Page - 195 - in VULNERABLE - The Law, Policy and Ethics of COVID-19

195Does Debunking Work? Correcting COVID-19 Misinformation on Social Media Third, use trustworthy and independent sources. Evidence per- ceived to be removed from an agenda (and the profit motive) is more likely to be trusted and persuasive.52 While it can be a challenge to find sources that are trusted by all—there has been a significant erosion in trust in many public institutions53—public health authorities and independent scientists still retain a relatively high level of trustwor- thiness, particularly during times of crisis.54 Fourth, if applicable and available, emphasize the scientific con- sensus.55 Ideally, this tactic should be accompanied by a recognition that science evolves and, as such, the consensus can change. 52. Susan T Fiske & Cydney Dupree, “Gaining Trust as Well as Respect in Communicat- ing to Motivated Audiences about Science Topics” (2014) 111:4 PNAS 13593. 53. Timothy Caulfield, “Now More Than Ever, We Must Fight Misinformation. Trust in Science Is Essential”, The Globe  and Mail (20 March 2020), online: <https:// www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-now-more-than-ever-we-must-fight- misinformation-trust-in-science-is>. Not surprisingly, studies have found that debunking has a more modest effect if people view the original source of misinfor- mation favourably. But even in this situation, debunking efforts can help. See Jeong- woo Jang, Eun-Ju Lee & Soo Yun Shin, “What Debunking of Misinformation Does and Doesn’t” (2019) 22:6 Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 423 at 426: “Overall, the results showed that when the falsehood of information was exposed, participants became less favorable toward the immediate source who shared the misinformation, but their initial source attitude also moderated their reactions by inducing different attribution processes.” For another commentary on the impact of low trust, see Mike Caulfield, “Cynicism, Not Gullibility, Will Kill Our Humanity” (27 November 2018), online: Hapgood <https://hapgood. us/2018/11/27/cynicism-not-gullibility-will-kill-our-humanity/>. 54. See Pew Research Centre, “Public Holds Broadly Favorable Views of Many Federal Agencies, Including CDC and HHS” (9 April 2020), online: Pew Research Centre <https:// www.people-press.org/2020/04/09/public-holds-broadly- favorable-views-of- many-federal-agencies-including-cdc-and-hhs/>: “Currently, 79% of U.S. adults express a favorable opinion of the CDC…”; Hannah Fingerhut, “AP-NORC Poll: High Use, Mild Trust of News Media on COVID-19”, Associated Press (30 April 2020), online: <https://apnews.com/4e2a20bd01bd2352009c3281b657 375d>: “Americans are especially likely to trust information about the corona- virus that comes from the CDC or from personal health care providers,” See van der Meer & Jin, supra note 45 at 560, where it is summarized that during times of crisis “government agency and news media sources are found to be more successful in improving belief accuracy compared to social peers.” 55. See Sander L van der Linden, Chris E Clarke & Edward W Maibach, “Highlighting Consensus among Medical Scientists Increases Public Support for Vaccines: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment” (2015) 15:1207 BMC Public Health; Jeremy D Sloane & Jason R Wiles, “Communicating the Consensus on Climate Change to College Biology Majors: The Importance of Preaching to the Choir” (2020) 10:2 Ecology and Evolution 594; Sander L van der Linden et al, “The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change as a Gateway Belief: Experimental Evidence” 10:2 PLoS ONE e0118489, DOI: <10.1371/journal.pone.0118489>; and Sander L van der Linden, “Why Doctors Should Convey the Medical Consensus