‘Fact-checking in a world that’s lost its effing mind’, or why we fight disinformation

PICTURE: Luis Quintero/Pexels

 

Keynote delivered by

Dr Sisanda Nkoala

at the 2025 Africa Media Perspectives meeting in

Stellenbosch, South Africa

 

The title, ‘Fact-Checking in a World That’s Lost Its Effing Mind’, is intentionally provocative. Despite its seeming indignation, it is undeniably appropriate. This title captures a sentiment that resonates deeply with many, reflecting a collective exasperation with the current state of information.

It is difficult to forget the recent incident when the President of the United States, Donald Trump – arguably the individual with unparalleled access to the most accurate and up-to date information – presented a photograph from Congo, falsely claiming it depicted white South Africans who were victims of genocide.

Compounding this, he also played a video of a symbolic art installation, brazenly declaring it to be mass graves, even after being corrected. This incident serves as a stark illustration of the deliberate distortion of truth in the public sphere.

The era that we are in is one where the lines between truth and falsehood are not just blurred but often seem to be deliberately obliterated. Social media, in terms of our individualised feeds and the algorithm that is meant to keep us scrolling, has put us in echo chambers where we have voices and made-up sources that confirm for us that just because we believe something to be a certain way, it must be that way.

Now with Artificial Intelligence (AI), even the most discerning of us can find it difficult to tell fact from fiction, truth from lies and real from fake as the capabilities of reproducing videos in people’s likeness improve with every passing day.

In this environment, the role of fact-checking, and indeed, the very survival of journalistic integrity, is critical.

The 2025 World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report identifies misinformation and disinformation as the top immediate global risk, and in the top 5 over the next 10 years. The report states: ‘Societal risks such as inequality rank high among today’s leading concerns as well as over the last years.’

‘Polarisation within societies is further hardening views and affecting policy-making. It also continues to fan the flames of misinformation and disinformation, which, for the second year running, is the top-ranked short- to medium-term concern across all risk categories.

‘Efforts to combat this risk are coming up against a formidable opponent in Generative AI created false or misleading content that can be produced and distributed at scale.’

Today, in this audience of esteemed media colleagues, students, practitioners, leaders and academics, it feels a bit like speaking to the choir. There is no need for me to tell you about the need for fact-checking because you centre it in your practice and scholarship, and you are probably among the lone voices in your context telling the people around you why this matters.

But I think the organisers of this year’s African Media Perspectives put this as a theme for a keynote because the challenges we face are changing on a day-to-day basis, demanding new strategies and a reinforced collective resolve

The structure of my presentation is to give a history of the importance of fact checking, then speaking about what I think is unique about the particular moment we are in as humanity that gives rise to the proliferation of disinformation.

Thirdly, I’ll talk about the importance of independent media in all of this, and then broaden it to consider the role that other actors in the news media ecosystem, like media educators, governments and even technology companies can play.

Beginning with a historical link between what we do, namely dissemination of information in printed, audio visual or digital form, I think the emergence of fact-checking in our current information landscape mirrors, in a profound way, the needs that led to the introduction of the printing press in the 1400s.

Before Gutenberg, knowledge was painstakingly copied by hand, making books rare, expensive, and largely inaccessible to the common person. This scarcity meant that the Church held a significant, almost monopolistic, grip on knowledge, particularly religious scriptures. Latin Bibles were the norm, understood by a select few clergy, allowing the Church to largely control interpretation and disseminate information as it saw fit.

By enabling mass production of uniform texts, the printing press inherently reduced transcription errors and, more importantly, democratised access to information. It broke the Church’s monopoly, directly challenging established authority and sparking movements like the Reformation.

Similarly, in our day and age, where anyone can be a publisher, fact-checking now serves as the critical filter, a vital mechanism for verifying the truth in a sea of content, aiming to restore reliability and accuracy to an information ecosystem that often feels as chaotic as the pre-print world was, limited in its access to verified knowledge.

Just as the printing press arose from a societal hunger for widespread access to knowledge, previously monopolised and laboriously copied, fact-checking has become essential to navigate the overwhelming deluge of true and false information that the digital age has brought.

