Media Misinformation and the Information Apocalypse: What You Need to Know
We’re living in the golden age of misinformation—an era where facts are optional, media conglomerates have mastered the art of narrative control, and the average citizen is left drowning in a sea of half-truths and corporate spin[1]. Once upon a time, journalism was meant to serve the people: reporting facts, keeping power in check, and ensuring an informed public. Today? Many mainstream outlets resemble PR firms for the elite, selectively amplifying certain stories while discrediting or outright ignoring others. This constant manipulation conditions the public either to distrust all news entirely or, worse, to accept misleading narratives without question—slowly eroding the ability to recognize when they are being lied to[2].
Kavanagh, J., & Rich, M. D. (2018). "Truth Decay: An Initial Exploration of the Diminishing Role of Facts and Analysis in American Public Life." RAND Corporation. ↩︎
Ognyanova, K., Lazer, D., Robertson, R. E., & Wilson, C. (2020). "Misinformation in action: Fake news exposure is linked to lower trust in media, higher trust in government when your side is in power." Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review. ↩︎
My blog, that usually averages less than 30 views per day, has had over 2,000 views since Friday night. I feel like this is indicative of the lack of coherent information and resources available to ppl trying to understand what's happening, rather than anything special about my blog.
— Dr. Kate Ringland (@kateringland.bsky.social) Feb 9, 2025 at 11:14 AM
[image or embed]
*Note: my blog on NIH indirect costs has now hit over 3,000 views only 7 hours after writing this bluesky post.
Case in Point: Media Coverage of Palestine Protests
Consider the relentless misrepresentation of Palestine protests over the past year. Coverage frequently employed inflammatory language, casting demonstrators as aggressors while downplaying the very injustices they were protesting. This is not new—it’s a longstanding tactic. By delegitimizing dissent and silencing marginalized voices, media outlets shape public perception to favor the status quo, making oppressive crackdowns seem reasonable rather than authoritarian.
This is especially evident in the practice of hasbara, a state-coordinated effort to shape global perceptions of Israeli policies by controlling narratives in mainstream media and online discourse[1]. Hasbara, along with broader state-sponsored propaganda, functions to discredit protest movements, dismiss human rights concerns, and normalize government overreach. By systematically branding activists as "threats to social order," state violence against them becomes not just accepted, but expected.
Aouragh, M. (2016). "Hasbara 2.0: Israel's Public Diplomacy in the Digital Age." Communication, Culture & Critique, 9(2), 212-232. ↩︎
Even if you think a conflict happening in the Middle East doesn’t affect you (even though it absolutely does) the mechanisms used to control narratives, justify violence, and suppress dissent abroad are the same ones being deployed now. If you believe you can stay neutral, consider this: the propaganda that normalizes and funds genocide with your tax dollars, is now being used to silence and justify oppression across the board. The erosion of truth, the vilification of activists, and the acceptance of state overreach are not confined to any single issue—they are a blueprint for widespread authoritarian control. And this is happening now.
From Disinformation to Creeping Authoritarianism
Fast-forward to the present moment. We’re witnessing a surge of fascist tendencies, not just in isolated pockets but in mainstream political discourse. While a direct line can’t always be drawn from a single incident to a systemic shift, the domino effect is real: the marginalization or demonization of certain voices normalizes the idea that suppressing dissent is acceptable—even necessary.
Research from the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public has highlighted how specific, well-orchestrated disinformation campaigns can rapidly shift public sentiment by exploiting existing biases[1]. This normalization is made possible, in large part, by who is granted the authority to disseminate information. When the public consistently hears only one version of events—one that paints protest as extremist or portrays systemic injustice as “overblown”—it shapes the collective understanding of what is considered “reasonable.”
Stephen Prochaska, Kayla Duskin, Zarine Kharazian, Carly Minow, Stephanie Blucker, Sylvie Venuto, Jevin D. West, and Kate Starbird. 2023. Mobilizing Manufactured Reality: How Participatory Disinformation Shaped Deep Stories to Catalyze Action during the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 7, CSCW1, Article 140 (April 2023), 39 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3579616 ↩︎
Over time, it becomes easier to accept government overreach, surveillance, or even blatant propaganda because these narratives have already framed dissent as something dangerous.
You can read more about how this was done in Nazi Germany nearly 100 years ago, starting with the universities (sound familiar?):
Philip Ball
Media Legitimacy: Who Gets to Speak?
The question of legitimacy is central to any discussion of how news shapes perceptions. Certain outlets, often backed by extensive funding or corporate sponsorship, can position themselves as “respectable” even if their reporting is riddled with bias or inaccuracy. Conversely, smaller, independent media channels are easily dismissed as “unreliable,” regardless of the quality of their investigative work. This creates a lopsided information ecosystem where voices critical of government or corporate power struggle to be heard.
Notably right now, outlets such as Wired, 404 Media, and Teen Vogue, along with many independent journalists such as Erin in the Morning, are leading the way in journalism.
