The Growing Gap Between Belief and Action in Fighting Misinformation

In July, a video of rabbits bouncing on a backyard trampoline captivated over 200 million viewers worldwide. The footage, seemingly captured by a home security camera, was shared thousands of times across social platforms. There was just one problem: the video was entirely artificial, generated by AI technology.

While many viewers immediately recognized something wasn’t quite right about the footage, this relatively harmless example highlights a much larger issue plaguing social media today – the proliferation of misinformation that can have far more serious consequences than fake rabbit videos.

Recent research published in Nature Scientific Reports reveals a troubling disconnect between how people think others should respond to misinformation and their own willingness to take action. Researchers surveyed more than 1,000 U.S. social media users about their reactions to encountering false information online, revealing what they described as “overwhelming evidence of hypocrisy.”

“People generally believe others should work harder to counter misinformation than they’re willing to do themselves,” explained the study’s authors. The numbers are striking – 93% of respondents reported seeing misinformation on social media, yet most expected others to be the ones commenting, messaging, or otherwise challenging false claims.

Even among the 26% who admitted to accidentally sharing misinformation themselves, researchers found “extreme evidence” that respondents believed others should put more effort into corrections than they personally did.

This reluctance to act comes despite broadly positive perceptions about correction behaviors. More than two-thirds of those surveyed believe that correcting misinformation is appropriate and socially desirable. The gap, researchers concluded, isn’t about belief but rather practical barriers – time constraints, fear of damaging relationships, and uncertainty about whether speaking up will make any difference.

The timing of these findings is particularly significant as major platforms scale back institutional fact-checking efforts. In January 2025, Meta – parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and Threads – announced the elimination of its fact-checking program. This decision followed a similar move by X (formerly Twitter), effectively transferring responsibility for challenging false information entirely to users.

“Most of us don’t spread misinformation maliciously,” notes the study. “Instead, we share it accidentally and want to be corrected.” Perhaps most importantly, corrections from trusted sources like friends and family prove far more effective than institutional fact-checking, which is increasingly absent from major platforms.

This creates a challenging dynamic where corrections from ordinary users become not just helpful but essential in the fight against misinformation. Yet the same research indicates most people are waiting for someone else to take that initiative.

The research team suggests several potential solutions, including campaigns highlighting the social desirability of corrections, creating opportunities for users to publicly commit to increased vigilance, and implementing platform design changes that could reduce accidental sharing of false content – such as confirmation prompts before sharing unreviewed material.

Recent examples of harmful misinformation underscore the importance of this issue – from dangerous health claims about medication safety during pregnancy to vaccine misinformation and conspiracy theories about natural disasters. Each represents potential real-world harm that stems from unchallenged falsehoods.

As institutional safeguards diminish, the collective responsibility of individual users grows. The research suggests most social media users already support taking action against misinformation – the challenge now is closing the gap between what people believe should happen and what they’re personally willing to do when scrolling through their feeds.