Scientific investigation into how disinformation affects democracy has never been more important. But autocrats and populists discredit such research, along with any journalism that challenges their worldview. Christoph Deppe describes how Trump’s second administration is changing the rules of communication – and manipulating public discourse
Spreading disinformation is a tactic for populists in politics and autocrats in hybrid and cognitive warfare. The actors who do so are aware of disinformation's disintegrating effects on democratic societies. They therefore use it strategically to further their individual causes, whether that's weakening the political system of a competitor in hybrid warfare, or promoting a populist political party.
Research on the subject reveals that disinformation is one of autocrats' and populists' most effective tools. Such leaders therefore seek to undermine research on disinformation, fact-checking initiatives, and critical journalism. On 20 January 2025, Donald Trump issued an executive order dismantling initiatives to research or counter disinformation in the USA.
In the most basic normative sense, throughout human history, people have perceived lies – and liars – as bad things. Being called a liar is rarely an accolade. Many democratic theories see open discourse, trustworthy information, and free speech as essential to democracy.
Deliberative democracy, as Jürgen Habermas defines it, legitimises democratic decision-making through rational public discourse. In such discourse inclusive, coercion-free deliberation and independent information, free from political and economic distortions, allow the better argument to prevail.
In John Rawls’ political liberalism, free speech and open discourse uphold public reason by enabling fair democratic deliberation. The quality of information, meanwhile, ensures that public justification remains legitimate, preventing misinformation from undermining democratic stability.
In neorepublicanism, as developed by Philip Pettit, free speech, open discourse, and the quality of information are as vital as non-domination for maintaining freedom, ensuring that democratic institutions remain accountable through informed civic engagement and public deliberation.
An influx of disinformation into the information environment attacks critical functions of democratic systems
An influx of disinformation into the information environment attacks critical functions of those systems. It makes open democratic systems less able to deliver the functions for which they were designed, weakening the system.
Trump popularised the discreditation of empirical facts during his 2016 presidential campaign, dismissing any outlet unfavourable to him as 'fake news'.
Then, on 22 January 2017, broadcaster Chuck Todd challenged Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway on the NBC show Meet the Press. Why, Todd asked her, had Trump's then Press Secretary Sean Spicer not been entirely truthful:
'Don't be so overly dramatic about it, Chuck', Conway responded. 'What you're saying (is), it's a falsehood. And Sean Spicer, (…) gave alternative facts to that.'
The final step was the Trump administration's decision to bombard the media with falsehoods intended to overwhelm the public. As White House Strategist Steve Bannon boasted:
'The opposition party is the media (…) they're dumb and they're lazy, they can only focus on one thing at a time. (…) all we have to do is flood the Zone, every day we hit them with three things, they'll bite on one, and we'll get all of our stuff done'.
Trump's first administration relied on denial, dispute, and distraction to evade accountability for untruthful communications.
In this second term, the administration has changed the rules of the game, escalating efforts to erode fact-based discourse. Indeed, it is antagonising knowledge actors and governmental agencies which could otherwise offer the public factual insight into politically important issues. By moving the goalposts, Trump can exclude or prosecute actors which do not comply with his new playbook.
Another such example is Trump’s unilateral decision to rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America. Altering the rules of communication in this way has enabled the Trump administration to scrutinise media that stick with the original terminology.
The Associated Press (AP) refused to adopt 'Gulf of America' in its reporting. Its refusal led to restricted access for AP personnel at Trump administration events. Trump even admitted as much in a press conference:
(AP) refuses to go with what the law is and what is taken place. It's called the Gulf of America now. It's not called the Gulf of Mexico any longer (…) We’re going to keep them out until (…) they agree that it’s the Gulf of America
Donald Trump, 18 February 2025
His logic is simple and effective. If lying is against the rules, we change the rules. The new rules put any outlet that refuse to comply in the wrong. On February 12, 2025 this was made obvious by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt in a press briefing: 'It is a fact that the body of water off the coast of Louisiana is called the Gulf of America. And I'm not sure why news outlets don't want to call it that, but that is what it is'.
Trump has applied this tactic to bigger issues, including his refusal to recognise non-binary identities. He has defunded scientific research, dismantled databases, and restricted agencies from publishing reliable information. The result is the erosion of democracy.
The Trump administration has changed the rules, silenced journalists, defunded scientists, and targeted knowledge actors
Without official data and clear communication, fact-based discourse becomes ever weaker. This leaves the public in an unreliable information space, where truth and fiction blur. While widespread disinformation is damaging, it remains manageable when enough reliable sources are available. However, changing the rules, silencing journalists, defunding scientists, erasing governmental information and targeting knowledge actors poses a deeper threat. Civil society cannot counter this threat indefinitely.
The Trump administration's actions are not mere publicity stunts. They are strategic attempts to reshape communicative norms to deliberately weaken democracy’s ability to challenge factually flawed government narratives and policies.
