Misinformation and distrust in science - with Naomi Oreskes

Misinformation and distrust in science - with Naomi Oreskes

by Naomi Oreskes

Humanities, Social Sciences & Thought Science — General & History PDScience: general issuesPDRImpact of science and technology on society
🎙 Naomi Oreskes 👥 1.8M 📅 August 21, 2025 ⏱ 16 min 👁 24K 📄 expert opinion 🧭 2026-08-06
Available in: English (current) Français

Keywords

misinformationdistrustsciencedoubtclimate change

Summary

In this talk, Naomi Oreskes, a Harvard professor of the history of science, explains how certain organizations, particularly the tobacco and fossil fuel industries, deliberately create distrust in science to protect their economic and ideological interests. She describes the strategy of ‘merchants of doubt’ who raise questions and cast doubt on scientific consensus without necessarily lying, but by creating confusion. Oreskes emphasizes that this corrosive skepticism leads to categorical rejection of science, endangering public health and safety. She discusses the link between distrust in science and distrust in government, noting that much science is publicly funded, and argues that scientists must do more to communicate not just what they know but how they know it. She highlights the imbalance in funding between disinformation and science communication. Regarding funding, she explains that while private sector research has contributed, it often lacks long-term commitment, and public funding is essential for building scientific capacity, as demonstrated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, she addresses the role of government regulation in correcting market failures, such as climate change, where scientists identified external costs, making them targets of attack.

183 words

Critical Evaluation

Naomi Oreskes delivers a compelling and articulate argument about the deliberate creation of distrust in science, drawing on her extensive research and publications. The talk is well-structured, moving from the motivations of ‘bad actors’ to the mechanisms they employ, and finally to potential solutions. Oreskes’s expertise in the history of science lends credibility to her analysis, and she effectively uses the tobacco industry as a well-documented case study to illustrate the ‘merchants of doubt’ strategy. The parallels drawn to the fossil fuel industry are persuasive, and she correctly notes that the scientific evidence for climate change is overwhelming. However, the talk is primarily an opinion piece based on her expert perspective rather than a systematic review or new research. While she references her books and general concepts, she does not provide specific citations or data within the talk, which limits the verifiability of some claims. The argument that scientists need to communicate more is valid, but she does not delve into the complexities of science communication or the role of media and social platforms in amplifying misinformation. The discussion on funding and regulation is insightful, particularly the point about public sector capacity building, but it remains at a high level. The adéquation between title and content is strong, as the talk directly addresses misinformation and distrust in science. Overall, the talk is valuable for its clarity and expert insight, but it would benefit from more concrete examples and references to support its assertions.

243 words

Title / Content Match

The title accurately reflects the content, which focuses on the deliberate creation of distrust in science and its consequences.

Quality & Reliability

8/10

The speaker is a Harvard professor of the history of science with extensive publications. The content is well-structured, based on documented cases (tobacco industry) and current scientific consensus (climate change). However, it is an opinion/analysis piece rather than a systematic review, and some claims lack specific citations within the talk.

Chapters

Cited Sources

  • Merchants of Doubt (book) — Referenced as the author's most well-known book on how doubt is sold to undermine public trust in science.
  • Why Trust Science? (book) — Mentioned as the book she wrote to address the question of why science should be trusted.
  • The Big Myth (book) — Referenced in the discussion about the effectiveness of the private sector versus public sector.
  • Naomi Oreskes's talk on plate tectonics theory — Linked in the description as a related talk by the same speaker.
  • Full Q&A for Science Supporters — Linked in the description as an extended Q&A session.

Concurring Sources

  • Merchants of Doubt (book) — The book provides detailed evidence of the strategies used by industries to create doubt, supporting the talk's claims.
  • Why Trust Science? (book) — The book addresses the question of why science should be trusted, aligning with the talk's theme.

Dissenting Sources

  • No specific discordant sources provided — The talk does not present opposing views, but some critics might argue that the role of government regulation is overstated or that private sector funding is more efficient.

External References

Contribution & Novelties

The talk provides a clear and accessible synthesis of how organized doubt-mongering operates, drawing on documented cases from the tobacco industry and applying them to current climate change denial. It emphasizes the role of confusion rather than outright lying, and highlights the need for scientists to actively communicate the process of science. The discussion on public funding and capacity building offers a nuanced perspective on the complementarity of public and private research.

Pour aller plus loin :

116 words

Radar Profile

The radar profile shows high scores in information quantity, quality, and reliability, with a moderate technical level. This indicates a well-informed and credible presentation that is accessible to a general audience, with a strong emphasis on factual content and expert analysis.

Reliability 8/10

💬 Positif. Sur les 30 commentaires analysés, la majorité exprime une appréciation positive de la clarté et de la pertinence de l'exposé, certains soulignant l'importance du message et la qualité de la communication.