Understanding Conspiracy Online: Social Media and the Spread of Suspicious Thinking
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5931/djim.v13i1.6928Keywords:
Conspiracy theories, echo chambers, Facebook, online social mediaAbstract
Even though the internet has dramatically changed the quantity and accessibility of information, there are large — and sometimes powerful — elements of society that are politically and emotionally invested in beliefs that are not supported by current evidence. These are generally referred to as “conspiracy theories”. Although this may be a pejorative term, to date there is no suitable neutral term, and the term conspiracy theory is used across multiple fields, ranging from computer science to cognitive science. In this paper I explore how conspiracy theories form, and how the internet has changed — or more frequently, not changed — the spread of conspiracy theories, in particular through social media networks such as Facebook or Twitter. Conspiracies theories spread much like scientific knowledge online, revealing that they are in some essences very similar constructs. The growth of user-specific filters and social exclusion are likely factors in the spread of these theories. Though some have argued to treat conspiracy theories as dangerous or harmful speech — such as in the case of vaccination refusal — I argue against limiting speech and instead suggest information literacy and a focus on analytical thinking as remedies. I also argue against further stigmatization of conspiracy theorists, as this will likely contribute to further radicalization.
References
Aupers, S. (2012). ‘Trust no one‘: Modernization, paranoia and conspiracy culture. European Journal of Communication, 27(1), 22–34. doi:10.1177/0267323111433566
Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science. doi:10.1126/science.aaa1160
Bessi, A., Coletto, M., Davidescu, G. A., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., & Quattrociocchi, W. (2015). Science vs conspiracy: Collective narratives in the age of misinformation. PLOS ONE, 10(2), e0118093. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118093
Bessi, A., Zollo, F., Del Vicario, M., Puliga, M., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., . . . Quattrociocchi, W. (2016). Users polarization on Facebook and YouTube. PLOS ONE, 11(8), 1–24. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0159641
Bode, L., & Vraga, E. K. (2015). In related news, that was wrong: The correction of misinformation through related stories functionality in social media. Journal of Communication, 65(4), 619–638. doi:10.1111/jcom.12166
Bricker, B. J. (2013). Climategate: A case study in the intersection of facticity and conspiracy theory. Communication Studies, 64(2), 218–239. doi:10.1080/10510974.2012.749294
deHaven-Smith, L., & Witt, M. T. (2013). Conspiracy theory reconsidered: Responding to mass suspicions of political criminality in high office. Administration & Society, 45(3), 267–295. doi:10.1177/0095399712459727
Del Vicario, M., Bessi, A., Zollo, F., Petroni, F., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., . . . Quattrociocchi, W. (2016). The spreading of misinformation online. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(3), 554–559. doi:10.1073/pnas.1517441113
Derek (2015). Anti-vaccine body count. Retrieved February 16, 2017 from http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com/
Einstein, K. L., & Glick, D. M. (2015). Do I think BLS data are BS? The consequences of conspiracy theories. Political Behavior, 37(3), 679–701. doi:10.1007/s11109-014-9287-z
Fisher, D. R., Waggle, J., & Jasny, L. (2015). Not a snowball's chance for science. Contexts, 14, 44–49. doi:10.1177/1536504215611896
Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016). Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80, 298–320. doi:10.1093/poq/nfw006
Fleck, F. (2014). Underlying issues are key to dispelling vaccine doubts. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 92(2), 84–85. doi:10.2471/BLT.14.030214
Frankel, T. (2015). Forget ‘anti-vaxxers.‘ The Disney measles outbreak could change the minds of an even more crucial group. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2015/01/26/forget-anti-vaxxers-the-disney-measles-outbreak-could-change-the-minds-of-an-even-more-crucial-group/?utm_term=.b7fc0dbea291
Graeupner, D., & Coman, A. (2016). The dark side of meaning-making: How social exclusion leads to superstitious thinking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2016.10.003
Harambam, J., & Aupers, S. (2015). Contesting epistemic authority: Conspiracy theories on the boundaries of science. Public Understanding of Science, 24(4), 466–480. doi:10.1177/0963662514559891
Himelboim, I., McCreery, S., & Smith, M. (2013). Birds of a feather tweet together: Integrating network and content analyses to examine cross-ideology exposure on twitter. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18(2), 40–60. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12001
Hofstadter, R. (1996). The paranoid style in American politics and other essays. Harvard University Press. Retrieved from http://blog.lix.cc/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Hofstadter-Paranoid-Style-American-Politics.pdf
Husting, G., & Orr, M. (2007). Dangerous machinery: Conspiracy theorist as a transpersonal strategy of exclusion. Symbolic Interaction, 30(2), 127–150. doi: 10.1525/si.2007.30.2.127
Jacobson, S., Myung, E., & Johnson, S. L. (2016). Open media or echo chamber: The use of links in audience discussions on the Facebook pages of partisan news organizations. Information, Communication & Society, 19(7), 875–891. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2015.1064461
