Fake news & bad science journalism
The case against insincerity
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21335258 |
|---|---|
| Authors | C J Oswald (0009-0000-1734-7738, University of Virginia), Carmen Oswald (University of Virginia, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 68 |
| Issue | 10 |
| Pages | 3748-3779 |
| Publication date | 2025-11-26 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Inquiry (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0020-174X • E-ISSN: 1502-3923 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/0020174x.2024.2399253 |
| OpenAlex | W4402287694 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 58 |
Philosophers and social scientists largely agree that fake news is not just necessarily untruthful, but necessarily insincere: it’s produced either with the intention to deceive or an indifference toward its truth. Against this, I argue insincerity is neither a necessary nor obviously typical feature of fake news. The main argument proceeds in two stages. The first, methodological step develops classification criteria for identifying instances of fake news. By attending to expressed theoretical and practical interests, I observe how our classification practices turn on worries about fake news’s unique political-epistemic risks. From this, I argue (i) theories of fake news should capture independent mechanisms that realise these risks and (ii) the manifestation of them suffices for classifying a news story as fake news. The second step applies the classification criteria to bad science journalism. I argue the systematic epistemic faults in bad science journalism manifest the same political-epistemic risks we see in fake news, which suffices to justify classifying it as fake news. But since such faults aren’t plausibly attributed to its propagators being insincere, insincerity doesn’t function independently as a mechanism for realising fake news’s political-epistemic risks. Thus, I conclude, we should exclude insincerity from our accounts of the phenomenon
Fake news · Internet privacy · Journalism · Law and economics · Media studies · Political science · Sociology · Climate Change Communication and Perception · Computer Science · Law · Media Influence and Health · Misinformation and Its Impacts
Objectivity, Professionalism, and Truth Seeking
Fake News and Partisan Epistemology
The Intent to Deceive
Stop talking about fake news!
Going On, Not in the Same Way
Scientific Misinformation and Fake News
Understanding the Problem of “Hype”
Fake news
Perils and positives of science journalism in Australia
A review of the effects of uncertainty in public science communication
The Epistemology of Fake News
Science Journalism
Fake News
Fake News and Democracy
What's New About Fake News
Sources, Characteristics and Effects of Mass Media Communication on Science
The facts of fake news
What Does Fake Look Like? A Review of the Literature on Intentional Deception in the News and on Social Media
Causes and consequences of mainstream media dissemination of fake news
Scientists, the Media, and the Public Communication of Science
Scientific Evidence and Science Journalism
Balance as bias
Are Experts (News)Worthy? Balance, Conflict, and Mass Media Coverage of Expert Consensus
The challenges of science journalism
Mapping Journalism Cultures Across Nations
Fake News
What is News
Journalists’ Perception of Time Pressure
Defending the Profession
Out of the shadows
In their own words
Breaking news production processes in US metropolitan newspapers
Truth, Deliberative Democracy, and the Virtues of Accuracy
Poisoning the information well
Fake news as a two-dimensional phenomenon
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |