In an era of increasingly intense digital connectivity and rapid information exchange, we are confronted with another communication phenomenon – an infodemic. According to the scientific definition, an infodemic refers to an overabundance of information, often inaccurate, about a particular issue, both online and offline, which hinders our ability to find necessary and valid solutions.
Although the term “infodemic” is just over 20 years old, it remains a relatively young yet aggressively expanding phenomenon in its reach and pace of development. We first encountered infodemic as a sociological and health-related issue during the COVID-19 pandemic, when it became evident that information spreads and ‘infects’ the population much faster than the virus itself. The excessive amount of information, some of which was false or partially true, had a negative impact on the global population. To mitigate the spread of inaccurate and false information, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared an infodemic alongside the pandemic.
While we are reluctant to recall pandemics, it is becoming increasingly clear that the infodemic has long ceased to concern only ‘health topics’ and has affected other aspects of life. This has led to a growing need for communication and understanding of this phenomenon, which remains completely foreign and unknown to many.
The term “infodemic” was first mentioned by American journalist and political scientist David Rothkopf in his 2003 column “When the Buzz Bites Back,” published in the Washington Post. In that article, he defined an infodemic as “a few facts, mixed with fear, speculation, and rumors, amplified and relayed swiftly worldwide by modern information technologies, affecting national and international economies, politics, and even security in ways that are entirely disproportionate to the underlying reality.”
Earlier, in his 2002 scientific paper titled “Infodemiology: The Epidemiology of (Mis)Information,” German-Canadian physician and scientist Gunther Eysenbach first introduced the concept of infodemiology. Among other things, he defined it as a science that “seeks to answer how medical knowledge based on scientific evidence, held by scientists and physicians, can be presented to patients, individuals, and the public to change attitudes and beliefs about specific health topics.”
Later, it became evident that infodemiology would be useful in mitigating the consequences of an infodemic. It has developed into a new and serious scientific field, which is why, in July 2020, the WHO, prompted by the infodemic, held the first infodemiological conference.
An infodemic has already shown that it can have serious consequences for society, including reducing trust in science, credible sources of information, and spreading panic and fear. Often, misinformation has also led to stigmatization, discrimination, or violence. Furthermore, its evolution is not uncertain. In the context of the multitude of unverified information we encounter daily through endless ‘scrolling,’ discussions arise about whether this ‘information noise’ serves as a new form of censorship. While there is room for scientific advancement and strengthening domestic capacities in the field of infodemiology as a tool in combating infodemics, it is necessary to develop awareness of responsibility at both the individual and collective levels. The fight against the ‘info’ virus requires a joint and coordinated approach from governments, media houses, communication experts, technological platforms, the academic community, and civil society.
This is a serious communication problem that can only be addressed by disseminating and utilizing accurate, verified, and expert information. In this regard, we will remind you of the recommendations jointly issued by UNESCO and the WHO:
- Seek facts and evidence. Critically think about the information you receive. Verify the accuracy and factuality of sources by comparing them with other sources.
- Choose carefully. Share, like, or forward only content from reliable sources.
- Be cautious. Do not further share, forward, or like false information that you know is not accurate.
- Be a good example. Correct or call out people on social media when they post something that is not true. Guide them to verify information with expert organizations.
