Health communicators face the persistent challenge of balancing correcting misinformation with the risk of amplifying claims that audiences might not have noticed otherwise. As KFF’s President and CEO, Drew Altman noted in a previous column, reporters and communicators “likely [have] no choice when [politicians] spread false information but to cover it and correct the lies in the process, but there are choices to be made about how it’s done.” This tension was recently illustrated when President Donald Trump briefly shared, and later deleted, an AI-generated video on Truth Social that falsely alleged “medbeds,” a fake technology featured in a long-standing conspiracy theory, could cure all diseases and reverse aging. Although the video was deleted and widely debunked by mainstream media, like ABC, CNN, MSNBC, and Forbes, coverage and discussion briefly amplified the claim, exposing new audiences and sustaining its circulation. In this example, most of the coverage and online posts criticized or shared background on the claim, but coverage and attention intended to correct or criticize misinformation to an audience that was previously unaware of it can extend the claim’s reach and persistence.
Several mechanisms contribute to amplification risks when reporting on or criticizing a claim:
Aussie cricket coach Andrew McDonald has rejected suggestions from England that Scott Boland could be a major weakness for the Australians in the Ashes. Boland looks set to play a huge role in the ...