How to Identify Misinformation in an Age of Unreliable Online Content

As Australia navigates an election campaign, the challenge of identifying false information online has become increasingly important. With over a quarter of Australians relying on social media as their primary news source, according to a 2024 report by Shannon Behaviour Change, the spread of misinformation poses significant risks to informed decision-making.

Despite this reliance on social media platforms, just 24 percent of Australians believe these platforms are effectively regulating false information. This creates a concerning gap between consumption and trust.

Experts distinguish between two types of false information. Misinformation refers to incorrect content that people share without intending to deceive, often because they believe it to be true. Disinformation, meanwhile, is deliberately deceptive – shared by someone who knows the information is false, with the intent to mislead.

Dr. Denise Goodwin, co-director of health programs at BehaviourWorks Australia at Monash University, connects the rise in both forms to what she calls a “post-truth” society. “Objective facts are less influential than emotional or ideological appeals, which is often exploited by politicians and state actors to sway public opinion, further polarising societies,” she explains.

The motivations behind spreading false information vary widely. Some actors receive financial incentives, others aim to promote specific political agendas, and some simply seek to create online discord. During election periods, these activities often intensify.

The Australian eSafety Commission provides guidance on spotting suspicious information, encouraging critical thinking when consuming online content. Red flags include extremely one-sided presentations, claims that seem “too good to be true,” and assertions without supporting evidence.

Visual manipulation presents another challenge. Doctored images may exhibit blurring, pixelation, or inconsistent skin tones, while manipulated videos might show quality issues, glitches, or lighting inconsistencies. Reverse image searching through Google, Bing, or specialized platforms can help identify potentially altered images by revealing their original context.

Certain topics are particularly vulnerable to false information campaigns. During the pandemic, COVID-19 vaccine misinformation spread rapidly across platforms like Facebook. Similarly, climate change discussions frequently feature distorted scientific data.

The State of Change report warns that Australia’s democratic institutions face risks from “false narratives and conspiracy theories.” Dr. Goodwin emphasizes the “significant” political implications: “They undermine trust in democratic institutions, erode the credibility of the media, and facilitate societal polarisation.”

When encountering questionable information, Australians have various options for verification. The report found that while 33 percent of people surveyed took no action when encountering misinformation, 38 percent checked alternative sources, and 30 percent actively commented to alert others.

Fact-checking resources include international platforms like FactCheck.org and Snopes.com, as well as the Australian Associated Press’s AAP FactCheck. Personal research through reputable news outlets and government websites remains valuable, with 88 percent of survey respondents reporting they attempt to verify information they encounter.

Google searches represent the most common verification method, followed by reading additional articles and consulting expert opinions. Media literacy resources, from First Draft News training to interactive educational games like Deakin University’s Libertas Veritas, can further build resilience against false information.

On the regulatory front, the Digital Industry Group established a voluntary code of practice in 2021 at the government’s request, with signatories including major technology companies like Adobe, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft. The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) monitors compliance and reports to the government.

ACMA’s 2023 report identified an “urgent need” to improve transparency around platform measures against misinformation. However, the federal government recently abandoned legislation that would have given ACMA greater regulatory powers, following criticism from across the political spectrum about potential impacts on free speech.

Public sentiment suggests Australians recognize their role in combating false information, with 77 percent agreeing they have a personal responsibility to verify information before sharing it. As the election campaign continues, this individual vigilance may prove crucial in maintaining a well-informed electorate.