Why false claims by disinformers should not be reproduced without verification: they are not opinions, they are hoaxes

The battle against pseudoscientific nonsense and health disinformation has been more important than ever in recent months. At Maldita.es, we believe that critical thinking and education are the best cure for these fallacies, but in the meantime, journalism with the help of the community is the vaccine to ensure, together, that we are not fooled by lies.

They are not opinions, they are disinformation

After the false claims made by Victoria Abril, who was awarded the Feroz de Honor 2021, went viral, the president of the awards, María Guerra, published a tweet asserting that they did not share «Victoria Abril’s opinion» at all. However, describing the actress’s falsehoods as an “opinion” implies that they are simply another viewpoint on COVID-19 vaccines, when in reality, they are nothing more than disinformation.

As we have already reported at Maldita Ciencia, vaccines have proven to be effective in reducing the impact of the pandemic. Proof of this is this study carried out in Israel, the country with the highest number of doses administered to date per 100 people, according to Our World in Data. This data collection, published in The New England Journal of Medicine, was done with more than one million subjects comparing those vaccinated with the two doses of Pfizer/BioNTech’s coronavirus vaccine to those who were not. Seven days after the second dose, COVID-19 hospitalizations decreased by 87% and symptomatic infections by 94%. Meanwhile, the study estimates that mortality is reduced by 72%.

Moreover, vaccines must undergo research phases before they are approved, including the testing phases with patients (clinical phases 2 and 3). In these stages, the double-blind technique is used: some patients are given a placebo and/or the reference drug, and others, the drug. Neither the patients nor the doctors know who belongs to which group until the end. The three vaccines administered in the EU (Pfizer, Moderna, and AstraZeneca) have already passed these phases. Once these phases are completed,

«the researchers have to explain what the manufacturing methods of the drug are and the facilities where it could be carried out and present it to the authorities (the European, the American, and the Japanese are the three most important), and they decide if the information collected is sufficient to market it or not,» as explained by clinical trial expert Roger Solanas to Maldita.es.

Repeating disinformation can make it be remembered as real 

According to this scientific article conducted by researchers from the School of Psychology at the University of Western Australia, a good way to reduce reliance on disinformation is to “minimize unnecessary explicit repetition” of those hoaxes.

“Repeating the myth before stating that it is false can increase the familiarity of that misconception, potentially increasing the risk that such misconceptions are mistakenly remembered as real,” they indicate.

Similarly, this study from the University of Toronto, the University of Michigan, and the University of Illinois maintains that

“repeating a claim without identifying its truth reinforces familiarity with it.”

Meanwhile, another research from the University of Illinois and the University of Pennsylvania indicates that “when in the process of elaboration (of the debunking) narratives of disinformation are organized, updated, and integrated” it can “create a network” of confirmations that stay in the readers’ memory. According to the researchers,

«such confirmations could be associated with the increase in the persistence of disinformation and with a weakening effect on the debunking”. The same research concludes that developing debunkings “in line with the disinformation reduces acceptance of the debunking message, making it difficult to eliminate false beliefs”.

In the face of lies that attack public health, journalism is not about interviewing “both sides”

Journalism has a responsibility in how it conducts verification: it cannot give the same weight to the person spreading the hoax as to the one debunking it with data, facts, and knowledge based on scientific evidence.

Interviewing a spreader of nonsense and then a scientist specialized in that area of knowledge means putting the two on the same level in the argument, giving the former a weight they do not deserve and, there, indeed, giving more visibility to their unfounded theories.

Journalism must be responsible and not give a voice to those who spread these hoaxes. On Friday, July 31, TVE’s Telediario picked up the statements of Natalia Prego, known for spreading false information about the pandemic, only to debunk them with statements from Juan Antonio López Guerrero, a biologist, and popularizer.

On August 31, Espejo Público interviewed Pilar Baselga, a known conspiracy theorist and pandemic denier. The program used our debunkings, but after years dedicated to this, we can say that lies should not be given a platform. That same day, Baselga also appeared on the program Todo es Mentira.

On September 8, TVE’s Telediario mentioned the alert from the Toxicological Information Service about the consumption of MMS, a toxic compound that does not cure COVID-19 (or anything), but included in its piece statements from Josep Pamiés, known for promoting its use against all scientific evidence. Pamiés has been sanctioned by the Generalitat for promoting the use of pseudotherapies to cure diseases.

Debunking as a vaccine

If we do not debunk them, if we do not appear in that search for the truth, those who disinform will end up convincing more and more people. Or at least creating doubts because of the conspiracy bombardment.

Our goal is for our debunkings to accompany their hoaxes so that we can vaccinate ourselves against them, and the sooner, the better. If our debunking reaches you before the hoax, we will have gained ground.

The most effective vaccine against lies is not us: it is critical thinking and the education of citizens in handling solid and reliable information. But that is a process that will take more time. In the meantime, fact-checking journalism along with the community is key to stopping the hoaxes.