Advancing the Study of Political Misinformation Across Countries and Platforms—Introduction to the Special Issue

Abstract

The global spread of political misinformation poses serious challenges to democracies, eroding trust and distorting public discourse. However, research has largely focused on WEIRD countries—Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic—limiting our understanding of how misinformation operates across diverse political, cultural, and technological contexts. This special issue addresses these gaps through comparative, cross-platform, and interdisciplinary perspectives. The articles explore how political and media systems shape misinformation, the role of individual resilience, and how platform-specific features—across social media, messaging apps, and traditional media—affect the spread of false information. Studies from non-WEIRD regions offer insights into distinct vulnerabilities, emphasizing the need for context-sensitive approaches. Together, these contributions advance our understanding of misinformation as a global challenge and offer guidance for strengthening democratic resilience in varied information environments.

The global proliferation of misinformation poses profound challenges to democratic governance, public discourse, and societal cohesion. In the digital age, the rapid dissemination of false or misleading information has been amplified by the algorithms and affordances of social media platforms, allowing content to transcend national borders with unprecedented speed. This phenomenon potentially undermines trust in institutions and distorts public debate, reshaping how citizens engage with politics and information (Valenzuela et al. 2021; Vasist et al. 2024). While misinformation has existed across different historical and media environments, the contemporary digital landscape intensifies both its reach and complexity, necessitating a more nuanced understanding of how misinformation spreads across distinct media ecosystems and political contexts.

Scholars have underscored the complex interplay between misinformation and trust in public institutions, noting that misinformation can exacerbate societal fragmentation by exploiting preexisting political and ideological divides. In high-choice, polarized media environments, misinformation does not merely mislead but actively reinforces grievance-driven narratives that deepen distrust in journalism, science, and democratic institutions (Frischlich and Humprecht 2021). This does not mean that misinformation does not exert harmful effects in tightly regulated media systems; state-sanctioned falsehoods may be particularly potent in such contexts. Indeed, research has demonstrated that the effects of misinformation are highly contingent on political and media system characteristics, making cross-national comparisons essential for understanding how misinformation gains traction and how societies respond to it (Humprecht et al. 2021).

However, despite the growing body of research on misinformation, significant gaps remain in understanding how this multifaceted issue operates across diverse political, cultural, and technological contexts. Much of the existing scholarship on misinformation has focused on Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) countries, often neglecting the experiences of regions with distinct media systems, political dynamics, and cultural norms (Broda and Strömbäck 2024; Sultan et al. 2024). While studies conducted in these contexts have provided valuable insights into individual susceptibility to misinformation, fact-checking effectiveness, or the role of social media platforms, this narrow focus has constrained the theoretical development of misinformation research by assuming that these dynamics are universal.

Recent scholarship has begun to address these limitations by examining misinformation in non-WEIRD settings, revealing distinct patterns that challenge prevailing assumptions (Wasserman and Madrid-Morales 2022). For example, studies in China, India, and Indonesia, among others, have demonstrated how different media infrastructures, political regimes, and digital cultures shape both the production and reception of misinformation (Guo 2020; Neyazi 2021; Neyazi et al. 2021). However, many of these studies remain limited to country-specific or single-platform analyses, restricting their ability to offer comparative insights into how misinformation occurs across diverse environments. This gap is particularly problematic given the interconnectedness of digital political communication, where misinformation flows across borders, platforms, and languages, adapting to local conditions while remaining part of transnational information ecosystems (Humprecht et al. 2020).

Beyond geographic limitations, existing research has also often focused disproportionately on the role of individual cognitive biases and heuristics in misinformation susceptibility, without sufficiently accounting for the structural factors that influence the production, dissemination, and amplification of misinformation (Sultan et al. 2024). Furthermore, while researchers have made strides in identifying the long-term characteristics of misinformation (Kauk et al. 2025), significant questions remain regarding the political, economic, and technological forces that drive misinformation spread. These include the strategic use of misinformation by political elites and media actors, the role of different media environments in shaping misinformation exposure, and the ways misinformation circulates across diverse digital and traditional media ecosystems.

Moreover, while much of the literature on misinformation has examined major social media platforms such as X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook, it has been constrained by data access limitations, leading to a disproportionate focus on public, large-scale interactions rather than the full spectrum of misinformation dynamics. This focus neglects other crucial spaces where misinformation spreads, including private messenger apps, partisan media ecosystems, and algorithmically curated video platforms. A broader analytical lens is needed to assess how misinformation circulates across different types of digital environments, how platform affordances shape its reach and impact, and how misinformation intersects with traditional news media in different regions.

