurate with their impacts — regardless of location, political views or role in society.
    • Amending Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to 1) withdraw platform immunity for content that is promoted through paid advertising and post promotion and 2) remove immunity as it relates to the implementation of product features, recommendation engines and design.
    This report comes on the heals of a study on election disinformation, prepared by the Common Cause Education Fund and released last month.

    Read More

    Podcast: How do police feel about gun control?

    Podcast: How do police feel about gun control?

    Jesus "Eddie" Campa, former Chief Deputy of the El Paso County Sheriff's Department and former Chief of Police for Marshall Texas, discusses the recent school shooting in Uvalde and how loose restrictions on gun ownership complicate the lives of law enforcement on this episode of YDHTY.

    Listen now

    Podcast: Why conspiracy theories thrive in both democracies and autocracies

    Podcast: Why conspiracy theories thrive in both democracies and autocracies

    There's something natural and organic about perceiving that the people in power are out to advance their own interests. It's in part because it’s often true. Governments actually do keep secrets from the public. Politicians engage in scandals. There often is corruption at high levels. So, we don't want citizens in a democracy to be too trusting of their politicians. It's healthy to be skeptical of the state and its real abuses and tendencies towards secrecy. The danger is when this distrust gets redirected, not toward the state, but targets innocent people who are not actually responsible for people's problems.

    On this episode of "Democracy Paradox" Scott Radnitz explains why conspiracy theories thrive in both democracies and autocracies.

    Your Take:  The Price of Freedom

    Your Take: The Price of Freedom

    Our question about the price of freedom received a light response. We asked:

    What price have you, your friends or your family paid for the freedom we enjoy? And what price would you willingly pay?

    It was a question born out of the horror of images from Ukraine. We hope that the news about the Jan. 6 commission and Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Supreme Court nomination was so riveting that this question was overlooked. We considered another possibility that the images were so traumatic, that our readers didn’t want to consider the question for themselves. We saw the price Ukrainians paid.

    One response came from a veteran who noted that being willing to pay the ultimate price for one’s country and surviving was a gift that was repaid over and over throughout his life. “I know exactly what it is like to accept that you are a dead man,” he said. What most closely mirrored my own experience was a respondent who noted her lack of payment in blood, sweat or tears, yet chose to volunteer in helping others exercise their freedom.

    Personally, my price includes service to our nation, too. The price I paid was the loss of my former life, which included a husband, a home and a seemingly secure job to enter the political fray with a message of partisan healing and hope for the future. This work isn’t risking my life, but it’s the price I’ve paid.

    Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

    Given the earnest question we asked, and the meager responses, I am also left wondering if we think at all about the price of freedom? Or have we all become so entitled to our freedom that we fail to defend freedom for others? Or was the question poorly timed?

    I read another respondent’s words as an indicator of his pacifism. And another veteran who simply stated his years of service. And that was it. Four responses to a question that lives in my heart every day. We look forward to hearing Your Take on other topics. Feel free to share questions to which you’d like to respond.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    No, autocracies don't make economies great

    libre de droit/Getty Images

    No, autocracies don't make economies great

    Tom G. Palmer has been involved in the advance of democratic free-market policies and reforms around the globe for more than three decades. He is executive vice president for international programs at Atlas Network and a senior fellow at the Cato Institute.

    One argument frequently advanced for abandoning the messy business of democratic deliberation is that all those checks and balances, hearings and debates, judicial review and individual rights get in the way of development. What’s needed is action, not more empty debate or selfish individualism!

    In the words of European autocrat Viktor Orbán, “No policy-specific debates are needed now, the alternatives in front of us are obvious…[W]e need to understand that for rebuilding the economy it is not theories that are needed but rather thirty robust lads who start working to implement what we all know needs to be done.” See! Just thirty robust lads and one far-sighted overseer and you’re on the way to a great economy!

    Keep ReadingShow less