Trust in voting: How misinformation threatens democracy

Public trust in our free and fair elections — a fundamental pillar of American democracy — is eroding.

We don’t need polls to tell us Americans are losing faith in democracy, though the numbers back it up: Recent survey data shows that almost 60% of Americans are dissatisfied with the current state of democracy in the United States, and 72% are concerned about the spread of misleading or false information.

The flow of misinformation and coordinated disinformation campaigns are generating alarming levels of doubt among voters, USC experts say. From narratives around contentious issues like abortion and immigration to unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud, the damaging effects of misinformation on democracy are increasingly evident. Even misinformation surrounding federal responses to crises such as Hurricane Helene show how public perception can be swayed and the consequences that can follow.

“In the long term, the greatest risk we face is the potential destabilization of not just American democracy, but democracies around the world,” said Mindy Romero, director and founder of the Center for Inclusive Democracy at the USC Price School of Public Policy and an assistant professor at the school.

“Our democratic institutions are already vulnerable,” she said. “We’re seeing higher levels of distrust in our elections, how they’re run and the validity of their outcomes.”

Generative AI takes misinformation to new extremes

Romero emphasized that misinformation — false information shared without harmful intent — and disinformation — intentionally misleading information — have long been part of U.S. politics.

What has changed, she noted, is the speed and scale at which misinformation can spread due to advancements in technology, particularly artificial intelligence. A piece of misleading information can go viral in minutes, potentially reaching millions of people almost instantly.

“The advent of generative AI poses an unprecedented threat to the integrity of the information ecosystem and therefore potentially to society and the ability to have fair democratic discussions online,” said Emilio Ferrara, principal scientist at USC’s 2024 Election Integrity Initiative. “In the hands of well-motivated and well-resourced adversaries, these tools could lead to influence campaigns with potentially catastrophic effects on elections decided by slim margins.

“The old saying, ‘I’ll believe it when I see it,’ no longer holds in an era defined by AI’s ability to produce, fabricate or simulate anything we can imagine,” said Ferrara, a professor of computer science and communication at the USC Viterbi School of Engineering and USC Information Sciences Institute. “We must now approach any unverified, sensational or seemingly too-good-to-be-true story with default skepticism.”

Media’s role in defending election integrity

A perfect storm of industry changes and political pressure has created ideal conditions for the spread of misinformation, experts say. As major tech companies have laid off thousands of employees, including crucial content moderation teams, and local newsrooms continue to shrink, the burden of fighting misinformation has increasingly fallen to the individual.

Experts warn that this trend is especially concerning as certain groups of voters, including Republicans and young adults, are now nearly as likely to trust social media as they are traditional news outlets, according to a recent Pew Research survey. In fact, nearly half of U.S. adults under 30 rely mostly on social media for political news, compared to much smaller shares of older age groups.

Romero, whose research focuses on the political behavior of youth and communities of color, argues that expecting individuals to bear the responsibility of combating misinformation alone is neither fair nor realistic, calling instead for systemic solutions to counter misinformation effectively.

Media outlets have a duty to assist in combating misinformation, said Tom Hollihan, an expert on media and politics, media diplomacy and political campaign communication at the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism.

“One of the most dangerous consequences of the concerted disinformation efforts intended to undermine public confidence in our democratic institutions has been the attacks on the fairness of our elections,” said Hollihan, a USC Annenberg professor of communication.

“It is imperative that all media outlets focus their efforts on rebutting mistruths and rehabilitating the public’s confidence in our elections. Misleading or untruthful posts should be called out and if possible removed,” Hollihan said.

When facts fail, consider the ‘vibe check’

In the absence of effective regulation and content moderation from government and tech companies, individuals can still take steps to distinguish fact from fiction.

Kristina Lerman, an expert on how people communicate in digital spaces, emphasizes that to do so, we must first start with understanding why misinformation spreads so easily.

“The power of misinformation lies not in its factual content, but in the emotional response it elicits. Content that provokes outrage, anger or a sense of injustice can spread rapidly and influence beliefs, regardless of its veracity. Misinformation that triggers fear is one of the most powerful rhetorical devices and has been used in propaganda for centuries,” said Lerman, a senior principal scientist at USC’s Information Sciences Institute and research professor at the USC Viterbi School of Engineering.

Q&A: WHY TRUTH IS NO MATCH FOR MISNFORMATION

Kristina Lerman, an expert on how people communicate in digital spaces, explains how misinformation thrives on emotional triggers — and why traditional fact-checking often misses the mark.

To counter this, she proposes a new approach: “vibe-checking.” This involves examining who benefits from the dissemination of specific information, who might be harmed by it and what emotional needs it fulfills for its audience.

“Acknowledging that the true power of misinformation lies not in its factual inaccuracy, but in its emotional resonance and social function may help dilute its power to divide,” she said.

Trust in voting: Misinformation’s impact on political representation

Romero added that historically marginalized or underserved groups are particularly vulnerable to disinformation operations, making them prime targets for malicious actors intent on influencing voters.

If left unchecked, the spread of misinformation could have serious consequences for political representation as voters are discouraged, misled or manipulated into sitting out of elections or voting against their interests.

“There are a lot of indicators that tell us we already have low levels of participation in our democracy — whether it’s civic, political or specifically electoral,” Romero said. “In fact, the U.S. has some of the lowest turnout rates among established democracies, which can be jarring for Americans to hear,” she said.

There are significant disparities in those participation levels, she added, pointing to a recent Center for Inclusive Democracy study revealing that, despite substantial population growth, voters of color remain underrepresented at the polls. The study also highlighted large gaps in voter turnout between white, non-Latino voters and voters of color across all nine battleground states.

“This lack of representation weakens democracy because our elected officials don’t truly reflect the diversity of the people they serve,” she said.