This special issue, Advancing the Study of Political Misinformation Across Countries and Platforms, addresses these challenges by adopting a comparative, cross-disciplinary, and cross-platform approach. Moving beyond single-country and single-platform analyses, it expands both empirical and theoretical boundaries, offering a broader perspective on the global dynamics of misinformation. Drawing on prior research that highlights the role of media, political, and economic conditions in shaping misinformation ecosystems (Humprecht et al. 2020), this collection brings together studies that explore how misinformation operates within and across different sociopolitical structures.

By incorporating research from various cultural, political, and media contexts, the articles in this collection provide new insights into the diverse ways misinformation manifests and how resilience can be built. The contributions examine the role of ideological and political drivers of misinformation, including the influence of populism, authoritarian media environments, and election campaigns. Others examine cross-national differences in misinformation perceptions, fact-checking practices, and news authentication behaviors. Through a comparative lens, the studies in this volume move beyond the dominant focus on individual-level factors in explaining the problem of misinformation; as the studies in this volume compare countries or platforms, they also surface social and technological structures that individual-level studies have either assumed or ignored. Collectively, these studies contribute to a broader theoretical and empirical understanding of misinformation as a complex, evolving phenomenon that interacts with political institutions, media structures, and digital technologies in distinct ways.

This special issue is structured around key thematic areas that reflect the multifaceted nature of political misinformation. The first set of articles examines how political and media systems shape the spread and perception of misinformation, considering factors such as fact-checking practices, political polarization, and media logics. The second group of studies explores the role of ideological and political actors in driving misinformation, focusing on populist narratives, election campaigns, and authoritarian media environments. A third theme investigates public perceptions and engagement with misinformation, including risk perceptions, news authentication behaviors, and the impact of misinformation on democratic attitudes. Finally, this issue also includes studies that examine how misinformation manifests across different platforms and media ecosystems, offering insights into the role of private messaging apps, social media, and legacy media in shaping the misinformation landscape.

By emphasizing comparative research and methodological diversity, this special issue contributes to a more global and context-sensitive understanding of misinformation dynamics. It challenges dominant assumptions about how misinformation spreads, how it is perceived, and how societies respond to it, offering a more nuanced and empirically grounded approach to misinformation in the digital age.

The Role of Political and Media Systems in Shaping Misinformation

A central theme of this special issue is the role of political and media systems in influencing the spread and perception of misinformation. Political environments characterized by high polarization and weak institutional trust are often more vulnerable to misinformation, as fragmentation within the media landscape can provide fertile ground for disseminating false narratives (Frischlich and Humprecht 2021). In this special issue, Mahl et al.’s (2024) comparative study of fact-checking cultures in Brazil and Germany illustrates how regional political and media environments shape the strategies and practices used to counter misinformation. While fact-checking organizations in both countries share core principles, differences in issue selection and verification methods reflect the distinct challenges posed by their respective contexts. For instance, a politically polarized environment in Brazil necessitates a stronger focus on combating disinformation tied to electoral politics. In contrast, in Germany, the emphasis lies on long-term, evidence-based practices shaped by the country’s regulatory framework.

Similarly, Štětka et al. (2024) examine the relationship between populist attitudes, trust in experts, and beliefs in COVID-19 misinformation across Brazil, Poland, Serbia, and the United States. Their findings reveal that populist affinity and mistrust in expertise are stronger predictors of misinformation belief than media consumption patterns, highlighting the intersection of political ideology and societal trust in shaping vulnerability to misinformation. These results underscore the importance of considering the broader political and cultural contexts in which misinformation circulates rather than focusing solely on individual behaviors or media effects.

Nenno and Puschmann (2004) further explore the structural dimensions of misinformation by analyzing flagged misinformation on Facebook across twenty-four WEIRD and non-WEIRD countries. Their study investigates how news values—such as negativity, conflict, and proximity—shape the perception and flagging of misinformation. They find that these values are not uniformly expressed across different contexts, challenging the universality of Western-centric models of newsworthiness. These findings reinforce the argument that misinformation must be studied through a comparative lens that accounts for the diversity of global media systems and their interactions with local political dynamics.

Individual-Level Factors and Misinformation Resilience

Another critical theme in this issue is the interplay between individual-level factors, such as political efficacy and institutional trust, and broader societal dynamics. Several articles emphasize the role of individual capacities in fostering resilience to misinformation while revealing the contradictions and complexities inherent in such behaviors.

Hameleers and Ortiz’s (2024) study on risk perceptions of misinformation across seven countries highlights how individuals assess the prevalence and impact of misinformation in their respective contexts. Their findings link higher perceptions of misinformation risks to societal factors, such as media system characteristics and cultural attitudes toward trust and authority, suggesting that collective experiences shape individual awareness.

