2018/08/11 by Joshua Habgood-Coote, Joshua Habgood‐Coote · 232 citations
Computer Science · Social Sciences · #Computer science #Context (archaeology) #Digital Education and Society #Epistemology #Ethics and Social Impacts of AI #Fake news #False accusation #History #Ideology #Law #Linguistics #Meaning (existential) #Media studies #Misinformation and Its Impacts #Nonsense #Philosophy #Political science #Politics #Post truth #Set (abstract data type) #Sociology #Vocabulary
paper · open access · doi:10.1080/0020174x.2018.1508363
published in Inquiry 62(9-10), 1033-1065 (Taylor & Francis)
openalex publication_date 2018/08/11 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/01
Since 2016, there has been an explosion of academic work that fixes its subject matter using the terms ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’. In this paper, I argue that this terminology is not up to scratch, and that academics and journalists ought to completely stop using the terms ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’. I set out three arguments for abandonment. First, that ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’ do not have stable public meanings, entailing that they are either nonsense, context-sensitive, or contested. Secondly, that these terms are unnecessary, because we already have a rich vocabulary for thinking about epistemic dysfunction. Thirdly, I observe that ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’ have propagandistic uses, meaning that using these terms legitimates anti-democratic propaganda, and risks smuggling bad ideology into conversations.