[Music]
Intro: The Guardian
Welcome to Science Weekly.
We're following the Covid-19 outbreak and
exploring some of the scientific questions
that have come out of it.
In today's episode, we are looking
at conspiracy theories:
Now, many people are getting
their information about coronavirus
through social media.
But not everything that's shared online
can be trusted.
5G mast on fire. **** the 5G!
Yeah!
It lowers your immunity
and runs people down!
The coronavirus pandemic is opening up
weird new horizons
for online conspiracy theorists.
The virus was bio-engineered in a lab
by scientists, to be used as a weapon
or a form of population control.
Hi guys, do you know
what you're doing now?
You're laying 5G. Yes.
So, you know that kills people?
It absorbs oxygen.
That's just nonsense!
Dangerous nonsense as well.
5G was a favourite target
of conspiracy theorists,
long before the new coronavirus appeared.
And now,
the myths have just been
tweaked a bit.
It's not merely an opinion
or an interesting conspiracy,
it's just bollocks.
So what is it about conspiracy theories
that makes them so appealing
in a time of crisis?
And how can we best combat them?
I'm Ian Sample, the science editor
at The Guardian,
and this is Science Weekly.
I'm Dr Daniel Jolley.
I'm a senior lecturer in psychology
based at Northumbria University
in Newcastle in the UK and my expertise is
in the psychology of conspiracy theories.
Hi Dan, how are you doing?
I'm doing well
thanks so much for having me here.
So Dan, let's start with the basics,
what is a conspiracy theory,
as opposed to misinformation, say?
So the whole difference
with a conspiracy theory is the idea
that there is a powerful group plotting
something secret for their own gain.
So something can just be fake, that
there is no hidden motive behind it.
I mean there is a cardinal difference,
it's pointing the finger
at a group of people
and blaming them for their wrongdoings,
blaming them for the virus, for example.
What is it about conspiracy theories,
generally,
that makes them so appealing to us?
Well, conspiracy theories in general
have been shown to arise
in moments of crisis, when we have the
need to feel in control, to feel certain.
And in these kind of rapid crises
we feel threatened,
we feel unsure of what is happening,
which is exactly what is happening
with Covid-19
I always thought that believing
in conspiracy theories
would make people feel more anxious,
but it sounds like, actually,
they have the opposite effect.
Well, it's a really interesting
point there.
People who have this need to feel
in control,
the influence on them actually may
just be quite temporal.
They may seem appealing,
but they're not satisfying.
Could be shown that people who are
exposed to conspiracy theories
actually have further mistrust
of those around them.
It actually increases their feeling
of anxiety.
Often it is because if you don't subscribe
to one conspiracy belief,
you then start questioning other things,
which means its kind of ramping up
your mistrust,
and you kind of feel a feeling of
uncertainty of you living in your society.
So when they emerge in times of crisis,
they may temporarily
make us feel more secure
but that will not be long-lasting.
This must be
a bit of a boom time for you,
as someone who studies conspiracy theories
I mean, we've seen,
you know, a bunch of them around recently,
from 5G masts,
man-made viruses coming out of
Chinese labs. I mean,
what is it about a pandemic
that seems to drive so many?
Covid-19 is not unique in regards to
having conspiracy theories bloom about it.
Thinking back to Zika, 2015,
there were conspiracy theories suggesting
Zika was a man-made weapon.
Zika is a mosquito-transmitted virus
that has led to travel warnings
in South America and Caribbean countries.
Is Zika caused by
genetically modified mosquitoes?
We're fact-checking this conspiracy theory
making the rounds on Facebook.
It's fair that the conspiracy now to
emerge,
when people are talking about extreme
uncertainty.
So when they felt uncertain, they now (??)
conspiracy theories was more blooming.
And the same thing is happening with
COVID-19.
The Trump administration has repeatedly
pushed the narrative that the Coronavirus
may have escaped from a Chinese laboratory
in Wuhan, rather than originating with an
animal in a seafood market in Wuhan, which
is the leading medical theory.
Because the world is definitely chaotic,
and it offers some kind of tangible
personal group to blame for
what is happening.
It sounds like, then, that it's
pretty typical to see conspiracy theories
spring up around any big event.
Do you think we're just seeing more now or
we're aware of more now, because they're
spreading through social media?
There's no hard data that
demonstrates that today with the
internet, conspiracy theories are more
popular. So it may just be us assuming
they are. I think it's important, though,
to really look into this, and to see the
peril that social media can have. Thinking
about the 5G conspiracy, it seemed to
emerge from social media, where the
algorithms and Facebook picked up chatter
with regards to 5G, and brought it into
the trending. And then, during videos
people in the comments were talking about
the masts and how one way to stop COVID is
by the masts and pulling them down, etc.
So that's something that's potentially
quite novel in that that fast interaction
may have actually sped up the kind of
insurgence of the conspiracy.
It's a real
interesting problem
with regards to
Facebook and
social media
in general, and how they deal with
conspiracy theories, because someone's conspiracy
theory is someone's truth, in essence. So
it's how do we define what a conspiracy
theory is. And indeed, by banning, for
example, conspiracy theories on platforms
will just reaffirm the suspicions that
people have, that they're trying to hide
something. So you may actually increase
people's conspiracy theorizing, because
they are being silenced. So it's that
balance of insuring there's a space and a
platform for people to have free speech,
to be able to discuss issues, and to, you
know, question things, which I think is
important that we question, but then the
balance comes by that things aren't made
into the trending pages that are not based
on truth. So right now, Facebook and etc.,
are taking down content that they see to
be inciting violence, and that can
actually be a hinder to curbing COVID-19,
which is think is a positive first step,
but it's not going to fix the issue as a
broad issue in the future.