Törnberg and Chueri (2025) investigate the role of political parties in disseminating misinformation, focusing on a dataset of tweets from parliamentarians in twenty-six countries. Their analysis reveals that radical-right populist parties are significantly more likely to spread misinformation than other political groups, taking advantage of the attention economy on which social media platforms are built and in which they thrive.

News Authentication and Fact-Checking Practices

Mahl et al.’s (2024) study highlights the significant cross-national differences in fact-checking cultures, demonstrating how institutional structures, regulatory environments, and political climates shape verification processes. Their analysis of fact-checking in Brazil and Germany shows that while both countries adhere to international fact-checking standards, their approaches are influenced by local conditions. In contrast, Zhu et al. (2025) examine how news authentication behaviors vary across Hong Kong, the Netherlands, and the United States, finding that fragmented, low-trust media environments increase the likelihood of individuals engaging in news authentication. However, their findings also indicate that in polarized societies, news authentication may serve to reinforce preexisting beliefs rather than mitigate misinformation. This complexity suggests that while fact-checking and news authentication are vital tools in combating misinformation, their effectiveness is contingent upon broader societal and political contexts. These studies emphasize the need for a more nuanced approach to misinformation resilience that accounts for structural and individual-level factors.

Integrating Non-WEIRD Contexts and Underrepresented Perspectives

A key contribution of this special issue is its integration of non-WEIRD contexts, addressing the underrepresentation of diverse perspectives in misinformation research. By examining regions with distinct political, cultural, and media environments, the articles challenge assumptions rooted in Western-centric frameworks and provide insights into the unique challenges faced by these societies. Ochieng et al. (2025), for instance, explore how perceptions of misinformation and censorship influence satisfaction with democracy across thirty-four African countries. Their study highlights the dual pressures of misinformation and authoritarian control, showing how restricted press freedom and low trust in governance intersect to shape public attitudes toward democratic institutions. These findings underscore the need for context-specific approaches to combating misinformation, particularly in regions where systemic vulnerabilities amplify its impact.

Fitzgerald et al. (2024) analyze the instrumentalization of religion and disinformation during election campaigns in Brazil and Turkey, offering a comparative perspective on how cultural and religious dimensions intersect with political strategies. Their findings illustrate how authoritarian populist leaders use religious rhetoric to consolidate power and spread disinformation, demonstrating the importance of examining misinformation’s cultural and ideological underpinnings in non-Western contexts. In addition, Saldaña et al. (2024) focus on the role of media systems in shaping voter perceptions during Chile’s 2022 constitutional referendum. Their analysis reveals that while legacy media can amplify misinformation, it also plays a crucial role in informing voters and shaping public opinion. This dual role highlights the complexity of media interventions in combating misinformation, particularly in politically contested environments.

Platform-Specific Dynamics in the Spread and Perception of Misinformation

The role of digital platforms in shaping the spread and perception of misinformation is another critical area addressed in this special issue. While much of the public and academic discourse has focused on the role of social media, such as Facebook and X (Twitter), this issue extends the discussion by incorporating platform-specific dynamics, including private messaging apps and legacy media channels. These differences are essential to understanding how misinformation travels, gains traction, and affects public perceptions in different contexts.

For instance, Stetka et al. (2024) highlight the unique role of messaging apps like WhatsApp in disseminating misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Their study across Brazil, Poland, Serbia, and the United States shows that private messaging apps, often overlooked in misinformation research, significantly impact beliefs in false information. These apps bypass traditional gatekeeping mechanisms, enabling the rapid and usually unchecked spread of misinformation in ways distinct from public social media platforms.

Hameleers and Ortiz (2024) further emphasize the importance of platform-specific comparisons by examining how risk perceptions of misinformation vary across different media types, including social media, private messaging apps, and traditional news outlets. Their findings suggest that public perceptions of misinformation are shaped not only by the content itself but also by the characteristics of the platforms on which it appears. For example, social media platforms are often perceived as more prone to misinformation than legacy media, reflecting broader societal anxieties about digital communication technologies.

But while many studies have demonstrated the significant role that social media platforms play in spreading falsehoods, Andı et al. (2025) demonstrate that in particular contexts, such as authoritarian regimes, journalistic media remain influential, and can be exploited to disseminate misinformation. While their study focuses on a single country, their survey allows comparison of the use of different information sources and their impact on susceptibility to misinformation.

