Investment in research or in scientific activity is ultimately a community decision, supported by public funds. Scientists, therefore, have the responsibility and the moral obligation of accurately communicating their ideas and results to the public. Of necessity, some of this can be restricted to an audience of peers, but it is essential to communicate the results of publicly funded research to a wider audience. Scientists and communicators of science share the additional responsibility of responding to fallacious and misleading statements on issues pertaining to science that are made by persons holding public office and those who play a prominent role in society.
In these times of pandemic, we are witnessing the continued dissemination of pseudoscientifi c misinformation about the disease as well as dubious claims of alternative cure. In some instances, such claims appear to be getting offi cial endorsements. Enabling people to identify unscientifi c claims and hoaxes, is the way forward to build rational immunity to halt the infectious spread of misinformation.
Like participants in the party game, truth or dare, members of large WhatsApp groups express a limited number of truths, but are dared to consume or refute massive volumes of misinformation.
Security and responsibility are persistent themes in the ‘junk’ information that spreads rapidly on middle class WhatsApp groups with large memberships. The ‘affordances’ of social media enables ‘emotional targetting’ of messages that claim to be about ‘true’ incidents.
