Key Insight
Kahan analyzes the 'alternative facts' phenomenon of early 2017, arguing the more dangerous threat to democratic epistemology comes from high-status superspreaders of misinformation.
By February 2017, "fake news" and "alternative facts" had become ubiquitous in public discourse. Both captured something real about the information environment. But the framing of both concepts tended to obscure the more serious threats to democratic epistemology.
The "fake news" framing suggested the primary problem was the proliferation of false information on social media — a problem that, while real, is not new and not the most dangerous form of epistemic pollution.
The more dangerous threat comes from high-status superspreaders — individuals with large platforms and high perceived credibility who propagate misinformation. These actors exploit the trust heuristics that ordinarily help citizens navigate an information-rich environment.
Cultural cognition is directly relevant here. An individual perceived as sharing one's cultural values will be extended greater credibility, regardless of their actual expertise or accuracy. High-status figures who signal cultural alignment can therefore propagate misinformation to culturally receptive audiences with unusual effectiveness.