Online conversations about Ozempic and similar medications are full of misinformation — and echo decades of flawed teachings on weight management.

How did an incident in a small village in Vijayapura snowball into an issue of national interest?

The role of podcasts in the information ecosystem has gone largely unexamined. While alt-right figures have been increasingly chased off Facebook and Twitter, podcasting is shaping up as the next arena where the fight over questionable or dangerous content will play out. However, the problem of how to moderate audio content is proving thorny.

As podcasting grows in stature and revenue, its disinformation problem can’t be ignored.

[Capital FM] Nairobi -- Athletics Kenya (AK) director of youth development Barnaba Korir has bemoaned the increasing mistrust certain athletes have towards the federation.

[The Conversation Africa] We're increasingly aware of how misinformation can influence elections. About 73% of Americans report seeing misleading election news, and about half struggle to discern what is true or false.

In this episode we read Esther 3:13a-g, 5:1-13 LXX, and 8:12a-I, considering the royal decrees of the king, the dramatic scene where Esther enters his presence without invitation, and the misinformation about the Jewish people which he finally rejects. We are helped in seeing the significance of these fascinating scenes by recourse to Psalm 85/6, Phil 2:5-11, and 1 Timothy 2:1-2

Aim/Purpose: The paper discusses various factors contributing to disagreements, such as differing experiences, perspectives, and historical narratives, leading to disagreements within families and societies. It explores how beliefs, values, and biases feed into disagreements, with confirmation bias affecting decision-making and the media. Cultural values also play a role, showcasing conflicts between meritocracy and inclusivity in ethical decision-making. Haidt's Moral Foundations Theory highlights differences in value priorities between Western and Eastern societies. The impact of Western values like rationalism, freedom, and tolerance, under threat from Marxist illiberalism on campuses, is dis-cussed. The text also delves into disinformation, emotions in warfare, and the use of fake information and images for propaganda purposes. The need for diligent reporting to avoid spreading disinformation is emphasized, given its potential to create misconceptions and harm diplomatic relations.

Fines of up to 5% of global revenue could be imposed on tech companies for failing to curb spread of misinformation.

The election is over, but rumors, lies and misinformation are here to stay. MPR News host Angela Davis talks about the role misinformation played in the election and how we can protect ourselves from it.

Small and medium-sized businesses (SMBs) in the UK are facing significant challenges in today’s digital landscape, with misinformation, fake reviews and inadequate search and engagement tools putting them at a serious disadvantage compared to larger competitors.

We are pleased to announce that the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are exploring ways to mobilize our expertise to counter misinformation on the web related to science, engineering, and health.

National Academies host three events to explore ways to expand the reach of accurate science and health information online

As vaccination campaigns begin ramping up around the world, experts discuss how variants, misinformation, and “brain drain” are affecting pandemic-control efforts.

The U.S. surgeon general has released a public advisory calling misinformation a “serious threat to public health.” The National Academies have been addressing misinformation in health and science on multiple fronts and are taking steps to help cultivate a fact- and evidence-based information environment.

Nobel Prize laureates and other esteemed experts and leaders will gather at “Truth, Trust and Hope” for a global dialogue on how to stop misinformation from eroding public trust in science. Hosted by NAS and the Nobel Foundation, the summit takes place May 24-26 in Washington, D.C., and virtually.

Registration is now open for the Nobel Prize Summit “Truth, Trust and Hope,” a global conversation on how to stop misinformation from eroding public trust in science. Hosted by NAS and the Nobel Foundation, the summit takes place May 24-26 in Washington, D.C., and virtually.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – NAB President and CEO Curtis LeGeyt was the featured speaker at The Media Institute's "Free Speech America" Gala last night. The event corresponded with Free Speech Week, the nationwide annual celebration of America’s constitutional guarantees of free speech and freedom of the press that runs October 16-22.

The government is instructing social media companies what should and shouldn't be allowed to be on the internet, these are the people least competent to judge what is misinformation. Continue reading →

CBC Winnipeg News host Brittany Greenslade speaks with Canadian gynecologist Dr. Jen Gunter, who is part of a Tuesday panel discussion about health misinformation and how to separate fact from fiction. It's part of Together Against Misinformation Week, a nationwide event that runs until Nov. 17.

