News Coverage of Misinformation Influences Public Perception and Trust

New research reveals that media coverage of misinformation may inadvertently be reshaping the public’s trust in news sources, with traditional print journalism benefiting at the expense of social media platforms.

In her newly published book, “How News Coverage of Misinformation Shapes Perceptions and Trust,” Syracuse University associate professor Emily Thorson examines the complex relationship between news outlets, social media, and the public’s understanding of misinformation.

The Cambridge University Press publication, released in 2024, comes at a critical juncture when concerns about false information have reached unprecedented levels across the political spectrum. Thorson’s research suggests that mainstream media’s approach to covering misinformation may be influencing public opinion in unexpected ways.

Through extensive content analysis, Thorson discovered that traditional news outlets frequently portray social media platforms as the primary culprits behind the spread of misinformation. This framing appears to have significant consequences for how audiences perceive different information sources.

“Most media coverage explicitly blames social media for the problem,” notes Thorson in her findings. Her experimental research demonstrates that when people consume news about misinformation, they become less trusting of content they encounter on social media platforms while simultaneously developing increased confidence in traditional print journalism.

This shift in trust occurs because coverage of misinformation tends to highlight the value of established journalistic standards and practices. As audiences become more aware of the potential for false information, they appear to gravitate toward sources they perceive as adhering to traditional journalistic norms.

Interestingly, Thorson’s research found that exposure to stories about misinformation did not significantly impact political trust or internal efficacy—the belief in one’s ability to understand and participate in politics. This suggests that the effects of misinformation coverage are primarily confined to media perceptions rather than broader political attitudes.

The research also revealed that interest in misinformation stories cuts across partisan lines, with political engagement being a stronger predictor of attention to such coverage than political affiliation. This finding challenges assumptions that concerns about misinformation are limited to particular ideological groups.

“These results suggest that many Americans see legacy media as a bulwark against changes that threaten to distort the information environment,” Thorson concludes.

Thorson brings considerable expertise to this subject as a senior research associate for the Campbell Public Affairs Institute. Her academic focus encompasses American politics, misinformation and misperceptions, political psychology, and media studies. The Maxwell School at Syracuse University recently recognized her contributions with the 2024 Daniel Patrick Moynihan Award for Teaching and Research.

Her scholarly contributions extend beyond this book, with two articles on misinformation published in the prestigious journal Nature. Thorson earned her Ph.D. in communications and political science from the University of Pennsylvania in 2013.

The timing of this research is particularly relevant as both policymakers and tech companies grapple with how to address misinformation in an increasingly fragmented media landscape. Social media platforms have faced growing pressure to combat false information, while traditional news outlets continue to navigate their role in explaining and contextualizing misinformation to the public.

As debates about information quality and media literacy intensify ahead of electoral contests worldwide, Thorson’s work provides valuable insight into how the framing of misinformation stories can inadvertently influence public trust in various information sources.

The research raises important questions for journalists covering misinformation, suggesting that how they report on the topic may have secondary effects on audience perceptions that extend beyond simply informing the public about specific instances of false information.