Public health in the era of misinformation and disinformation
Year: 2025
Type: article
Abstract: The digital era has transformed public health communication into a high-stakes balancing act. As misinformation and disinformation proliferate, health authorities face unprecedented challenges in maintaining public trust while adapting to the dynamic nature of scientific evidence. This plenary will explore how the public health community can uphold scientific integrity, communicate uncertainty with humility, and counter harmful narratives-without compromising the boldness required to drive meaningful action. The dual crisis erosion of trust and ideological polarization Public health institutions are navigating a landscape where facts increasingly compete with ideology. The COVID-19 pandemic laid bare the vulnerabilities and exposed the fragility of health communication systems: rapidly evolving guidelines, shifting recommendations, conflicting expert opinions, and politicized debates eroded public confidence and contributed to public skepticism. Today, misinformation thrives not only on social media but also through targeted disinformation campaigns that exploit emotional narratives and systemic inequities. Vulnerable populations-those with limited health literacy or preexisting distrust in institutions-are disproportionately affected, exacerbating disparities. Science, uncertainty, and controversy Scientific inquiry is inherently dynamic and iterative, yet this process often clashes with public expectations for definitive answers, meaning that its provisional nature can be at odds with public expectations for certainty. Two forms of controversy demand attention: 1. Divergent perspectives among researchers: Differences in methodologies, theoretical frameworks, or interpretations of data can lead to legitimate disagreements. For example, debates over screening guidelines or treatment protocols often reflect trade-offs between individual and population-level outcomes. 2. Evolving evidence: New discoveries can upend previous consensus, as seen with shifting understandings of COVID-19 transmission or vaccine efficacy. While this flexibility is a strength of science, it risks being mischaracterized as incompetence or dishonesty. These controversies underscore the need for transparency. Acknowledging uncertainty, while explaining how evidence is weighed, can mitigate perceptions of inconsistency. Openly discussing the process by which evidence is generated, evaluated, and sometimes revised can help demystify science and reduce perceptions of arbitrariness. Strategies for humble and bold communication Effective public health communication in this climate requires both humility and resolve: 1. Normalize uncertainty: Frame uncertainty as inherent to scientific progress. For instance, instead of dismissing past guidelines, clarify how new data refined recommendations. 2. Anticipate, address, and prebunk misinformation: Proactively address common myths by equipping audiences with critical thinking tools, improving systems with an emphasis on preemptive messaging to reduce susceptibility to false claims. 3. Leverage trusted messengers: Collaborate with community leaders, healthcare providers, and influencers who resonate with specific demographics. Trust is built through cultural relevance and consistency. 4. Prioritize clarity, accessibility, and nuance: Use straightforward, plain language and clear explanations to convey complex information without oversimplifying and to explain risk-benefit analyses and evidence hierarchies. Avoid absolutist language that may later require retraction. A call to action for EUPHA and beyond This plenary marks the launch of EUPHA’s long-term initiative and sustained commitment to strengthen public health communication ecosystems. Panelists will be invited to: 1. Share practical experiences in managing scientific controversies and public scepticism. 2. Share case studies on navigating controversies (e.g., vaccine hesitancy, climate health policies). 3. Explore innovative tools for monitoring and countering misinformation, such as AI-driven misinformation monitoring or participatory community dialogues. 4. Reflect on personal experiences where humility in communication preserved trust during crises, particularly in moments of uncertainty or evolving evidence. The session will prioritize interactive dialogue, recognizing that solutions must be co-created with diverse stakeholders. Post-conference, EUPHA will establish working groups to develop practical, actionable frameworks for addressing misinformation, training health professionals in risk communication, and advocating for evidence-informed policy. Moderators Charlotte Marchandise Executive Director EUPHA Orkan Okan President EUPHA Health literacy section Speakers/Panellists Götz Gottschalk Head of Health, YouTube (Google), Germany Seema Yasmin Emmy Award-winning journalist, Clinical Assistant Professor, Medicine, Stanford University, USA Sanna Vesikansa Director, Crisis Services MIELI Mental Health, Finland
Author: Organised by: EUPHA
Language: English
Subfield: Sociology and Political Science
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: gold
Estimated APC paid: $3,181
OpenAlex ID: W7101387935