The Power of Belief in falsehood
and the Persistence of Disinformation
In today’s world, where information travels faster than ever, the spread of disinformation is not just a passing concern—it’s a powerful force that shapes perceptions, influences behavior, and sometimes becomes entrenched as an undeniable truth. What makes the situation particularly unsettling is that many people cling to falsehoods even when they are debunked, especially if those falsehoods serve a deeper emotional or ideological need.
This behavior can be understood through the lens of human psychology, where belief often transcends evidence. When disinformation targets a specific enemy or adversary, it taps into pre-existing fears, prejudices, and biases, making it especially appealing. In such instances, the truth becomes secondary to the emotional payoff of reinforcing a particular narrative—especially one that casts the enemy in a negative light. The notion of “us versus them” becomes central, and the target of the disinformation becomes a focal point for collective anxiety. Any piece of information, regardless of its veracity, that supports this narrative is welcomed, while contradictory evidence is discarded.
This dynamic is particularly evident when disinformation is deliberately manufactured and spread, often with the intent to manipulate public opinion. For broadcasters or influencers pushing false narratives, the truth is less important than the desired outcome—whether that be to discredit an adversary, rally a specific audience, or control the flow of information. If disinformation helps maintain power or influence, it becomes a tool for shaping perceptions, even if the facts are clearly debunked. In such cases, the priority isn’t the search for truth but the continuation of a narrative that serves the broadcaster’s or group’s interests.
From a media-theoretical perspective, Marshall McLuhan’s work on the “medium is the message” helps explain why disinformation is so effective in the modern world. McLuhan argued that the medium through which information is presented shapes not just how we perceive the content but how we experience the world. In today’s digital age, where social media and online platforms amplify personalized content, people are exposed to misinformation in environments where emotional appeals and identity reinforcement take precedence over rationality. As McLuhan warned, technology, particularly media, creates environments where people’s perceptions are shaped by the medium itself, rather than by the objective truth of the content.
Meanwhile, Jürgen Habermas’s theory of the public sphere underscores the critical role communication plays in democratic societies. However, when disinformation infiltrates public discourse, it erodes the potential for rational, critical debate. Habermas argued that a healthy public sphere depends on the free exchange of ideas, where individuals engage in discussions based on facts and reason. Yet in an environment saturated by disinformation, this kind of discourse becomes undermined, and public debate becomes skewed toward emotional manipulation rather than truth. Disinformation thus not only distorts facts but also obstructs meaningful conversation.
For the audience, especially those deeply invested in a particular narrative, accepting disinformation can be seen as a coping mechanism. Admitting that the false beliefs they’ve held might be wrong can feel threatening—emotionally, socially, and even psychologically. Once a certain story or belief is internalized, it becomes part of one’s identity or worldview. To abandon it would require a shift in how they see themselves and the world around them. This cognitive dissonance—feeling uncomfortable when holding conflicting ideas—leads many to double down on their beliefs, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that contradicts them.
This phenomenon becomes even more entrenched when the disinformation targets a particular group or enemy. The emotional satisfaction of being “right” or of protecting one’s community, identity, or ideology often outweighs the cold facts. For many, the belief becomes a defense mechanism—a way to maintain a sense of security and control in an increasingly uncertain world. Disinformation, in these instances, fulfills an emotional need for certainty, reinforcing both personal and collective identity against perceived threats. McLuhan’s theory suggests that, in the digital age, individuals often experience this reinforcement through media platforms that are designed to cater to their existing beliefs.
The persistence of such misinformation, even after being debunked, reflects not just a failure of media literacy but also a deeper psychological need for certainty and security. People who are most vulnerable to misinformation often have a heightened sensitivity to threats, which disinformation exploits by targeting their social and cultural identity. In this way, disinformation becomes not just a tool for manipulation but also a way for individuals to maintain a sense of control and stability in an uncertain world.
Thus, while it may be unsurprising that individuals continue to cling to disinformation, the real challenge lies in understanding the complex interplay of psychological, social, and media factors that enable such narratives to persist. In a media landscape shaped by powerful technologies, disinformation finds fertile ground in the emotional and identity-based needs of its audience, making it a persistent and pervasive force in shaping public perception.
Moreover, the persistence of false narratives can be likened to the “opium of the people” that Karl Marx spoke about in his critique of religion. Just as religion in Marx’s view provided solace to the oppressed by offering an illusory escape from material suffering, so does disinformation offer a psychological escape for those who feel powerless or disenfranchised. By clinging to a narrative that supports their worldview, individuals can block out uncomfortable truths and find refuge in an illusion of certainty and control. This false comfort can be especially alluring in a world that often feels chaotic, unjust, or beyond one’s control.
The role of disinformation in society, much like the role of religion in Marx’s theory, can serve to pacify the oppressed. The emotional satisfaction of holding on to a narrative, even when it is clearly debunked, provides a psychological shield. It becomes a form of resistance against perceived threats, offering a sense of security in an increasingly uncertain world. However, just as opium dulls the senses and prolongs suffering without addressing the root cause, disinformation prevents individuals from confronting deeper issues, keeping them trapped in a cycle of false belief and dependency.
But come to think that in religion means invoking hope and peace, a protest against suffering, demanding justice. What makes it described an opium? The establishment uses religion as a tool to pacify, but should faith remain a pacifier for the oppressed as scripture increasingly demands justice? Then the establishment can shun on religion as faith inceasingly speaks otherwise from the establishment's intent- but instead having a myriad of distractors just for the people to evade from the truth, and that includes media of various forms to disinform. Even art, literature, can be an opium not just a copium.
In this way, disinformation is not merely a matter of misleading the public; it is an emotional and psychological mechanism that addresses deep-seated fears and needs. It provides an emotional refuge for those who feel vulnerable or marginalized, making them less likely to question the false narratives that provide them with a sense of belonging and certainty. Just as opium is addictive and self-reinforcing, disinformation becomes a mental and emotional trap, keeping individuals from breaking free and seeking the truth.
The challenge, therefore, lies not just in debunking falsehoods but in understanding the emotional, social, and psychological factors that make these false narratives so attractive and persistent. Breaking free from the grip of disinformation requires more than just presenting facts—it requires addressing the deeper needs and fears that give rise to such beliefs in the first place. Only by confronting these underlying psychological forces can society hope to overcome the pernicious effects of disinformation and move toward a more informed and rational public discourse.