Editorial
Volume 1, Issue 1
Volume 1, Issue 1 Editorial
For the scope of this publication, we use the term “misinformation” to refer to all kinds of false or inaccurate information, independently from the fact that such information was deliberately created and spread to deceive. Then, misinformation can take many forms. It can be a coordinated, online campaign that targets fragile communities with false or misleading information for political or economic gains. A “misinformed public” can hold a series of misconceptions about a natural phenomenon, because of fear, lack of knowledge, or identity dynamics. Artificial intelligence (AI) can play a big role in the diffusion of misinformation, or it can be irrelevant. A misinformation campaign can start offline and get amplified online, or vice-versa. Often, both mainstream and fringe media can help this amplification process (voluntarily or involuntarily). Pieces of misinformation can spread fast or gain traction over time. They can quickly lose relevance and have limited impact on behavior, or endure for long periods of time. Misinformation can be promoted widely, or be hidden in closed, invite-only groups. One thing is certain: misinformation is a messy, old problem, that got even messier with the widespread adoption of the Internet and information technologies.
It seems unreasonable to think that we will ever eradicate misinformation for good, online or offline. Indeed, we might agree that lies and deceptions are integral parts of human communication. What we can do, instead, is to work together to build and maintain a response strategy (or multiple, parallel ones) that can to some extent prevent or reduce harmful lies and deceptions from spreading unchecked, keeping misinformation to an “acceptable level” (whatever that might look like). Of course, such a strategy requires interventions at many levels: legal, political, financial, infrastructural, cultural, and social. The goal of the HKS Misinformation Review is to peer-review, share, and organize empirical, specialized research on all aspects of misinformation, which will help us conceptualize and design what this strategy might be.
To maximize our chances of success, we introduced a few innovations into the scholarly communication process. At the HKS Misinformation Review, we are committed to reviewing and publishing scientific articles approximately one month after submission, on a rolling basis. Our “fast review” process enables us to disseminate critical insights in time to contribute to solutions to this rapidly evolving problem. Our editors edit all articles to make sure that the language is accessible to wide audiences and that the practical applications of the research we publish clearly stand out. We strive to make scholarly research accessible to non-specialists and useful to scholars and practitioners alike. We also encourage scholars to adopt interdisciplinary research approaches to the study of misinformation (for this reason, we assembled a quite interdisciplinary Editorial Board).
Our work is just beginning, and much more is left to be done. In the upcoming months, we will release special calls for urgent topics (e.g., elections), specific methodologies (e.g., “digital trace ethnographies” of online misinformation), and other research products (e.g., book and literature reviews). Following on our success as co-organizers of the Comparative Approaches to Disinformation conference, we are working on hosting new conferences and talks on different aspects of the misinformation phenomenon, in collaboration with non-academic communities (journalists, policymakers, civil society organizations, etc.).
Not only is there a lot left to be done, but there is also a lot left to be learned. As researchers, we haven’t quite figured out how to produce highly quality research on misinformation without risking harm to users and our credibility as experts. As editors, our biggest challenge is also the most fundamental one: to decide when it is appropriate to label a piece of information as “misinformation,” and when it is not. We felt this responsibility deeply while putting together this first issue. In some cases, such decisions were easier than in others. We tried to minimize harm by asking authors not to overstate their findings and be clear about how definitions were constructed. Still, this is not enough. Going forward, we need to face the growing need for interdisciplinary collaborations and, specifically, for collaboration between misinformation experts and “domain experts,” who can consult about the truthfulness and complexities of the claims and facts under analysis. Finally, there is an urgent need to re-think the way we write, visualize, and present research products. While preparing this first issue we learned many important lessons on how to enhance clarity, and we are now preparing glossaries and other tools to help researchers “translate” their work into more accessible English.
Going forward, we hope that this journal will help the fast-growing network of researchers working on all aspects of misinformation to organize and gain traction for their research. On the other hand, we invite professionals whose work is somehow impacted by misinformation (from digital platforms to lawmakers) to consult the HKS Misinformation Review as a resource to learn more about how misinformation works and, as a result, make informed decisions to counteract it.
Special thanks to our funders the Ford and Knight Foundations, to Claire Wardle and Nicco Mele, who first envisioned this project and gave us the opportunity and responsibility to lead it, and to the Shorenstein Center’s team and leadership for their incredible support and friendship.
Happy reading!