Contesting Authority to Adjudicate Misinformation

Bibliographic Data

ID6322971
AuthorsScott Radnitz (0000-0003-2621-080X, corresponding author)
Year2025
Pages1-23
Publication date2025-07-24
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePerspectives on Politics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1537-5927 • E-ISSN: 1541-0986
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s1537592725102028
OpenAlexW4412643750
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited83

In recent years, analysts have raised concerns about the threat misinformation poses to democracy, yet efforts to counter misinformation have been met with charges of bias and censorship, predominantly from the political right. This article asks who sets the terms of debate over misinformation: what it is, how much there is, whether it is a problem, and what to do about it. It frames the past decade’s controversies around misinformation as an implicit struggle for authority and offers a framework to interpret the arguments of the actors involved. It identifies three coalitions with distinct institutional and ideological profiles that have articulated consistent stances on misinformation. The analysis demonstrates how contestation among competing coalitions plays out in five distinct domains of misinformation: content, attribution, scale, consequences, and policy. Viewing the misinformation debate as part of broader political and cultural struggles within democracies at a time of low trust in institutions helps explain why (mis)information is so fiercely contested. The issue takes on outsize proportions because whoever prevails in shaping the discourse surrounding misinformation stands to gain authority over the rules governing the public sphere, with implications for the future of free speech and democratic participation

Adjudication · Misinformation · Political science · Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection · Law · Media Influence and Politics · Misinformation and Its Impacts

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access