This brings me to the current moment that we are in. Why are we so heightened about disinformation and why do we see this moment as one where we are almost losing our minds when it comes to fact checking?

Firstly, I draw on the notion of the ‘digital wild west’, which is discussed by scholars such as Denise Mann, and Lisa Guernsey et al, as far back as 2014 and 2012 respectively. The notion of the digital wild west is a widely used metaphor to describe the Internet and the broader digital landscape. It evokes the imagery of the American Wild West, characterised by, among others, lack of clear rules and regulations, pioneering and exploration, rapid expansion as well as uncertainty and risk.

In our era, social media platforms, while connecting us globally, have also become super- spreaders of false information. The algorithms prioritise engagement, and therefore foreground sensational or emotionally charged content regardless of its veracity.

The act of simply considering sharing a piece of news on social media can make people worse at judging its accuracy, especially when sharing is considered before accuracy.

This social media mindset actively interferes with truth discernment. Never before have we seen the individual so overwhelmed by the sheer volume of unverified claims, such that it can become too much even those of us who are trained in spotting misinformation

If you see a post trending of a video of Cyril Ramaphosa saying something, amid all of the information you’re bombarded with, it would not be implausible for you to take it at face value as real, and then run with it. It has happened before.

Secondly, there is a severe erosion of trust in traditional institutions, including the media. According to the 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer, ‘Business and NGOs remain the most trusted South African institutions, with 68% and 63%’ of survey respondents indicating they trust these two institutions respectively. The media remains less trusted, at 46%. That’s less than half of the people surveyed.

This lack of trust, coupled by all the information from social media, creates fertile ground for alternatives to fill the gap with their conspiracies, in a way we have not seen before.

Previously, institutions like mainstream media were viewed as credible, and if you wanted to see if something was real or not, you turned on your radio, looked to your newspaper or watched the TV news to check if that was the case. Nowadays we go to X, Facebook and TikTok, and not only does it sometimes confirm the lie, it sends us down a rabbit hole of more conspiracies.

Thirdly, there are Intentional Disinformation Campaigns. These are strategically crafted efforts to spread false or misleading information with the intent to deceive or manipulate audiences, are often orchestrated by various actors, including state and non-state entities, and can have significant impacts on public opinion, political processes and societal stability.

The complexity of these campaigns lies in their intentionality, the methods employed, and the diverse motivations behind them. These campaigns often exploit existing anxieties and divisions.

A clear example for us in South Africa is Elon Musk’s AI chatbot Grok (integrated into X) that was noted for injecting references to ‘white genocide’ in South Africa into unrelated queries, demonstrating how AI can be leveraged to spread ideologically charged disinformation.

Clearly, this wasn’t just about accidental sharing of false information (misinformation). We’re witnessing sophisticated, coordinated campaigns designed to deceive, manipulate, and destabilise (disinformation). And it is particular to the moment we are in.

Turning our attention now to fact checking, just as disinformation and misinformation are not new concepts, it has also been around. It is the meticulous process of verifying information, often by cross-referencing multiple credible sources, consulting experts and presenting evidence-based conclusions.

Fact-checking is a rigorous process that has gained prominence with the rise of social media and the rapid spread of misinformation. It involves verifying claims by consulting multiple credible sources and experts, ensuring that the information presented is accurate and reliable

Key strategies and considerations for effective fact-checking that you would know include:

• Speed and accuracy: Misinformation spreads at lightning speed. Fact-checkers need to be agile, but never at the expense of accuracy. A well-researched, though slightly delayed, fact-check is better than a quick, inaccurate one. This is hard when you’re competing not only against other media houses, but also against social media influencers. But ours can no longer be a business of breaking news primarily, it must be a business of truthful news
• Transparency: Fact-checkers must be transparent about their methodologies, sources and any corrections. This builds trust with the audience. Being open about sources, methodologies, and corrections not only enhances credibility but also encourages public engagement with accurate information
• Collaboration: The scale of misinformation is too vast for any single entity to tackle alone. Collaborative networks of fact-checkers, both nationally and internationally, are essential. By sharing resources and information, fact-checkers, organisations and platforms can enhance the effectiveness of their efforts and tackle misinformation more robustly, and
• Focus on the most harmful content: Prioritising fact-checking efforts on information that poses the greatest threat to public safety, democratic processes, or societal well- being. Of course, all false information online pollutes the information ecosystem, but we must adopt a triage approach on these matters because of limited resources, time and expertise, and the need to ensure that the most harmful content is dealt with urgently

While debunking false claims is crucial, it’s not enough because in some cases some damage has already been done. When it comes to information integrity, prevention is better than cure.

