Propagandists need not fake results, only manipulate how results are shared

Evidence

One of the most surprising conclusions from the models we study in this book is that it is not necessary for propagandists to produce fraudulent results to influence belief. Instead, by exerting influence on how legitimate, independent scientific results are shared with the public, the would-be propagandist can substantially affect the public’s beliefs about scientific facts. This makes responding to propaganda particularly difficult. Merely sussing out industrial or political funding or influence in the production of science is not sufficient. We also need to be attuned to how science is publicized and shared. — Cailin O’Connor and James Owen Weatherall, The Misinformation Age, 60

Categorization

• XREF: Extends the Merchants of Doubt manufacturing-uncertainty story past the point of production into distribution and curation. — connects to: Tobacco executives publicly claimed no proof existed while privately knowing otherwise — Cailin O’Connor and James Owen Weatherall, The Misinformation Age: How False…, 323; An honest journalist sharing only surprising results can mislead the public — Cailin O’Connor and James Owen Weatherall, The Misinformation Age: How False…, 527; Trumpspeak treats belief and usefulness as substitutes for factual truth — Lee McIntyre, Post-Truth, 342 (+1 more)
• SEED: Essay angle: auditing not just who funds science but who shapes the pipelines of its publicity — the overlooked lever of belief is curation, not fabrication.