Along these lines, Saldaña et al. (2024) provide a contrasting perspective by analyzing the role of traditional and digital media in shaping voter perceptions during Chile’s 2022 constitutional referendum. Their study highlights the dual role of legacy media as both amplifiers of and counterbalances to misinformation. Legacy outlets often serve as reference points for credibility, but their involvement in misinformation dynamics underscores the complexity of platform-specific effects in politically contested environments.

These contributions underscore the need to move beyond broad generalizations about “social media” or “digital platforms” and instead focus on the specific affordances, algorithms, and social dynamics that differentiate platforms. Combining the findings presented in the different articles, this special issue provides comparative insights into how different types of platforms—social media, private messaging apps, and legacy media—mediate misinformation dynamics. Some studies highlight how platform type and function, such as the distinction between public social media spaces and private messaging apps, shape misinformation exposure and belief. Others examine differences in news authentication and misinformation risk perceptions across platforms, emphasizing variations in how users assess credibility and engage with misinformation. While these findings underscore the importance of platform-specific contexts, they highlight the influence of platform type and user behavior in misinformation dynamics, underscoring the need for future research on platform affordances and governance. These insights are critical for developing targeted interventions that account for the distinct roles of platforms in facilitating or mitigating the spread of false information.

Journalism, News Values, and Misinformation

The interplay between journalism and misinformation is another significant area of inquiry in this issue. Nenno and Puschmann’s (2024) study on news values in flagged misinformation provides valuable insights into how traditional journalistic practices influence the spread and perception of misinformation. By analyzing the prevalence of news values such as negativity, conflict, and proximity, the authors show that these values are more pronounced in flagged misinformation, reflecting the alignment between audience preferences and the characteristics of false content. However, their findings also reveal significant differences between WEIRD and non-WEIRD countries, challenging the applicability of Western-centric models of newsworthiness and calling for broader theoretical frameworks.

These insights build on existing research on the alignment between journalistic practices and audience behavior, suggesting that the characteristics of misinformation are shaped not only by those who produce and share it but also by the cultural and institutional factors that define newsworthiness (Trilling et al., 2017). This perspective bridges gaps between journalism studies and misinformation research, offering new ways to understand how media systems and practices influence the dynamics of misinformation.

Contributions and Future Directions

This special issue makes several key contributions to misinformation research by bringing together diverse perspectives and methodologies. It broadens the field’s empirical and theoretical scope, emphasizing the need for comparative studies that account for cultural, political, and technological diversity. It bridges gaps between journalism studies and political misinformation research, highlighting the role of news values and journalistic practices in shaping the spread and perception of misinformation. Finally, it underscores the complexity of fostering resilience, showing that effective interventions must address individual capacities and systemic conditions.

Current events underscore the importance of expanding research in this domain, particularly considering challenges such as Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (FIMI)—a form of coordinated, state-driven disinformation aimed at influencing public opinion and democratic processes (Arribas et al. 2023). The studies in this special issue contribute to understanding these challenges by examining how misinformation spreads in politically contested environments (Saldaña et al., 2024), the role of different media systems and political actors in shaping misinformation narratives (Fitzgerald et al., 2024; Törnberg and Chueri, 2025), and the impact of news authentication and fact-checking practices in mitigating false information (Zhu et al., 2025; Mahl et al., 2024). Insights from cross-national research also underscore how platform types, political ideologies, and regulatory frameworks influence misinformation susceptibility, providing a comparative foundation for addressing emerging threats such as deepfakes and state-driven disinformation campaigns. These contributions help contextualize and refine strategies for safeguarding information integrity in diverse political and media landscapes.

The findings presented in this issue also raise important questions for future research. How can policymakers and practitioners develop context-specific strategies to combat misinformation while accounting for the diversity of global media environments? Given the increasing role of artificial intelligence in both generating and detecting misinformation, what ethical considerations must be addressed in automated misinformation detection? How do social norms and cultural differences shape perceptions of misinformation, and how can these insights inform intervention strategies?

Moreover, misinformation research must further integrate computational methods, such as network analysis and multimodal AI, to track the evolution and impact of misinformation across platforms and geopolitical contexts. The intersection of disinformation and political extremism also warrants closer examination, particularly in how misinformation narratives contribute to radicalization and political violence. Finally, as public trust in journalistic news media continues to decline, understanding the role of alternative media ecosystems in misinformation dynamics remains critical for future scholarship.

Ultimately, this collection underscores the value of cross-national and comparative research in understanding and addressing the challenges of misinformation. The special issue advances academic understanding by situating these studies within broader societal and global contexts. It provides actionable insights for scholars, policymakers, and educators seeking to strengthen resilience against misinformation in an increasingly interconnected world.