Some strategies to consider are:

Pre-bunking: Stephan Lewandowsky (Professor of Cognitive Science and Chair in Cognitive Psychology at the University of Bristol) and Sander van der Linden (Professor of Social Psychology in Society at the University of Cambridge and author of Foolproof: Why We Fall for Misinformation and How to Build Immunity) published a paper in 2021 in the European Review of Social Psychology where they talk about this, arguing that pre-bunking is a proactive strategy designed to build resilience against misinformation and disinformation before people encounter it.

It’s often compared to a ‘mental vaccine‘ or ‘inoculation theory‘ in psychology.

Pre-bunking involves educating the public about common misinformation tactics before they encounter false claims, enabling them to recognise misleading information more effectively. Instead of refuting a specific false claim (which is what ‘debunking’ does), pre-bunking exposes people to the tactics or techniques commonly used by misinformers.

This is something we should consider doing often as media houses.

Linked to this is promoting media literacy. Media literacy is the set of skills that enables individuals to access, analyse, evaluate, create and act on media in a responsible and informed way. It’s a broadened understanding of ‘literacy’ that goes beyond simply reading and writing to encompass all forms of communication in our increasingly digital and media-saturated world.

This includes understanding source credibility, recognising emotional manipulation and identifying logical fallacies in media texts. It’s something we need to teaching along with reading, writing and arithmetic from an early age, especially because the children born now, are immersed in digital tools from birth

Media literacy programmes empower individuals to critically assess information, distinguish credible sources, and identify biases, leading to a more informed public across the board.

And finally, understanding the ‘Why’: we need the psychological insights for interventions to understand why people believe and share misinformation. People are not stupid or gullible, as we sometimes believe. They are motivated by something. Addressing the psychological and social drivers can lead to more effective interventions.

Understanding the psychological factors that drive misinformation sharing can help develop targeted interventions, addressing why people spread false information and fostering healthier information habits.

The fight against misinformation and the preservation of truth is not solely the burden of journalists or fact-checkers. Individuals have a role to play in developing their critical thinking skills, being sceptical of sensational headlines, cross-referencing information, and thinking before we share.

The buck stops with you and your phone or computer.

Further, as educators, across the board, primary, secondary and tertiary, we need to integrate media and information literacy into curricula as much as possible. Then there is the place of regulators; we need policies that promote transparency and accountability without stifling free speech.

Currently, South African news media has an excellent regulatory mechanism in the Press Council which involves members of the media and the public. However, we are struggling as a sector to come up with ways of regulating some online journalistic content in a similar way that does not involve government which could have implications for free speech.

Lastly, Africa needs to be at the forefront of designing platforms that prioritise truth and well-being over engagement at any cost and invest in robust fact-checking partnerships. We simply cannot leave this to the West.

What we have seen happen with Twitter and Facebook, where the rules change at a whim, and their regard for African audiences and the public is irrelevant, should be a warning to us of the risk we face as we watch AI evolve with very little coming from Africa in this regard.

Then, specifically when it comes to independent media, once we saw ourselves as people who spoke truth to power. Now we need to be people who also fiercely committed to speaking truth to an increasingly disoriented public.

Independent media, such as yourselves, serves as a critical defence against misinformation, ensuring that factual reporting prevails over sensationalism and disinformation. It is your organisations that still centre journalism ethics, investigative orientations to journalism and diversity of views.

Additionally, it is often independent media that is at the coalface, working with communities. The fight against misinformation is ongoing and requires collaboration among individuals, independent media, educators, and technology companies to restore trust in information.

• Nkoala is an award-winning NRF-rated Associate Professor at the University of the Western Cape (UWC) within the Linguistics Department. She is also the UWC Chair of Media Inclusion and Diversity and a member of the Press Council of South Africa