Graduation Year

2026

Document Type

Open Access Senior Thesis

Degree Name

Bachelor of Arts

Department

Science, Technology and Society

Reader 1

Gabriela Morales

Reader 2

Andre Wakefield

Terms of Use & License Information

Terms of Use for work posted in Scholarship@Claremont.

Rights Information

© 2026 Julia C Knutson

Abstract

Information epidemics or “infodemics” became the center of misinformation conversations, due to a global increase in information spread surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic. While many academic scholars and institutions, such as the World Health Organization (WHO) attribute the cause of infodemics to anti-science attitudes and the public’s lack of scientific literacy, scholars in Science, Technology, and Society argue that analyzing misinformation within these isolated bounds limits our understanding of its underlying social and historical contexts. Using the COVID-19 pandemic as a case study for misinformation analysis reveals a gap in our current understanding of how people who resonate with or spread misinformation function with deceitful or malicious intentions. This paper discusses the WHO’s framing of an infodemic, specifically their explanation that the increase in the spread of misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic was a result of there being too much information in general circulating in both digitally and physically public spaces. I argue that although leaders in science such as the World Health Organization, had the right intentions to protect the public from engaging with harmful misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic by establishing infodemic awareness, their explanation that disagreements or skepticism of science are solely rooted in anti-science or public health sentiments is an inaccurate portrayal of how people negotiated and legitimized Covid knowledge. A deeper analysis into Redditors’ perspectives on major topics within Covid misinformation, including virus origins, infection and mortality statistics, and the role of political or scientific responsibility in mediating communications amongst the public reveal that Redditors grappled with how their lived realities, medical histories, and day-to-day observations within their communities reflected a more truthful narrative of their experience during the pandemic, compared to the quantitative data and findings projected by scientific expertise as undebatable truths. For Redditors, it was not just the amount of information that was causing confusion amongst some individuals; rather, it was the way that the information was presented as hard fact which caused frustration, uncertainty, and for some, a decrease in trust in scientific institutions. This shows that Redditors’ understandings of what kinds of information is legitimate and has authority stem from the balance between scientific institutions accounts of truthful knowledge, how people in power act based on those truths, and what they can tangibly observe in their own lives.

Download

Share

COinS