Dr. Kate Starbird, a professor at the University of Washington and co-founder of the Center for an Informed Public, has dedicated her career to understanding how information travels during crises. Initially focused on the positive role of digital volunteers during disasters, her research took a turn when she began observing the darker side of online connectivity following the Boston Marathon bombing. She noticed that the same collaborative spirit used to help disaster victims was being redirected into the formation of false rumors. This transition from studying “pro-social” digital behavior to analyzing how misinformation spreads marks the evolution of her work from early crisis informatics to the nuanced, often toxic, study of modern digital discourse.
The core of Dr. Starbird’s current research is the concept of “participatory disinformation.” She describes a shift away from the idea that manipulation is exclusively a “top-down” effort by deceptive agents. Instead, she argues that modern disinformation is deeply collaborative. In these online spaces, influencers and motivated audiences work in tandem—sometimes wittingly, sometimes unwittingly—to shape narratives that align with their political worldviews. Audiences are no longer passive consumers; they are active participants who provide feedback, refine stories, and help verify or amplify claims, effectively turning the process of political messaging into a form of “improvisational theater.”
Dr. Starbird identifies why this model is particularly effective for right-wing political movements. While the left has remained tethered to traditional, institutional media, the right has successfully built a sprawling, non-traditional ecosystem of podcasts, hyper-partisan outlets, and social media influencers. This structure empowers audiences, giving them a sense of agency and inclusion that mainstream media often lacks. However, this same participatory power carries a significant danger: it can cause movements to spiral out of control, where the audiences themselves radicalize the influencers. When the audience feels they are co-creating the “truth,” they develop a fierce, almost proprietary attachment to those narratives, regardless of their factual accuracy.
The conversation also touches on the rhetorical shift from “disinformation” to what Dr. Starbird calls “bullsh*t.” Drawing on philosophical definitions, she notes that much of today’s political communication—typified by the communications style of Donald Trump—is less concerned with truth or falsehood and more concerned with the emotional, rhetorical, or political utility of a claim. It is about saying whatever is useful to achieve a goal or resonate with a base. This style of communication is inherently adaptive to the “if it bleeds, it leads” logic of social media algorithms, which reward engagement above all else, allowing such figures to disregard factual consistency without suffering political consequences.
Reflecting on the aftermath of January 6th, Dr. Starbird details a period of intense public discourse where the narrative surrounding truth and censorship was intentionally reframed. Political actors successfully rebranded the effort to curb election misinformation as a form of “censorship.” By leveraging the “folk theory”—a long-held, widespread suspicion that online platforms suppress conservative voices—they managed to shift public perception. They turned the act of calling out objective lies into an attack on “free speech.” This, she explains, is why a significant portion of the public now views fact-checking and information integrity efforts as hostile acts, effectively shielding bad-faith actors from criticism.
Today, Dr. Starbird continues to face significant challenges as she attempts to study these phenomena. Despite a desperate need for research and new forms of information literacy to navigate a landscape increasingly impacted by AI, the groups conducting this work find themselves defunded and under political investigation. She suggests that the resistance to studying propaganda is itself a tactic used by those who benefit from it. For Dr. Starbird, the goal remains clear: society must develop better ways to understand information provenance and digital accountability. She remains committed to helping the public navigate this complex environment, acknowledging that while the technologies and tactics evolve, the fundamental need for a resilient, informed citizenry has never been more urgent.