Grade by Grade
Media Studies · Media Studies: Critical Lenses, Platforms, AI and Responsible Production

Misinformation at Scale: Narratives, Networks, Techniques and Prebunking

1.3 1.5About 75 minutes
Learning goals
  • I can distinguish claims, narratives and content and explain why narratives are durable.
  • I can identify manipulation techniques and explain how false content spreads through networks and data voids.
  • I can respond to misinformation with a truth sandwich and explain prebunking.

Words to know

narrative
A broad story that gives specific claims meaning and emotional force.
coordinated inauthentic behaviour
Coordinated use of fake or misleading accounts to manipulate public conversation.
cheapfake
Misleading media made with simple edits rather than advanced AI.
data void
A search topic with little reliable content, open to manipulation.
liar's dividend
The ability to dismiss real evidence as fake because fakes exist.
prebunking
Building resistance to manipulation before exposure.

Remember from Grade 11

In Grade 11 you separated misinformation, disinformation and malinformation, used SIFT and lateral reading, and learned the who else? test. Those skills check one post at a time.

Grade 12 looks at misinformation at scale: how false content is organized into narratives, spread through networks, and resisted by whole communities. This is evaluation (1.3) plus analysis of perspectives and the questions of power that misinformation raises (1.5).

Hook: the fireplace ban that wasn't

An invented graphic spreads in rural Ontario groups: a logo that looks like a government trillium, the words NOTICE: Wood-burning fireplaces and stoves banned province-wide from January 2027. Fines up to $10,000, and the line Mainstream media won't tell you this. City politicians want to control how you heat your home. SHARE before they delete it!

There is no such ban in this scenario. The provincial government's official news page has no such announcement. But the post gets thousands of shares, and when one is fact-checked, a new version appears: Now they're coming for backyard fire pits.

Narratives, claims and content

  • A claim is a specific, checkable statement (a province-wide ban begins in January 2027).
  • A narrative is a broader story that gives claims meaning (they are coming for your way of life). Narratives connect to real feelings and values, which makes them durable.
  • Content is the many posts, memes and videos that carry the claims.

Fact-checking one claim helps, but the narrative can attach to a new claim. Effective responses address the narrative, the techniques and the real concerns underneath (here, perhaps real worries about heating costs and rural voices being ignored).

Common manipulation techniques

Researchers Jon Roozenbeek and Sander van der Linden built a game called Bad News (2018) to teach techniques often used in disinformation. They include:

  • Impersonation: posing as a trusted source (the fake trillium logo).
  • Emotional language: fear and outrage (fines up to $10,000).
  • Polarization: us versus them (city politicians versus rural people).
  • Conspiracy: a hidden plot (before they delete it).
  • Discrediting: attacking those who might correct it (mainstream media won't tell you).
  • Trolling: provoking people to get reactions.
Narratives outlast claimsNARRATIVECLAIMSspecific, checkable statementsPOSTS, MEMES, VIDEOSthousands of pieces of content"They are coming foryour way of life"Debunk one claim and the narrative simply attaches to a new one.
Misinformation campaigns are built on a broad narrative at the top, supported by specific claims, spread through many pieces of content. Fact-checks work on claims; prebunking and media literacy work on the narrative and the techniques.

How false content travels

  • Networks and coordination: groups can coordinate fake or misleading accounts to make a message look popular. Platforms call this coordinated inauthentic behaviour. Bots (automated accounts) and sockpuppets (fake identities run by real people) inflate numbers.
  • Cheapfakes: simple edits (slowing a video, cutting a quote, a false caption) can mislead as well as deepfakes. Researchers Britt Paris and Joan Donovan used this term in 2019.
  • Data voids: when people search for a new or rare term, there may be little reliable content, so manipulators fill the gap. Michael Golebiewski and danah boyd described data voids in 2018.
  • The liar's dividend: a term from law professors Bobby Chesney and Danielle Citron. Because fakes exist, people can dismiss real evidence as fake.

Responding: debunking and prebunking

  • Debunking corrects a falsehood after it spreads. A useful structure is the truth sandwich (associated with linguist George Lakoff): start with the truth, briefly name the falsehood and the technique, end with the truth again. Researchers once worried that corrections could backfire and strengthen false beliefs; later studies found this is rare, and that corrections usually help.
  • Prebunking builds resistance before exposure, by teaching the techniques. It is based on inoculation theory, which psychologist William McGuire developed in the 1960s.

Power and perspective (1.5)

Misinformation raises questions of power: who gains from confusion? Who is targeted? False narratives often scapegoat minority groups, newcomers or people already marginalized, and they can reduce trust in institutions that communities need, such as health services and elections. Analyze who benefits, who is harmed, and whose real concerns the narrative exploits.

Prebunking works like a vaccine (an analogy)1. WARNINGsomeone may tryto mislead you2. WEAK DOSEsee a harmlessexample of a trick3. REFUTElearn how thetrick works4. RESISTspot the trickin the wildBased on inoculation theory (William McGuire, 1960s) andprebunking research by Sander van der Linden, Jon Roozenbeek and others.Effects can fade over time, so "booster" reminders help.
Prebunking warns people and shows them a weakened example of a manipulation technique before they meet the real thing, so they can recognize it later.
Worked example

Let's analyze and respond to the fireplace post

Analyze the techniques in the invented fireplace-ban post, evaluate its credibility, and write a truth-sandwich correction.

