E-Mail Beats Blogs and Web Sites for Rumor Mongering

Forwarded e-mail purveying falsehoods about political candidates or insidious rumors is more convincing than Web sites or blogs that do the same. Christopher Intagliata reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

During the 2008 presidential election, the Internet became a giant rumor mill. For example, there were the viral e-mails claiming that Barack Obama’s birth certificate was a fake. Or ones spreading the phony Sarah Palin quote, “God made dinosaurs 4,000 years ago”.

Some political scholars worry the Web could undermine democracy, by misinforming and polarizing voters. But Web sites and blogs don’t serve up the most influential rumors. Our in-boxes do. So says a study of e-mail in the journal Human Communication Research. [R. Kelly Garrett, "Troubling Consequences of Online Political Rumoring"]

Just after the election, researcher R. Kelly Garrett randomly surveyed 600 Americans about their online habits, and whether they'd heard—and believed—a number of widespread rumors. He found that the Web does expose us to more rumors. But the Web also delivers more rebuttals, which can even the field.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


E-mail’s more insidious. Because you’re more likely to believe that rumor forwarded by cousin Rob. And the more you believe something, Garrett says, the more you want to share it with your social network—spawning a nasty cascade of misperception.

So before you hit SEND to forward e-mail, ask yourself: Do I know the item I'm sharing is true, or do I just want it to be?

—Christopher Intagliata

[The above text is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe