Global misinformation takes center stage at Emory conference

A recent Emory conference examining research into misinformation and propaganda around the world offered attendees something they don’t always get at academic gatherings.

The Hankin Conference on Media and Information Manipulations in Democracies and Autocracies, hosted by Emory College’s Department of Political Science, prioritized discussion over presentation.

“Typically, in a national conference, you get three or four scholars on a panel, who present their work for 15 minutes or so, discuss it and then maybe if there is time left, there are a couple of questions from the audience,” says Michael Rich, chair and professor of political science with an additional appointment in environmental sciences. 

“This conference streamlined that to where we had presenters summarize their research, methods and findings, but allotted most of the time for discussion, constructive feedback, questions and suggestions,” Rich says. 

The workshop comes as the use of misinformation and propaganda is growing around the world, with increasing numbers of officeholders, national leaders and ordinary citizens questioning the merits of democracy. The spread of misinformation is especially true on divisive issues such as immigration, public safety and elections, researchers say.

More than three dozen scholars from around the globe — including experts from Emory, Dartmouth, Stanford, University of Georgia, Princeton, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and New York University and others — convened at Tarbutton Hall to analyze and discuss research into the methods, effects and outcomes of agitprop and disinformation.

They sat around a U-shaped table listening intently as presenters discussed papers on topics such as authoritarian information control; the impact of claims of election fraud in the 2020 U.S. election; the effectiveness of false AI generated information; manipulation in political communication; and the role social media plays in spreading misinformation. 

Each researcher who presented a paper was followed by a fellow researcher who analyzed the work and offered feedback. 

For instance, Tony Yang, an assistant professor in Emory’s political science department and expert on propaganda and censorship in authoritarian regimes, talked to the group about his research on the Chinese government’s control over messaging about democracy. 

Contrary to popular belief, the Communist nation’s leadership does not go after everyone who speaks about democracy, says Yang, who helped organize the conference with Natália Bueno, an associate professor of political science at Emory. Beijing is more surgical, Yang says, targeting specific subjects for scrutiny, such as checks and balances, democratic elections and judicial review. 

“There is more logic to what the state sees as more threatening versus less threatening,” Yang says. “Normal citizens like us, when we say something, are not the most threatening to the regime.”

Disinformation and information manipulation also travels fast, making studying how it works and is consumed that much more urgent, according to Tom Rogers, Emory College’s interim divisional dean of humanities and social science.

“The speed of transmission of information and the cultivation of narrow self-reinforcing media environments put us in particularly difficult territory,” says Rogers, a historian who has studied dictatorships in Brazil and how intentional manipulation of information circulates and wreaks havoc on an autocracy. 

Intentional conversations and expanded perspectives 

The conference also included a dinner for participants and a session for graduate students to showcase their research.

Jennifer Pan, a political scientist in Stanford’s communication department, says Emory created an ideal format for researchers to get real-time feedback. The university provided copies of each participant’s research into misinformation and information manipulation in advance of the meeting.

The result: Instead of listening passively to a presentation, conference attendees could offer research suggestions, challenge assumptions, recommend new angles to explore and propose methodological tweaks.

“At other conferences, it’s more about presentation and performance,” says Pan, who received robust feedback on her research into the effectiveness of propaganda in randomized experiments. “At this conference, most of the time was spent answering questions and engaging. This format, coupled with the small size of the group, allowed us to engage more deeply on the underlying questions.”

Zachary Peskowitz, Masse-Martin NEH Professor of Political Science at Emory, agrees.

“Getting different perspectives helps the publication process, how you do the research and how to talk about it,” says Peskowitz, who provided feedback on a paper by Dartmouth political science professor Brendan Nyhan about the 2020 election and claims of election fraud.

“It’s mutually beneficial,” Peskowitz says. “It’s beneficial for the author, but it’s also beneficial for the audience to try and think through things when they are doing their own research.”

That is critical, he says, because of the changing landscape of information delivery. The power that broadcast news and newspapers used to have in shaping political beliefs and behavior has changed drastically over the past 30 years. Now, more of that information is coming from a ubiquitous stream of content providers.

“There is so much more content, and people are exposed to it in very different ways than they were through a daily newspaper or broadcast television,” Peskowitz says.

Anthony DeMattee, a data scientist with the Democracy Program at The Carter Center, says communities also can benefit from conferences like the Emory gathering. He read the research papers and added his voice to the chorus of those helping the researchers build better models and methodologies.

“What I think is valuable about a conference like this is the intersection of theory and praxis,” DeMattee says. “All of these scholars are researching important topics, and they make intellectual contributions to their community, which is important. But it doesn’t just need to stay there in academic journals. There are a lot of things that we at The Carter Center and other democracy promotion organizations can learn from those academic articles and apply them to our day-to-day work, trying to promote and defend democracy, elections and human rights.”

Rich says the conference reflects the value of scholarship at Emory.

“The conference is a really good example of the kind of conference with elite scholars that our department routinely puts together precisely because our faculty are involved in conversations on important and pressing issues,” he says.