  1. Claim: a province-wide ban on wood fireplaces and stoves from January 2027 with fines up to $10 000. Narrative: city politicians are coming for your way of life.
  2. Techniques: impersonation (a trillium-style logo); emotional language (huge fines); polarization (city versus rural); conspiracy (before they delete it); discrediting (mainstream media won't tell you).
  3. Verification: the provincial government's official news page has no announcement; no reliable news outlet reports it; the image traces back to an anonymous account. The claim fails.
  4. Why it spreads: it taps a real concern (heating costs, feeling ignored), it is emotional, and sharing feels protective of neighbours.
  5. Power (1.5): the post deepens a rural-urban divide and reduces trust in government information that people need, for example during an emergency.
  6. Truth sandwich: There is no province-wide ban on wood fireplaces or stoves; the provincial government has announced nothing like this. A graphic using a fake government-style logo claims there is, and says the media are hiding it, which is a common trick to stop people from checking. You can always confirm rules on official government websites.

The post uses five manipulation techniques to carry a false claim inside a durable narrative. It fails verification. A good response uses a truth sandwich, names the technique, and respects the real concern underneath rather than mocking the people who shared it.

Truth first

When you correct someone, don't repeat the false claim in your headline or first line. Lead with the truth, name the trick, and end with the truth.

Just for fun

Researchers have found that a few minutes playing a game in which you pretend to be a fake-news tycoon can make people better at spotting manipulation. It may be the only time pretending to be a villain is homework.

Hands-on activity

Build a prebunk

You need: paper or a device for drawing or recording, and a family member to test it on.

  1. Choose one manipulation technique from this lesson.
  2. Invent a harmless, obviously fake example of it about a silly topic (for example: Scientists HATE this: snowmen secretly control the weather! for emotional language and conspiracy).
  3. Design a 4-panel comic, a 30-second script or a poster that follows the four prebunking steps: warning, weak dose, refute, resist.
  4. Test it on a family member: before and after, show them a different example of the same technique and ask if they can name the trick.
  5. Write 3 sentences on what worked and what you would change.

Safety and ethics note: never use real people, real groups or real events in your fake example, and label it clearly as an example.

What to look for: one clearly explained technique, a clearly fake and harmless example, all four steps, and a simple test with honest results.

Your turn

1

Explain the difference between a claim and a narrative.

2

Name four manipulation techniques taught by the Bad News game.

3

What is coordinated inauthentic behaviour?

4

What is a data void?

5

Describe the truth sandwich.

6

What is prebunking, and what theory is it based on?

7

What is the liar's dividend?

More practice: warm-up

1

What is a cheapfake?

2

What is a sockpuppet account?

3

Is the backfire effect common, according to later research?

4

Which technique is Mainstream media won't tell you this?

5

Why might prebunking need boosters?

More practice: on your own

1

Why can fact-checking a single claim fail to stop a misinformation campaign?

2

Identify the techniques in this invented post: BREAKING: Doctors at a secret meeting admit snow tires cause headaches. They don't want you to know! Share now!

3

Explain how a data void could be exploited after a breaking news event in a small town.

4

Rewrite this correction as a truth sandwich: No, the fireplace ban is fake.

5

Apply 1.5: why do misinformation narratives often target minority or marginalized groups?

Challenge

1

Evaluate prebunking as a response to misinformation: give one strength and one limitation.

2

Explain how the liar's dividend could harm accountability in politics, and one way the public can respond.

3

Write a 5- to 6-sentence analysis of the fireplace post that connects its techniques to its narrative and to questions of power.

Check your understanding

Quiz

1.

They are coming for your way of life is best described as a:

2.

A fake government-style logo on a false notice is which technique?

3.

A truth sandwich begins with:

4.

Building resistance by showing a weakened example of a trick before exposure is:

5.

A politician claims a real recording is AI-generated. This exploits:

6.

What do later studies suggest about the backfire effect?

For parents and teachers

What this lesson teaches: evaluating misinformation at scale (1.3) and analyzing the perspectives and power it involves (1.5): narratives versus claims, manipulation techniques (from the Bad News game by Roozenbeek and van der Linden), coordinated inauthentic behaviour, cheapfakes, data voids, the liar's dividend, the truth sandwich and prebunking (inoculation theory). The fireplace post is invented; there is no such ban in this scenario.

How to help at home:

  • When a false post appears in a family chat, practise a kind truth-sandwich reply together.
  • Talk about the real worries false narratives exploit, without mocking people who shared them.
  • Check official sources together (government news pages, health units).

Common difficulties:

  • Repeating the falsehood loudly when correcting it. Lead with the truth.
  • Treating all misinformation as stupidity. Narratives work because they connect to real feelings.
  • Cynicism. The goal is calibrated trust, not distrust of everything.