So maybe,
thinking about the individual as well,
and insuring the individual has the skill
sets to really ask the questions, but also
evaluate the evidence. So we know those
people who lack critical thinking
abilities are more likely to believe in
conspiracy theories, and we also know that
people who in believe in conspiracies is
because they want to understand
the world, but they're struggling to
evaluate the evidence. So potentially us
trying to instil those skill sets, may
mean that they're able to resist the
conspiracy narrative. Let's talk a bit
more about the psychology of people who
believe in conspiracy theories or tend to
believe in them. Are there characteristics
or personality traits that make people
maybe more susceptible to these kinds of
theories than others?
There are a range of different needs
that are met by conspiracy theories,
while there's also kind of a social
element whereby we want to affirm
ourselves and also the groups that we
belong in. And interestingly, research in
America has found that in regards to
politics, the conspiracy theories switch
depending on who is in power. So it's very
much a prophecies in play here, where
you're just affirming your identity, the
others, those are the ones who are
conspiring, and that can change depending
on the context.
It sounds like some other sort of
traits might come into play as well,
around how people see themselves, their
social self-image, but also whether
people have been sort of marginalized in
the past?
Absolutely. So, research has found that
being a narcissist is more predictively
believing in conspiracy theories,
and also, it has been shown that people
who are from disadvantaged groups,
because if you have received
discrimination in the past,
you may be more likely to perceive
that people are out to get you.
Because once upon a time, maybe they were.
So prior experiences may also play a role
in making you more susceptible.
And then, when you're in an environment
that increases your uncertainty,
increases your threat, like COVID-19,
you may be more susceptible
to subscribe to these conspiracy theories.
And indeed, a consistent finding
in the literature is
that if you believe in one conspiracy,
you believe in many others.
Also, interestingly,
researchers find that
you can believe in mutually exclusive
conspiracy theories. Because, it's all
based around this world view that
conspiracy theories in the world. So that
means that someone may believe that the
virus was human-made, but also believing
it is caused by 5G. Whilst these two
things can't necessarily happen at the
same time, it's in this process if you
feel distrust, of society, of people who
we see to be in power, you can subscribe
to these ideas. [Music]
When I've seen conspiracy theorists
talking about their beliefs, it's clear
that there's a real urge to pull together
strands of evidence, and to collect
evidence, and say, pull together these
sort of desperate things, and many of them
seem to see themselves as like, the real
critical thinkers, but I'm wondering what
kind of biases are coming into play there,
that are actually within those people, to
make them believe these kinds of theories.
(DJ) One of the biases is confirmation
bias, that we're all susceptible to.
This is the idea that we only really
listen to evidence that supports our prior
beliefs. Things that go against it, that
discredit our beliefs, we ignore.
There's also biases based around
personality bias, with COVID-19, it's such
a large event, worldwide, to explain this
as something from animals doesn't really
make sense. But to explain this as a
conspiracy where it was human-made,
the proportionality matches the cause,
it all kind of fits together.
So, we can, in situations where these
events arise, be more drawn to conspiracy
narratives. We then stay in our echo
chambers in our online world.
It can be tough debating and arguing
with people who believe in conspiracy
theories, and okay, some of them are
harmless, but some of them really aren't.
I mean, as someone who really studies
them, do you have a sense of how best
we can combat them, the ones that are
dangerous?
Interventions are really challenging,
but of course, as you say, they're really
important, so potentially targeting the
general population, and targeting those
who are hardened conspiracy theorists,
may be slightly different.
So for example, we know that using counter
arguments, giving people facts, can reduce
belief in conspiracy theories. But, if you
harbor a conspiracy belief, and you see
some counter material from the government,
you are going to discredit that, because
of your confirmation bias. So indeed, for
others, it may be having people become
trusted messengers, where you're not
aggressive, but instead, talk to them
about their beliefs, get them to really
kind of think hard about the evidence
that they are, you know, really kind of
suggesting is the be and end all, and
that maybe that kind of thinking process
and get them to re-evaluate may start
changing their beliefs. Of course, this
I'm sure would work for the general
population as well, so I think with
ensuring that the landscape on Twitter, on
Facebook is full of facts is really
important, but then still acknowledging
that those who are on the hardened end
of the conspiracy theorizing may distrust
that straight away. So it's definitely a
challenge, but I think it's important to
really evaluate.
Dan, finally, how do you think you
fair in all of this? I mean, do you feel
you're immune to conspiracy theories that
you can tell pretty much on contact
whether something's real or BS?
It's really difficult to tell the
truth from the untruthful, from the fake
news, but the conspiracy's always based
around pointing the finger at those in
authority, and suggesting that they are
conspiring. I try and have trust in the
gatekeepers, where I also trust the
journalists, to ask the questions, and
the conspiracy theories that have been
proven to be true, have always been driven
by journalism. So, having the trust in our
society that if a conspiracy is occuring,
it will come out by these natural
processes.
Wonderful stuff. Dan, thank you so
much for joining us.
Pleasure, thank you so much.
Thanks to Dan for joining me this
week. As we continue to follow the
COVID-19 outbreak, we'd love to keep
hearing your questions. You can send them
in via the form we've set up, just head
over to theguardian.com/covid19questions,
that's all one word.
And also thank those who support
as listeners.
In times like this, trusted news is more
important than ever, and here at the
Guardian we are 100% committed to
accurate and reliable news, but in order
to help us do that, we need your support.
To find out more, please go to
theguardian.com/supportpodcast, again
all one word.
Look after yourselves and stay well,
see you back here soon.
[Outro]
For more great podcasts from the Guardian,
just go to theguardian.com/podcasts.