By Jeremy Wright

 

(Mis/Dis)information in History

As discussed more thoroughly in the article Climate Change Misinformation, Disinformation, and Fake News, there are a few key differences between these three forms of communication. First, Misinformation is any incorrect information whether it was a mistake or a lie. Disinformation is a little different as it refers to incorrect information that was intentionally created and released to manipulate the truth. Finally, fake news has nothing to do with the intention behind the release or accuracy of the message, but instead refers to any misinformation or disinformation that looks like traditional journalism (e.g., news broadcasts, magazines, or radio). These three terms are very similar, yet have distinct definitions that outline them as unique concepts.

​

(Mis/Dis)information and fake news have a history that goes long and wide. Almost 2000 years ago in an early Western context, Ceasar Augustus, the first ruler of the Roman Empire, used (mis/dis)information about military and political rivals to secure his position as emperor (BBC, 2022). Looking to the East, around 2500 years ago Sun Tzu, a Chinese philosopher and military strategist, wrote The Art of War. In the book he suggests that deception is key to winning wars and being a successful ruler (Tzu, 475-221 BCE/2010). Jumping ahead to the 16th century, Niccolo Machiavelli continued the tradition and wrote The Price as a book of suggestions for the Medici family of Italian monarchs. One of Machiavelli’s key points was that skillfully using (mis/dis)information is an effective, and necessary, way to shape the beliefs and actions of the population to fit the will of a ruler (Machiavelli, 1532/1992).

​

In the early 20th century, a man named Edward Bernays (also known as the “father of propaganda”) modernized marketing by including psychological concepts developed by his uncle, Sigmund Freud (Curtis, 2014). In his early career, Bernays consulted with governments and businesses from a variety of sectors to accomplish public messaging goals. By applying his understanding of Freudian psychology (i.e., the unconscious desire to maximise pleasure and minimise discomfort) to mass messaging, Bernays was able to shift public opinions and amass support for all sorts of products and government actions. For example, one of his most famous campaigns was called “Torches of Freedom” and was run for the American Tobacco Company in the late 1920’s. In their mission to increase the number of smokers in the US, Bernays opened fake news companies and released advertisements about a staged protest. The social norm at the time held that smoking was “unladylike” and so Bernays and his colleagues staged a protest of young women standing up to the patriarchy by “lighting their torches of freedom.” The messaging was that if women started smoking cigarettes, just like men, they would be empowered in a patriarchal society. And it worked. Cigarette sales increased dramatically almost over night, leading to some of the worst chronic health outcomes in history. 

 

Some of the most common techniques utilized by Bernays, and those who follow his teachings, are to frame messaging with highly emotional and impactful wording when discussing specific topics, manufacture expert testimonials, and release figures that suggest high popularity amongst the population even if there is little to none. To apply this strategy effectively, Bernays did things like pioneer the use of celebrity representatives for products like Ford trucks and make-up, and was also the first to hire doctors to provide recommendations for a product (e.g., “3 out of 4 doctors recommend eating bacon for breakfast”). By associating products with celebrities, for example, Bernays established public trust and changed consumer behaviour because people emotionally connect to entertainers. With that emotional connection, consumers become easier to convince.  

 

Since the 1920’s, and continued to this day, Bernays’ strategies have been used by tobacco companies, the food industry, as well as coal mining and fossil fuel advocates. Marketing firms and other interests use these strategies to do something referred to as “doubt-creation.” In these instances, doubt is created by releasing disinformation that obscures public opinions about one topic or another. In the case of climate change, these tactics are often employed to sew doubt about the environmental impacts caused by human industry, making it easier for polluters to continue to harm the planet (Oreskes & Conway, 2011; Supran & Oreskes, 2020). 

​

Origins of Climate Change Disinformation

Climate change (mis/dis)information is particularly dangerous because there are widespread consequences that affect so many things. To illustrate the gravity of climate change (mis/dis)information, many scholars have described it as one of the greatest threats to everyone and everything on Earth (Traberg & van der Linden, 2022; Ecker et al., 2022; Lazer et al., 2018). 

​

Following WWII, the exponential growth of industrialization and the development of globalism motivated the use of disinformation campaigns about climate change. These campaigns were used to increase profits by rapidly expanding energy production, large factory facilities, and transportation without resistance from government or the public. Since then, multiple other corporate interests have successfully utilized climate denial campaigns and created doubt in both the scientific evidence and the experts who collect it.

​

Modern climate change misinformation and the use of disinformation to create public doubt toward climate science has been around for a long time. Recent research unearthed internal documents showing that early research into oil and gas found that increasing levels of CO2 by burning fossil fuels would create a greenhouse effect that traps solar radiation, increasing average global temperatures over time. These corporate communications planning climate denial campaigns go back as far as the early 1950’s (Dunlap & Jacques, 2013; Supran et al., 2023; Supran & Oreskes, 2017). For example, ExxonMobil was found to have identified the environmental threat of burning high levels of fossil fuels as early as 1954. Because of the inevitable backlash of poisoning everything on Earth, ExxonMobil constructed a series of media campaigns to discredit any opposition to the expansion of the oil and gas industries by establishing doubt in the science (Supran & Oreskes, 2017). 

​

Types of Climate Change Misinformation 

Climate change disinformation tends to come in two main forms—outright denial of the rapid changes in the global climate, and the rejection of human activity being the cause of these changes. An example of a climate change denial narrative is that changes in weather activity and natural ecosystems are part of the natural cycles that the Earth goes through. Another example of climate change disinformation can be found by looking at multiple campaigns performed by the public relations consultation firm Hill & Knowlton (Oreskes & Conway, 2011). 

Hill & Knowlton were colleagues of Bernays and have been honing Bernaysian techniques for the fossil fuels industry since the 1980’s. They do so by using disinformation about the scientific evidence that is framed with emotions and fake expert opinions to produce doubt in the fact that humans are causing the climate to change at an unsustainable rate. However, 97% of actively publishing climate scientists and 99% of all published research confirms ExxonMobil’s early conclusions that burning fossil fuels is detrimental to the health and wellbeing of those that rely on planet Earth (Cook et al., 2016; Lynas et al., 2021; Myers et al., 2021). 

​

Even though the vast majority of scientific evidence suggests climate change is real and existentially threatening, many people still believe the disinformation and inhibit the move toward sustainability.

 

Conclusion

Let’s recap! First, misinformation, disinformation, and fake news are similar yet different in important ways. The history of (mis/dis)information does back thousands of years, with similar conceptualizations coming from around the world and throughout human history. Early Western rulers, Eastern philosophers, Renaissance writers, and modern marketing experts all discuss the use of inaccurate messaging as an efficient way to skew perceptions, influence peoples’ psychology, and shape their understanding of the world. And by extension, these messages manipulate peoples’ behaviour. 

​

In the case of climate change, disinformation is often used to discredit scientists and the evidence they produce as a way to make the population doubt that moving toward sustainability  is necessary. By using emotional headlines, fake experts, and faux popularity then consultation firms, fossil fuel companies, and politicians are able to skew what we know to be true about how the Earth is changing. When it comes to climate change (mis/dis)information, everyone is susceptible because those who release it are using psychological science to get into peoples’ heads.

​

 So, what do we do about climate change (mis/dis)information? We watch out, consider what is behind all climate change messages, and pay attention to the science!!