I spend way too much time on social media platforms. I often come across various forms of propaganda and disinformation, especially about climate change. Bots create some of these posts. Likely bad actors produce others, and some come from people who genuinely can’t distinguish between science and propaganda.

Science and propaganda are very different in their purpose, method, and intent. Here’s a comparison to make these differences clearer:

Science

Science aims to understand the natural world by observing, experimenting, and drawing conclusions based on evidence. Scientists follow the scientific method: they form a hypothesis, conduct experiments, analyze data, and reach conclusions. They focus on being objective, making sure others can repeat their work, and having their research reviewed by other scientists. Credible scientific journals publish these findings.

Scientists base their claims on empirical evidence, and these claims can change as new data and discoveries come to light. Science values transparency and open communication. Scientists share their methods and results, allowing other experts to verify, expand on, or replicate their work.

Science encourages people to ask questions, think critically, and approach ideas with healthy skepticism. Its goal is to help us understand how things work and to discover the truth. However, it’s important to distinguish between questioning by experts in the field and skepticism from people on social media who don’t have a scientific background. Above all, it’s critical not to confuse questioning by other experts in the same field with skepticism from individuals on social media who lack a scientific background.

It’s important to be cautious of climate change information on social media, as some “experts–people who might appear knowledgeable, like Nobel Laureates, but lack actual expertise in climate science and haven’t published climate research. may be linked to think tanks funded by the fossil fuel industry. These organizations often aim to cast doubt on climate science to protect their interests. For example, the American Petroleum Institute has funded research that questions the severity of climate change.Watch out for “fake experts”—people who might appear knowledgeable, like Nobel Laureates, but lack actual expertise in climate science and haven’t published relevant research. Also, check if these “experts” are connected to think tanks funded by the fossil fuel industry. DeSmog is a helpful resource for spotting these connections.

Propaganda

Propaganda aims to shape people’s beliefs, attitudes, or actions to serve a specific agenda, often political, ideological, or financial. It uses persuasive techniques like emotional appeals, misinformation, selective facts, and repetition to influence public opinion. Propaganda may twist or misuse evidence to fit its narrative and often ignores or dismisses opposing information. It lacks transparency and may hide or manipulate details to control the message. For instance, propaganda might involve sharing a graph or chart that hasn’t been published in a credible scientific journal or showing an incomplete or misleading graph.

Critical Thinking: Propaganda tries to shut down questioning and critical thinking. Its goal is to persuade rather than to inform, often by oversimplifying complex issues or relying on catchy slogans.

In short, science is real. Science aims to understand and explain the world objectively, while propaganda tries to influence people, often using biased or misleading information.