Advances in generative AI mean fake images, videos, audio and bots are now everywhere. But studies have revealed the best ways to tell if something is real

A debating technique known as the "truth sandwich" is helping archaeologists combat a false narrative about an advanced ancient civilisation forgotten in human history

Advances in generative AI mean fake images, videos, audio and bots are now everywhere. But studies have revealed the best ways to tell if something is real

As misinformation about the upcoming US elections rockets across social media, creating chaos, companies need to be honest about where this content is coming from, says Annalee Newitz

“Going viral” appears to be more than just a catchphrase when it comes to the rampant spread of misinformation

Last month when Google introduced its new AI search tool, called AI Overviews, the company seemed confident that it had tested the tool sufficiently, noting in the announcement that “people have already used AI Overviews billions of times through our experiment in Search Labs.” The tool doesn’t just return links to Web pages, as in a typical Google search, but returns an answer that it has generated based on various sources, which it links to below the answer. But immediately after the launch users began posting examples of extremely wrong answers, including a pizza recipe that included glue and the interesting fact that a dog has played in the NBA.

Renée DiResta has been tracking online misinformation for many years as the technical research manager at Stanford’s Internet Observatory.

While the pizza recipe is unlikely to convince anyone to squeeze on the Elmer’s, not all of AI Overview’s extremely wrong answers are so obvious—and some have the potential to be quite harmful. Renée DiResta has been tracking online misinformation for many years as the technical research manager at Stanford’s Internet Observatory and has a new book out about the online propagandists who “turn lies into reality.” She has studied the spread of medical misinformation via social media, so IEEE Spectrum spoke to her about whether AI search is likely to bring an onslaught of erroneous medical advice to unwary users.

I know you’ve been tracking disinformation on the Web for many years. Do you expect the introduction of AI-augmented search tools like Google’s AI Overviews to make the situation worse or better?

Renée DiResta: It’s a really interesting question. There are a couple of policies that Google has had in place for a long time that appear to be in tension with what’s coming out of AI-generated search. That’s made me feel like part of this is Google trying to keep up with where the market has gone. There’s been an incredible acceleration in the release of generative AI tools, and we are seeing Big Tech incumbents trying to make sure that they stay competitive. I think that’s one of the things that’s happening here.

We have long known that hallucinations are a thing that happens with large language models. That’s not new. It’s the deployment of them in a search capacity that I think has been rushed and ill-considered because people expect search engines to give them authoritative information. That’s the expectation you have on search, whereas you might not have that expectation on social media.

There are plenty of examples of comically poor results from AI search, things like how many rocks we should eat per day [a response that was drawn for an Onion article]. But I’m wondering if we should be worried about more serious medical misinformation. I came across one blog post about Google’s AI Overviews responses about stem-cell treatments. The problem there seemed to be that the AI search tool was sourcing its answers from disreputable clinics that were offering unproven treatments. Have you seen other examples of that kind of thing?

DiResta: I have. It’s returning information synthesized from the data that it’s trained on. The problem is that it does not seem to be adhering to the same standards that have long gone into how Google thinks about returning search results for health information. So what I mean by that is Google has, for upwards of 10 years at this point, had a search policy called Your Money or Your Life. Are you familiar with that?

I don’t think so.

DiResta: Your Money or Your Life acknowledges that for queries related to finance and health, Google has a responsibility to hold search results to a very high standard of care, and it’s paramount to get the information correct. People are coming to Google with sensitive questions and they’re looking for information to make materially impactful decisions about their lives. They’re not there for entertainment when they’re asking a question about how to respond to a new cancer diagnosis, for example, or what sort of retirement plan they should be subscribing to. So you don’t want content farms and random Reddit posts and garbage to be the results that are returned. You want to have reputable search results.

That framework of Your Money or Your Life has informed Google’s work on these high-stakes topics for quite some time. And that’s why I think it’s disturbing for people to see the AI-generated search results regurgitating clearly wrong health information from low-quality sites that perhaps happened to be in the training data.

So it seems like AI overviews is not following that same policy—or that’s what it appears like from the outside?