Jong, W., & Dückers, M. L. A. (2016). Self-correcting mechanisms and echo-effects in social media: An analysis of the “gunman in the newsroom” crisis. Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 334–341. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.032
Kata, A. (2012). Anti-vaccine activists, web 2.0, and the postmodern paradigm–An overview of tactics and tropes used online by the anti-vaccination movement. Vaccine, 30(25), 3778–3789. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.11.112
Kopplin, Z. (2016). Trump met with prominent anti-vaccine activists during campaign. Science Magazine. doi: 10.1126/science.aal0407
Ledbetter, C. (2016). Neil deGrasse Tyson schools rapper B.o.B, who thinks the Earth is flat. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bob-says-earth-is-flat-neil-degrasse-tyson_us_56a65171e4b0d8cc109abcb7
Li, J. (2016) Vaccine refusal linked to recent U.S. measles outbreak, study suggests. CBC News. Retrieved February 16, 2017 from http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/vaccination-refusal-measles-outbreak-study-1.3490506
Loxton, D. (2014). Flat Earth?! The convoluted story of a flatly mistaken idea. Skeptic, 19(4), 64A, 64B, 65–73. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1643098333?accountid=10406
Martin, B. (2015). Censorship and free speech in scientific controversies. Science and Public Policy, 42(3), 377–386. doi:10.1093/scipol/scu061
Menchaca, F. (2012). The future is in doubt: Librarians, publishers, and networked learning in the 21st century. Journal of Library Administration, 52(5), 396–410. doi:10.1080/01930826.2012.700804
Messing, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2014). Selective exposure in the age of social media: Endorsements trump partisan source affiliation when selecting news online. Communication Research, 41(8), 1042–1063. doi:10.1177/0093650212466406
Mocanu, D., Rossi, L., Zhang, Q., Karsai, M., & Quattrociocchi, W. (2015). Collective attention in the age of (mis)information. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, Part B, 1198–1204. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.024
Nyhan, B. (2014). The myth of the ideological echo chamber. New York Times, 164(56666), 3–3. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=99042677&site=ehost-live
Parry, J. (2008). No vaccine for the scaremongers. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 86(6), 425–426.
Reyes, I., & Smith, J. K. (2014). What they don't want you to know about planet X: Surviving 2012 and the aesthetics of conspiracy rhetoric. Communication Quarterly, 62(4), 399–415. doi:10.1080/01463373.2014.922483
Sunstein, C. R., & Vermeule, A. (2009). Conspiracy theories: Causes and cures. Journal of Political Philosophy, 17(2), 202–227. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2008.00325.x
Swami, V., Voracek, M., Stieger, S., Tran, U. S., & Furnham, A. (2014). Analytic thinking reduces belief in conspiracy theories. Cognition, 133(3), 572–585. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.08.006
Tufekci, Z. (2015). Facebook said its algorithms do help form echo chambers, and the tech press missed it. NPQ: New Perspectives Quarterly, 32(3), 9–12. doi:10.1111/npqu.11519
van Prooijen, J. (2016). Sometimes inclusion breeds suspicion: Self-uncertainty and belongingness predict belief in conspiracy theories. European Journal of Social Psychology, 46(3), 267–279. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2157
Wiebe, T. J. (2015). The information literacy imperative in higher education. Liberal Education, 101/102(4/1), 52–57. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1777198877?accountid=10406
Wong, E. (2016). In sign of shifting roles, china gives U.S. a lecture on climate change. New York Times, pp. A16.
Wood, M. J., Douglas, K. M., & Sutton, R. M. (2012). Dead and alive: Beliefs in contradictory conspiracy theories. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(6), 767–773. doi:10.1177/1948550611434786
Zollo, F., Novak, P. K., Del Vicario, M., Bessi, A., Mozetič, I., Scala, A., . . . Quattrociocchi, W. (2015). Emotional dynamics in the age of misinformation. PLOS ONE, 10(9), 1–22. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0138740
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Papers published in the Dalhousie Journal of Interdisciplinary Management must be the original, unpublished work of the author. Contributors are responsible for obtaining any copyright clearances required in relation to their work.
Authors submitting a paper to the Dalhousie Journal of Interdisciplinary Management automatically agree to grant a limited license to DJIM if and when the manuscript is accepted for publication. This license gives permission for DJIM to publish the paper in a given issue and to maintain the work in the electronic journal archive. DJIM also submits issues to institutional repositories and Open Access repositories.
Contributors agree to each reader accessing, downloading, or printing one copy of their article for their own personal use or research. All other copyrights remain with the author, subject to the requirements that any republication of the work be accompanied by an acknowledgement that the work was first published in the Dalhousie Journal of Interdisciplinary Management and that the DJIM Editorial Chair must be notified of any republication of a work first published in DJIM.
Dalhousie Journal of Interdisciplinary Management
c/o School of Information Management
Faculty of Management
Dalhousie University
Kenneth C. Rowe Management Building
6100 University Avenue
Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 3J5
Canada
Email: djim@dal.ca
Authors should recognize that, because of the nature of the Internet, the publisher has no control over unauthorized copying or editing of protected works.
