The many challenges of disinformation: The role of regulation, journalism, and freedom of opinion

There is a continuous slate of articles, features, and other coverage that tackle “disinformation” in light of the super election year of 2024. Again and again people are asking: Can targeted disinformation campaigns manipulate opinions and influence elections? We are obviously asking ourselves these questions, too. At the same time, we want to know in how far we might be stuck in our own “bubble” and whether society at large agrees. The results of our representative survey, which we’ve just published in our study “Disconcerted Public”, are as alarming as they motivate us (and people) to act.

In an increasingly digitised world, where information is abundant and the distinction between true and false often murky, the spread of disinformation is threatening democracy and social cohesion. Our study results are unfortunately strikingly clear: concerns and an awareness of the threat of disinformation has arrived in all parts of society, both in Germany and the U.S. An overwhelming majority of respondents considers disinformation a serious problem for democracy and social cohesion. Most notably, respondents point to the connection between disinformation and the manipulation of political opinion, the influence on elections and the division of society.

Trust and controversies in the digital realm

There is a snag in digital spaces: It is worrisome that almost half of all respondents is unsure about the veracity of information online and one third indicates encounters with disinformation in the last few months. Respondents are most likely to encounter disinformation on social media, but also on blogs and news sites as well as messenger services, such as WhatsApp or Telegram. TikTok, X (Twitter) and Facebook present the highest rate of disinformation. Topics, such as immigration, climate crises, health, warfare as well as elections, are identified most often.

Protest groups, activists, bloggers, influencers, and political actors, both domestic and foreign, are most often assumed to be perpetrators and people responsible for the spread of disinformation.

Trust in the media appears to be decisive: Respondents with low trust in the media are more likely to consider disinformation politically motivated and used for discrediting opponents, and they are more susceptible to encountering disinformation. There is an urgent need to act here to strengthen people’s trust in the media landscape and increase resilience in countering disinformation.

The U.S., polarisation and what might be in store for the German public

The comparison with the U.S. public shows that people are both more disconcerted and encounter disinformation even more frequently. Debates are more polarised, and people are significantly more likely to suspect the other political camp as the aggressor. This highlights the global dimension of the problem and underscores the need to collaborate across borders to manage this challenge. On that note, regulation has an important part to play: Disinformation must be researched, detected, and demonetised. For that, we require platforms to be more transparent and assume larger responsibility. At the same time, it is crucial to adopt a proportionate approach, which counters manipulation and false information but does not infringe on freedom of expression. The European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA) could be a trendsetter here.

The comparison and our results also show how important it is to strengthen trustworthy and reliable sources of information. Quality journalism that is based on facts and takes different perspectives into account is an effective antidote to manipulation and polarisation. On the one hand, journalists must be able to continue to fulfil their responsibility to actively expose disinformation and inform the public about its effects. At the same time, we must strengthen trust in the media and promote an independent and pluralistic media landscape. This is the only way to ensure that citizens receive reliable information and are able to recognise and counter disinformation. An informed public is the best defence against disinformation and manipulation.

What happens next?

The results of this study also highlight the need for a broad societal discourse on how to counter disinformation and improve our political debating culture. In doing so, we must ensure that regulatory measures do not restrict freedom of expression but offer balanced protection against manipulation.

Overall, it is crucial that political parties, governments, the media and everyone communicate transparently, seriously and truthfully to minimise the scope for ambiguity and uncertainty. Only then, can we effectively counter disinformation campaigns and protect fundamental democratic values.

The study provides a wealth of representative data. Anyone wishing to examine the links between trust in the media and political leaning, between the use of different networks and the perception of disinformation, can find many relevant pointers here. In view of the upcoming state elections in Germany this year, there is certainly value in developing even more targeted recommendations for action.

Click here to download the study and here for the press release.