DiResta: That’s how it appears from the outside. I don’t know how they’re thinking about it internally. But those screenshots you’re seeing—a lot of these instances are being traced back to an isolated social media post or a clinic that’s disreputable but exists—are out there on the Internet. It’s not simply making things up. But it’s also not returning what we would consider to be a high-quality result in formulating its response.

I saw that Google responded to some of the problems with a blog post saying that it is aware of these poor results and it’s trying to make improvements. And I can read you the one bullet point that addressed health. It said, “For topics like news and health, we already have strong guardrails in place. In the case of health, we launched additional triggering refinements to enhance our quality protections.” Do you know what that means?

DiResta: That blog posts is an explanation that [AI Overviews] isn’t simply hallucinating—the fact that it’s pointing to URLs is supposed to be a guardrail because that enables the user to go and follow the result to its source. This is a good thing. They should be including those sources for transparency and so that outsiders can review them. However, it is also a fair bit of onus to put on the audience, given the trust that Google has built up over time by returning high-quality results in its health information search rankings.

I know one topic that you’ve tracked over the years has been disinformation about vaccine safety. Have you seen any evidence of that kind of disinformation making its way into AI search?

DiResta: I haven’t, though I imagine outside research teams are now testing results to see what appears. Vaccines have been so much a focus of the conversation around health misinformation for quite some time, I imagine that Google has had people looking specifically at that topic in internal reviews, whereas some of these other topics might be less in the forefront of the minds of the quality teams that are tasked with checking if there are bad results being returned.

What do you think Google’s next moves should be to prevent medical misinformation in AI search?

DiResta: Google has a perfectly good policy to pursue. Your Money or Your Life is a solid ethical guideline to incorporate into this manifestation of the future of search. So it’s not that I think there’s a new and novel ethical grounding that needs to happen. I think it’s more ensuring that the ethical grounding that exists remains foundational to the new AI search tools.

Social media has become a significant source of health-related content. But while it connects people to news, updates, […]

As Latino voters are a key voting bloc in the 2024 presidential election in battleground states like Nevada, Arizona and Pennsylvania, they have been targeted by a rise in Spanish-language misinformation. Most of the false messaging disparages Kamala Harris and supports Donald Trump, says Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Maria Hinojosa, host of Latino USA, which investigated the phenomenon in a new episode called “The Misinformation Web.” She interviewed some of the content creators in this “blob” of online vitriol and says there is almost no effective content moderation online, nor many reliable fact-checking sources in Spanish to counter the lies.

The accounts are part of pro-Trump and pro-Harris networks sharing each other’s content multiple times a day.

Teenagers and young adults rely on TikTok for information. However, a new study reveals that TikTok provides misinformation on sexual education. The

Storied investor Vinod Khosla, founder and partner at Khosla Ventures, and more recently one of the first checks into OpenAI, veered off topic during a Monday interview at TechCrunch Disrupt 2024 focused on the future of AI. After talking about AI’s future and risks, he took a moment to deliver a stringent warning about the […]

© 2024 TechCrunch. All rights reserved. For personal use only.

Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press, 2022.

Lanham : Rowman & Littlefield, [2023]

Maria Ressa spoke with Steven Levy at WIRED25 about the numerous trumped-up charges facing her and her publication, Rappler, and the terrible power Facebook can have when used by bad actors.

Renée DiResta of the Stanford Internet Observatory shares how people can balance the freedom of sharing information while engaging in healthy discourse.

The Duke of Sussex talks about misinformation before the digital age and how it has affected him and his family personally.

One of the most important things to learn is that misinformation and especially disinformation do not just affect us cognitively, they affect us emotionally. They often trigger an emotional response. They can make us outraged or angry, and self-righteous. And this can activate us to do something, like press the share button. Tuning in to our emotions, to how information makes us feel, can help us recognize when someone might be trying to manipulate us into becoming part of their disinformation campaign.

National Bureau of Economic Research

In the closing weeks of his 2024 campaign, Mr. Trump aired false claims about weather manipulation and government assistance after hurricanes hit North Carolina, a swing state

The danger of Donald Trump’s leadership lies in his willingness to exploit and manipulate information to achieve his goals

We are pleased to announce that the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are exploring ways to mobilize our expertise to counter misinformation on the web related to science, engineering, and health.