The massive dissemination of hoaxes and disinformation marks the urgency caused by DANA, which finds in social networks the ideal vehicle for rapid and effective dissemination. These messages, which are even amplified on web portals or television programs, as Iker Jiménez did in Horizonare usually accompanied by talk of an alleged intentional concealment of information, for example about the number of people dead or missing. It’s no coincidence that many of these hoaxes lean towards the classic “we’re telling you what they don’t want you to know” or “this is what no one is telling you”, despite the fact that dozens media broadcast what is happening. on the ground.
The paradigmatic case was that of the parking lot of the Bonaire shopping center, in Aldaia, where no body was found despite the fact that the idea that there were “hundreds” or “thousands” had been circulating for days . The tunnel between Alfafar and Benetússer was also the subject of a hoax that “45 dead people” were found there. There are also lies about the destruction of dams, the fall of 112 or the claim that the radar that monitors the rain in Valencia did not work, among others. Far-right sectors, conspiracy theorists and climate change deniers are joining forces to spread non-contrasting messages that also resonate with certain influencers or content creators with thousands of followers.
But, beyond the transmitter, why do these hoaxes end up spreading? Professor of social psychology at the Complutense University of Madrid (UCM) Guillermo Fouce explains that in the face of a crisis like the current one “there is a very relevant human need” which is to “know what is happening and give it meaning . » “And when there is no information or it is not immediate, alternative answers arise, it doesn’t matter whether they are true or not, but they cover that space, they make us feel more calm and make us believe that we apparently know what is happening,” adds the also president of Psychology Without Borders.
For the expert, it is also essential to emphasize how the effectiveness of these messages “is linked” to the way in which the discourse surrounding them “enters the emotional domain”. “In social psychology, we know that the best way to influence is emotions, which evolve at a much faster pace, not arguments. In this case, uncertainty is invoked and instrumentalized to oppose “I will tell you the truth”. This ends up giving certainty, which is currently lacking, even if it is through lies or elements that simplify reality,” believes Fouce.
The educational psychologist and professor at the Open University of Catalonia (UOC) Sylvie Pérez thinks along the same lines and explains that these messages are generally linked “to pain, to suffering and to the proximity of what is happening” so that “there is no analysis of the information”. ” but rather “it happens and is irrationally assumed to be true.” And this, in a context where criticism of the authorities is intensifying and discontent is growing among the victims of the tragedy themselves. “There is a feeling of improvisation and, when in doubt, this increases the chances that hoaxes will circulate,” adds the expert.
This crisis is not exceptional, even if it is taking on new nuances today, believes Fouce. “In an emergency, this has always happened to us. At 11M, for example, false lists of missing or deceased people were sent to victims,” explains the psychologist, who highlights two elements that differentiate the current situation: “On the one hand, the speed of the networks and the capacity to these people to generate their own diffusion mechanisms; on the other, that there are interests behind this with a clear political intention of destabilization and the search for a scapegoat, which in this case would be Pedro Sánchez”, adds the expert on the strategy deployed by the far right to capitalize on the disaster.
“Disorganized” communication
But on the other hand, “there is no effective communication strategy that counters disinformation and leaves it less space”, according to the specialists consulted. “It failed from minute zero,” responds forcefully Carles Pont, one of the main researchers of the Crisis and Emergency Communication in Social Media project at Pompeu Fabra University (UPF). The specialist believes that “risk communication has failed” by the Valencian Generalitat by reacting “late” and now “there is no control and coordination of it” in the midst of the crisis.
It is not that there have not been appearances – the president of the Valencian Community Carlos Mazón did it and on behalf of the Moncloa Pedro Sánchez, the general head of the UME or this Tuesday the directors general of the National Police, the Civil Guard and Public Services Health, for example – but for specialists, “it is an error” not to have “clear planning of spokespersons” and precise schedules to go out and talk. “Whether it is necessary morning and afternoon or once a day, it depends, it is something that must be decided,” says Pont, who gives the example of the press conferences that the Technical Steering Committee gave every morning during Covid.
Guillem Suau, crisis communications specialist at the University of Lleida, agrees: “Communication is disorganized and there are no unambiguous messages. Sometimes you have to come out and simply say that there is no news from the previous appearance because that reassures the public, but it is essential that the information is transmitted, constant and, above all, that there is a point of reference for people, so that they know that “These are the people who are going to tell you what the situation is, that is, they should not be the spokesperson every time.”
Otherwise, not only does it “add more anxiety and stress” to the population in general and to victims in particular, but “it allows a lot of noise to be made around the emergency and gives more room for speculation” at a time when In addition, “we see a growing distrust of public institutions and the media,” says Suau, who believes that hoaxes and disinformation would also circulate if institutional communication “was effective” but “ surely” that would prevent them from going viral. so much and that part of the population would believe them. »
The case of the number of deaths – 215 according to the latest official data – and missing people, which are the subject of the theory of cover-up, is paradigmatic for experts. “In this we must be very careful, you cannot give information without closing it because it also depends on a technical process – as several forensic experts have explained these days – but it must come out and l “explain it and people will understand it perfectly”, believes Pont, for whom “it is not a good idea” to give information of this type on the fly and without programming, as happened this Tuesday with the. body found in Letur (Albacete) to which an identity was initially assigned that later it was questioned.
The “non-state” discourse
Specialists are aware that talking about communication strategy in times of overwhelm “is very easy to say and very difficult to do” due to the scale and unpredictability of a disaster “but the reality is that it there are successes,” they admit. . Guillermo Fouce, for his part, doubts the idea that this type of messages “which exploit pain” to “construct a self-serving political message” are easily neutralized by institutional communication. “Surely there were mistakes, but in this case we are not talking about objective information that can be refuted but rather emotional and value-laden.”
Beyond hoaxes about specific data or information, the professor of social psychology refers to the discourse that is spreading these days according to which “everything is bad, it is permanent chaos, we are alone and abandoned” and supported by the belief of the “State”. failed” and this would be consistent with the allegation which defends the thesis of cover-up by the media or the authorities. A message which, according to him, “is dangerous”: “We are looking for extreme polarization and in this sense to affirm that there is no State and that nothing works is practically to legitimize a coup d’état , which in some way can intervene since “He knows what forces”, he analyzes.
Guillem Suau expresses himself along the same lines and reflects on how, in times of crisis like this, “this type of discourse emerges” which “feeds the feeling of panic and reinforces the ideas that defend strong and orderly commandments, which is very good.” to the most authoritarian and conservative political sectors.
The expert, however, qualifies and gives importance to the “small base of reality” on which, according to him, these messages are built at specific moments: “There was a lack of coordination and there was incompetence, at least when it comes to informing in a clear and precise manner, which creates a favorable environment for the far right to easily spread the idea that the Government only wants your taxes and abandons us from simple way. An idea that also reinforces people’s prior beliefs that they are using pain to cause political damage.”
