The power of disinformation is suspected of influencing elections and our democratic coexistence. Communication scientist and media psychologist Lena Frischlich is researching the staging, dissemination and impact of disinformation online at the University of Southern Denmark in Odense. As part of the bidt event “Democracy under pressure? How AI and disinformation influence social trust”, she gave the keynote speech. In this interview, she talks about the psychological mechanisms behind disinformation — and the question of how to promote democratic resilience.
In the early days of the internet, there were great expectations that the web would lead to a comprehensive democratisation of the world. How do you think the discourse on the internet has changed in recent years?
Frischlich: On the one hand, the internet has indeed contributed to democratisation. In the past, only editors-in-chief could decide what news appeared in the mass media, but today, minorities can also share news online and make their voices heard. So, the discourse has indeed become democratised! However, the increase in information also makes it easier to spread disinformation and thus manipulate specific groups of people. We need to learn to cope better with this new Internet environment.
What phenomena fall under disinformation — and what is the difference to misinformation?
Frischlich: Both phenomena involve false or misleading content. While misinformation is not necessarily intentional, disinformation always involves a strategic intention to deceive. Misinformation is deliberately spread to manipulate individuals or groups. The factual discrepancies can affect the core information and the meta-information, such as the source. Disinformation occurs on all channels, from text and images to audio and video. It can also be spread in various ways: one possibility is to manipulate credible sources and hide the message within them. For example, reputable media brands such as Spiegel-Online have been copied to spread misinformation via these doppelganger sites.
more about Disinformation
How do you research disinformation on the internet?
Frischlich: We look at which actors are spreading disinformation online. We also analyse the material: What has already been debunked, and what does it look like? We are also examining conspiracy myths. Such myths are associated with unrealistic assumptions of power and a Manichean view of the world. This means that the followers believe in an apocalyptic battle between good and evil that does not exist. As a psychologist, I also rely on experiments: How do people’s attitudes change after consuming misinformation?
What psychological mechanisms are behind it when people believe very dubious or clearly biased sources?
Frischlich: Most people think they have a clear view and can protect themselves from fake news. But nobody is immune to falling for disinformation. Our brains are lazy, and we don’t like to be convinced of a different world view. We prefer to trust content that confirms our world view and shows people we like in a good light. It’s important to always remember that you can be mistaken! Studies also show that people who think carefully about things have a lower “bullshit receptivity”. They are better at assessing the truthfulness of headlines. We can learn from this that we should carefully think about content and take time to analyse news before sharing it.
Are there certain individuals who are more likely to believe in fake news?
Frischlich: In addition to a willingness to reflect on things, certain personality traits make individuals more susceptible to disinformation. One such characteristic is a conspiracy mentality, i.e. the tendency to suspect conspiracies behind major events. This mindset typically comes with a deep mistrust of powerful people and institutions. Past negative experiences with government entities can further intensify this mistrust. Additionally, disinformation campaigns intentionally exacerbate this distrust.
Is it possible to train people to deal with disinformation?
Frischlich: There are many programmes, but they vary in their effectiveness. Programmes that start before people are confronted with disinformation are often particularly effective. We summarise such offers under the term cognitive inoculation, based on the medical term vaccination. This involves demonstrating the techniques of disinformation campaigns — in reduced doses — to build up resistance to misinformation. Such programmes can be fun, such as the browser games “Bad News” or “Crancy Uncle”. Research shows that such tools work very well in the short term.
Adults are often difficult to reach with such programmes. Can disinformation be regulated?
Frischlich: The regulation of disinformation is a tricky area, because interference in freedom of opinion and the protection of groups of people have to be weighed up against each other. We don’t want an Internet where it is forbidden to believe in Father Christmas. Rumours and myths are part of human civilisation; censorship of opinion must not be part of our democracy. However, this does not mean that everything has to be tolerated. We want a coexistence that is characterised by an honest exchange, based on the Basic Law and international human rights.
What media and political strategies are there to make adults fit against fake news?
Frischlich: Research shows that a decline in trust in state institutions can make people more vulnerable to disinformation. Therefore, it is essential to foster citizens’ trust in public institutions. This involves supporting independent and well-funded journalism, as well as examining how social interactions are structured within cities. Questions to consider include: How accessible is democratic representation in my community? How trustworthy is the local daily newspaper? How transparent are politicians with the public? Addressing these issues contributes to strengthening democratic resilience.
Democratic resilience — what does that mean?
Frischlich: The term resilience comes from physics — and describes the ability of a material to return to its original state after a shock. The term is now also being applied to the human psyche. Democratic resilience is the ability of the state and society to maintain democracy despite crises.
To promote resilience in the long term, we need a holistic approach that starts at the individual level, takes social processes into account and looks at platform economies as well as political and social processes.
Prof. Dr. Lena Frischlich, University of Southern Denmark Odense
A new Bundestag will be elected in Germany in 2025. What can every one of us do to make our democracy more resilient to fake news and online propaganda?
Frischlich: We should take more time to think about content — and regularly remind ourselves that we are not omniscient. It can be helpful to comment on, categorise and correct incorrect content online. However, it is advisable to resist the reflex to share news on social networks without reflection. I am quite hopeful that our society can become more resilient to disinformation. Compared to previous centuries, we now believe far fewer clearly refuted things. So far, humankind has always managed to find a good way of dealing with new technical revolutions.
Thank you very much for the interview!
The interview was conducted by Anja Reiter
