How health journalists gatecheck public figures who share misinformation

Abstract

This study investigates how health journalists report handling misinformation shared by a public figure. Survey results from 629 U.S. journalists show that nearly 70% said they would gatecheck the information or make an explicit reference that the information was incorrect. Using the gatekeeping theory and the Hierarchy of Influences model, we examined the individual and organizational influences on information correction and found that women and more experienced professionals were less likely to correct the public figure. For those who chose to correct the public figure, their motivations included public-figure accountability, journalistic duty, concern that the audience would further pursue misinformation, and informing the public. Meanwhile, concerns about balance, maintaining neutrality in the marketplace of ideas, and amplifying misinformation could dissuade them.