At the Misinformation Desk, we’re big fans of the podcast “Question Everything.” It’s hosted by Brian Reed, a reporter who dives deep into what journalism is all about, and guess what? Misinformation pops up a lot in his discussions. Recently, Brian sat down with Natalia Antelava, a foreign correspondent who really knows her stuff when it comes to something called “media capture.” Think of media capture as a sneaky political move, often used by governments that lean authoritarian. Their goal? To grab hold of independent news organizations and turn them into tools for spreading their own stories and silencing anyone who disagrees. It’s when the news stops doing its job – reporting for us, the public, and holding powerful people accountable – and instead starts pushing the agendas of governments or special interest groups who now pull the strings. Brian explains it in four clear steps. First, the government takes over the folks who regulate broadcasting, like the FCC here in the US. Then, they start attacking and weakening public media. Next, they use their money and power to mess with the press in other ways. And finally, rich and influential friends of the government leaders buy up private media companies to gain control. Each of these steps, Brian and Natalia explain, can lead to more and more misinformation making its way into our news.
It’s a pretty sobering thought, especially since many experts, and even Natalia’s experiences, suggest that media capture might already be happening in the United States. Natalia shared some intense examples from other countries where she’s reported. Imagine being a journalist in the early stages of this takeover – you might start censoring yourself, not because someone told you to, but because you’re terrified of losing your job, or worse, facing personal harm. Natalia recounted a haunting story about a Russian journalist. He was on camera, reporting obviously false information about Russian troops, clearly lying. The moment the camera was off, he was furious, expressing his anger and frustration at being forced to lie. “He was told that he’d be fired,” Natalia reported, if he dared to tell the truth. In Russia, she added, journalists live with a gnawing fear that “they’ll kill you” if they step out of line. Beyond journalists censoring themselves, there’s also the straightforward kind of censorship. News organizations might fire journalists, or simply not hire them, because of what they’ve written or said. And it’s not always about outright firing; sometimes, organizations simply avoid assigning certain stories because they know it could lead to trouble. It’s a chilling progression, where the truth becomes a dangerous commodity.
Natalia sees these same four stages of media capture unfolding in the United States, too. She points out familiar patterns of journalists censoring themselves, as well as censorship coming from the government and media organizations directly. For instance, she’s observed how a disciplined U.S. administration consistently pushes out a central message. Repeat that message enough times, and it starts to become the dominant story, the accepted narrative. She gave an example of how this tactic led to the absurd idea that “librarians are the enemy,” a narrative that others have also flagged as deeply troubling. We’ve seen this play out ourselves, like with the false narrative of election fraud in the 2020 U.S. presidential election – that whole story emerged from a remarkably similar, disciplined central messaging strategy. It’s not just about what’s being said, but how it’s being said, and the sheer force with which it’s being propagated, creating an echo chamber where inconvenient truths struggle to be heard.
But here’s where it gets even trickier, and frankly, more insidious. Natalia argues that today, media capture has evolved beyond those traditional steps Brian outlined. We’re moving past just journalists self-censoring or the government and news organizations openly censoring. Now, there’s a new form of censorship, and she calls it “noise.” Imagine being bombarded with so much information, so many opinions, so many “facts,” that it becomes utterly impossible to figure out what’s real and what isn’t. As Natalia puts it, “noise has become the new censorship.” It’s not about blocking information, but flooding the senses to the point of confusion and paralysis. This tactic, often referred to as “flooding the zone,” is something we’ve seen before, notably during the Trump administration. It’s a deliberate strategy to overwhelm the public, making it incredibly difficult to discern truth from fiction.
This information overload has a deep impact on us. It leaves us feeling overwhelmed and stressed, often leading us to just tune out completely. It’s like a kind of learned helplessness, but for information. We simply throw up our hands, not knowing what to believe anymore. We’ve previously explored ways to navigate this, suggesting a strategy we call “critical ignoring.” This involves actively choosing what information to pay attention to and what to dismiss. Specifically, we should be wary of information that’s designed to be polarizing or to target a scapegoat. Be cautious if something sounds compelling but has no real facts to back it up, or if it appeals purely to your “common sense” without any credible sources. And definitely question anything that seems designed to distract you from what’s truly important. The more we understand media capture, including tactics like “flooding the zone,” the better equipped we become as consumers of information. By practicing critical ignoring, we can filter out a good chunk of that overwhelming “noise” and hopefully, find our way back to the truth.