Mythbusting pitfalls and how to avoid them
Anyone familiar with the Common Cause approach to messaging will know we always caution against ‘mythbusting’ – that is, repeating (and thus inadvertently reinforcing) false or misleading information in order to debunk it.
We recently reviewed the latest evidence from the fields of applied psychology and cognitive linguistics for any new research on mythbusting and its effects on beliefs and behaviours.
The good news is that research on mythbusting has flourished in recent years – thanks to renewed interest in the science of correcting misinformation during the Trump years and the Covid 19 pandemic, where misinformation ran rife.
While our literature review on mythbusting didn’t change our minds, we did discover some nuances we think are worth sharing.
Before we get into the detail, let’s make one thing clear:
In most cases, mythbusting or debunking misinformation works against us. There are many reasons for this, but here are our top two:
It’s a wasted opportunity to tell your story
Repeating misinformation or opponent framing in central campaign communications in order to debunk it is usually a strategically bad idea. Campaigns that win do so by telling a values-based story (“Love is love”) – not wasting time engaging with their opponents’ frames. Where audiences aren’t already familiar with the misinformation, we’re doing our opponents’ work for them by spreading it.
2. Misinformation is rarely the real problem
We know that facts don’t change people’s minds – and that goes for false statements of fact too. People make up their minds subconsciously using values, and only apply “facts” and logic afterwards. So even if you succeed in changing someone specific belief, this rarely changes people’s actual attitudes or behaviours.
That said, correcting misinformation can be effective in some specific circumstances – but only if done carefully.
Some reasons you may be forced to mythbust might include:
Your organisation has a duty to correct misinformation (for example, about a health issue like cancer) when people ask you specifically about myths they’ve already heard.
You are put on the spot with a piece of misinformation - for example, by a journalist or a community member in a live or online conversation that you need to address.
In these rare cases where it is necessary to address the myth directly, here are some tips to help you avoid the most common mythbusting pitfalls.
How to mythbust (if you absolutely, positively, definitely must)
1. Avoid negation
If you are going to mythbust, it’s important to avoid negation. Negation involves repeating a frame while adding in words like “not” to indicate it is false. For example, saying: “Laptops do not cause cancer”.
The problem with this sentence structure is that runs the risk the word “not” will become detached in memory, leaving audiences with the concept of “laptops” + “cause cancer”. The last thing we want to do is build this association in people’s minds. This is especially likely to occur when an audience’s attention is divided.
Instead, we want to state our truth clearly and separate it from the myth.
How exactly do we do this? That’s our next tip!
2. Serve up a truth sandwich
Cognitive linguist George Lakoff (who wrote the seminal book on mythbusting, Don’t Think of an Elephant) came up with his ‘truth sandwich’ strategy during the height of the Trump era. It involves sandwiching a reference to the misinformation between two slices of truth.
Start with the truth: Begin the communication with a clear, values-based message, framing the issue in the way you want it. State the facts in a positive and straightforward manner.
Address the misinformation: The second layer of the truth sandwich involves addressing the false claim or misinformation directly. Flag that a lie is coming before you mention it. Avoid repeating the lie explicitly, as repetition can inadvertently reinforce it in people’s minds. Instead, acknowledge that there are alternative claims which might be due to misunderstandings or deliberate malice.
Reiterate the truth: End the communication by restating the truth from the beginning. This helps reinforce the accurate information and leaves the audience with the correct message in mind.
Here’s our ‘laptop’ example again, this time as a truth sandwich:
Journalist:
So, there’s a rumour going around that using a laptop can give you cancer. Is that true?
You:
The important thing for people to know here is that laptops are safe to use. Feel free to use your laptop on your lap or on the desk or even in bed – you can do so safely.
We often hear various myths out there on the internet and via word of mouth about various things giving you cancer. They are often misleading or inaccurate and just scare people for no reason.
So we can reassure everyone that when it comes to laptops, they are definitely safe to use from this perspective.
3. Optimise your content for maximum ‘truthiness’
‘Truthiness’ describes the characteristics that make people believe a piece of information is true. Pictures help truthiness (Google ‘Nick Cave truthiness’ for a fun example). So does repeating the truth many times and putting it in a larger font than the lie.
Other truthiness tips include putting your truth into an engaging, emotional story and showing social consensus (in other words, letting people know many others believe it).2
4. Pre-empt the spread of information
If you fear misinformation could spread, consider a pre-emptive move that tells a competing story.
A well-known example of this was during the 2021 Presidential Election campaign in the United States, when Joe Biden’s team came up against an opposition media story that claimed he was going to ban Americans from eating burgers more than once a month. Biden’s campaign team responded by setting up a photo opportunity of him flipping burgers at a campaign event – not repeating the lie, but undermining it instead.
Image: Charlie Neibergall/AP
Approach myths strategically
Navigating the intricate world of mythbusting in our digital age requires both caution and strategy. The goal is not to become embroiled in a ceaseless game of whack-a-mole against falsehoods, but rather to strategically counteract them while staying true to our core messaging.
The evidence from cognitive linguistics and applied psychology shows that challenging myths can sometimes do more harm than good. It’s therefore worth seeing mythbusting as a last resort, rather than a go-to tactic.
In those rare cases where mythbusting is necessary, strategies such as the truth sandwich provide a guide to navigate these choppy waters, anchoring the audience in a sea of truth amidst waves of deception. As we progress, let's remember to prioritise values-based stories over direct confrontations with falsehoods, emphasising connection, clarity, and truth in our messaging.
Have you had any success in combating misinformation without falling into a mythbusting trap? We’d love to hear about it! Leave a comment below, drop us a line or share your thoughts in our Facebook group.
