Cited by 251Misinformation and Its ImpactsCommunication and COVID-19 ImpactVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy

A deadly infodemic: social media and the power of COVID-19 misinformation

Open access
Gisondi, Michael A, Barber, Rachel, Faust, Jemery Samuel, Raja, Ali, Strehlow, Matthew C, Westafer, Lauren M, Gottlieb, Michael·2022·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

COVID-19 is currently the third leading cause of death in the United States, and unvaccinated people continue to die in high numbers. Vaccine hesitancy and vaccine refusal are fueled by COVID-19 misinformation and disinformation on social media platforms. This online COVID-19 infodemic has deadly consequences. In this editorial, the authors examine the roles that social media companies play in the COVID-19 infodemic and their obligations to end it. They describe how fake news about the virus developed on social media and acknowledge the initially muted response by the scientific community to counteract misinformation. The authors then challenge social media companies to better mitigate the COVID-19 infodemic, describing legal and ethical imperatives to do so. They close with recommendations for better partnerships with community influencers and implementation scientists, and they provide the next steps for all readers to consider. This guest editorial accompanies the Journal of Medical Internet Research special theme issue, “Social Media, Ethics, and COVID-19 Misinformation.”

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/35552

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Various political leaders publicly undermined WHO, campaigned against it and its advice, and tried to halt its funding.

    “various political leaders publicly undermined WHO, disseminated campaigns against it and its advice, and even tried to halt its funding.”
  • New forms of disinformation through digital media are especially powerful in disseminating ideas because of their reach, immediacy, relative anonymity, and the ease of creating echo chambers.

    “Now we are experiencing new forms of disinformation through digital media,231 which are especially powerful in disseminating ideas because of their reach (eg, Facebook has nearly 2·4 billion subscribers), immediacy, relative anonymity, and the ease of creating echo chambers of tightly clustered groups receiving utterly different impressions of the facts from other online communities.”
  • Social media and gray literature have already been a ground for infodemic.

    “Social media and gray literature have already been the ground for infodemic, (63)”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [13]Stanford Infodemic Conference 2021 2021-11-13 https://www.stanfordinfodemic.org/

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gisondi, M. A., Barber, R., Faust, J. S., Raja, A., Strehlow, M. C., Westafer, L. M., & Gottlieb, M.
Affiliations
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School (US)
  • Rush University (US)
Corresponding author
Gisondi, Michael A
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2022-02-01
Volume
24
Issue
2
Pages
e35552
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4205472032
Cited by
251
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 61 · 2023: 81 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 1
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Communication and COVID-19 Impact
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Keywords
COVID-19 misinformation, infodemic, social media, disinformation, vaccine hesitancy, vaccine refusal, fake news, misinformation mitigation, social media ethics, legal obligations, community influencers, implementation science, scientific community response
MeSH terms
COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Infodemic, Communication, Humans, United States, Social Media

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review