Condé Nast
Over the past year, we’ve also seen a reshuffling in who gets direct media access. The Pentagon’s Annual Media Rotation Program, for instance, has replaced outlets like National Public Radio and The New York Times with more partisan platforms (e.g., Breitbart, OANN). On paper, it might look like administrative housekeeping. In reality, it’s a deliberate move to magnify certain narratives while muting critical, potentially dissenting coverage.
Headline Fixers: Downplayed and Obfuscated News
The best (or worst) example of this phenomenon can be seen in how frequently people on social media have to “fix” headlines from mainstream outlets. One day, you’ll see a watered-down headline that frames a blatant abuse of power as a mere misunderstanding; the next, you’ll find articles that subtly shift blame to protestors rather than the authorities who incited the conflict.
Often the public catches misleading headlines and rewrites them to reflect underlying facts so often that it's become a meme.
Here's another thread (highly recommend going and reading the whole thing, I'll wait here.) that unpacks how certain narratives get buried or reframed altogether:
JD Vance Attacks Judicial Independence, Accelerating Constitutional Crisis. There, @forbes.com, fixed your headline.
— Miranda Yaver (@mirandayaver.bsky.social) Feb 9, 2025 at 11:40 AM
[image or embed]
When large sections of the population feel compelled to correct professional journalists, we have a serious credibility crisis on our hands. Not only does this erode trust in established media, but it also leaves an opening for more extreme outlets to fill the gap—claiming they’re the “real truth-tellers.”
Recognizing Burnout and Overcoming Fatigue
It’s no secret that many people are burnt out from the endless barrage of conflicting headlines and sensational stories. Constant exposure to alarming news—much of it incomplete or biased—makes it difficult to know who or what to believe. In a lot of ways, this feels like early COVID-19 days when real information was thin on the ground and much of everything felt uncertain. This collective fatigue, however, serves the interests of an authoritarian government. When the public is overwhelmed and exhausted, we’re less likely to challenge official narratives and more prone to complacency. In other words, burnout isn’t just a personal struggle—it’s a political outcome. Studies in cognitive psychology[1] suggest that information overload can decrease our capacity for critical thinking, making us more susceptible to manipulation.
Pennycook, Gordon et al. "The Psychology of Fake News." Trends in Cognitive Sciences, Volume 25, Issue 5, 388 - 402 ↩︎
To protect our democratic institutions, we need to acknowledge our fatigue, find ways to recharge[1], and then remain vigilant. Tuning out might feel like relief, but it ultimately opens the door wider for the very forces that rely on our disengagement.
I honestly think having a collective moment with Kendrick Lamar during the Halftime show at the Superbowl was a great cathartic moment for a lot of us (I don't even know sports OR Lamar and I still appreciate the emotion and poetic justice of his halftime show). ↩︎
The Bottom Line: Are We Complicit?
We are, in effect, living through a war on factual reporting, exacerbated by an increasingly compromised media ecosystem. The real danger lies in our collective complacency. When protest movements are caricatured, when accountability is buried, and when entire communities are systematically delegitimized, it sets a precedent that can—and will—be used to justify future authoritarian measures.
What Can We Do?
- Diversify Information Sources
Seek out multiple outlets, including reputable independent or international news, to get a fuller picture (e.g., The Guardian, Al Jazeera, ProPublica, local investigative journalists). - Elevate Marginalized Voices
Pay attention to journalists and activists who have been sidelined or mischaracterized. They often report on stories mainstream media ignores. For instance, Kate Starbird’s work at UW shows how crucial citizen reporting can be in crisis scenarios. - Stay Connected With Your Community
Talk to friends, family, and neighbors who might not be clued into the same conversations. Share credible information and offer context. Personal engagement can break the isolation of echo chambers. - Scrutinize Language
Headlines and phrasing matter. Notice when passive voice is used to obscure responsibility or when protestors are described with bias-laden terminology. - Support Accountability Efforts
Whenever possible, lend your voice, platform, or resources to initiatives that call out misinformation—whether it’s on social media or in local communities. Consider supporting nonpartisan fact-checking organizations and investigative reporting outlets. - Figure Out Your Form of Protest
Staying informed is essential, but it’s only the first step. Whether it’s participating in demonstrations, engaging in local organizing, volunteering with community groups, or contacting legislators, find tangible ways to act. We can’t just read about the news. We need to do something about it. - Manage Your Own Burnout
Find a balance between staying informed and preserving your mental health. Step away from the constant feed when necessary, but don’t abandon the conversation entirely.
Ultimately, the question becomes: Are we willing to confront how our news is shaped, or are we content to let the algorithm—and the most powerful (or loud) voices in the room—decide what we believe? The next time you see a misleading headline, take a moment to question who benefits from that slant. The fight for truthful reporting is, in many ways, the fight for a functioning democracy. And right now, democracy could use all the help it can get.
If you found this post useful, I’d love for you to share it on social media and invite others to join the conversation. Don’t forget to subscribe to my blog for more reflections, stories, and critical takes delivered straight to your inbox. Let’s build a community where joy and connection thrive!
Member discussion