Caution against online censorship of scientific misinformation

Governments and social media platforms should not rely on content removal to combat harmful scientific disinformation online, according to a report today from the Royal Society, the UK's national academy of sciences.

But the Online Information Environment report, created by a working group of leading researchers including computer, internet and media experts from Oxford, recommends far-reaching measures to build resilience to disinformation and a healthy online information environment.

Professor Sir Nigel Shadbolt, Professor of Computer Science at Oxford, one of the members of the working group, says: "The Internet has been one of humanity's greatest innovations. The knowledge and information it supports and disseminates is among our greater resources.

However, it says: "We are faced with a torrent of misinformation on issues big and small. The report looks at the challenges of misinformation and the steps we can take to address them. It doesn't call content removal a panacea, but which recommends a range of measures that governments, technology platforms and academic institutions can implement, recommendations that increase resistance to disinformation and promote a healthy online environment."

Professor Gina Neff, another member of the working group and Professor of Technology and Society at the Oxford Internet Institute, adds: "Scientific misinformation not only affects individuals, it can harm society and even generations. future if it is allowed to spread unchecked. Our survey showed that people have complex reasons for sharing misinformation, and we will not change this by giving them more data."

Meanwhile, Professor Michael Bronstein, the Oxford Deep Mind Professor of Artificial Intelligence and work group member, notes: "Members of the public often lack the tools to differentiate between authoritative sources and fictional ones, and tend to view science as the absolute 'truth' rather than an ever-evolving picture, and consequently fall victim to both of honest mistakes and misinterpretations of scientific data". outcomes, as well as intentional manipulation.

Professor Rasmus Kleis Neilson, of the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at the University of Oxford, concludes that "many citizens [would have] your worst suspicions confirmed" if access to information is limited, even if it is misinformation.

The task force report recommends a number of measures for policymakers, online platforms and others to understand and limit the harms of disinformation, including:

• Support media plurality and independent fact-checking.
• Monitor and mitigate evolving sources of scientific misinformation online.
• Invest in information literacy throughout life.

---

---