Political disinformation in digital media: its impact on youth and ways to counteract it

Gilyazov Rasim Shamilevich Postgraduate student; Department ; Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University 420124, Russia, Rep. Tatarstan, Kazan, Novo-Savinovsky district, Yamasheva ave., 35B rasimgiliazov@gmail.com Other publications by this author

Introduction

The expansion of digital communication has increased the availability of political information, while making it more difficult to verify its origin, context, and authenticity. On social networks and instant messengers, a political message is distributed simultaneously as news, commentary, visual image and user reaction, and algorithmic personalization additionally affects which messages a particular user receives.

The urgency of the problem is especially noticeable in relation to young people, for whom digital platforms are an important channel of political socialization. However, the intensive use of digital media in itself does not mean increased susceptibility to misinformation: vulnerability depends on the skills of checking sources, the nature of media consumption, the emotional burden of the message and the information environment. Therefore, it is scientifically important not to repeat the thesis about "vulnerable youth", but to identify a combination of risk mechanisms and resilience tools.

The scientific contradiction lies in the fact that studies describe in sufficient detail individual mechanisms for the dissemination of false information and individual ways to counter it ^[1-12], however, these elements are rarely considered as a single system in relation to the political media consumption of young people. As a result, it remains insufficiently defined at what level a particular tool should operate and what limitations arise when it is used in isolation.

The object of the research is the political information communication of youth in the digital media environment. The subject of the research is the mechanisms of the impact of political disinformation on the youth audience and the levels of counteraction to this impact.

The aim of the study is to develop a model of integrated youth resilience to political disinformation in digital media.

Tasks are set to achieve the goal: 1) to clarify the concept of political disinformation and distinguish related categories; 2) to systematize the mechanisms of dissemination and perception of false political information; 3) to compare existing methods of counteraction according to their level of action and limitations; 4) to determine the relationship of individual, educational and platform-technological measures; 5) to formulate a three-level model of sustainability of the youth audience.

The research methods include the analysis and critical generalization of scientific literature, comparative analysis and qualitative thematic classification. For the first task, a conceptual analysis was used; for the second and third, a thematic coding of the provisions of the sources; for the fourth and fifth, a comparative comparison of risk mechanisms and counteraction tools.

The research material consisted of 12 scientific publications from 2017-2025, presented in the bibliographic list. The sources were selected according to three criteria: a direct connection with the phenomenon of false information or the political socialization of youth; the presence of empirical or analytical conclusions about the mechanisms of dissemination, perception or counteraction; the ability to correlate the results with one of the levels of the proposed model.

The scientific novelty lies in the systematization of the mechanisms of political disinformation and counteraction measures within the framework of a single three-level model. Unlike approaches where media literacy, fact checking, and technological filtering are considered separately, the proposed model shows their functional complementarity and limitations.

The theoretical framework of the study

In the scientific literature, it is important to distinguish between false information as a broad category and deliberate misinformation. G. Pennycook and D. Rand consider the psychological mechanisms of perception of fake news and show that the erroneous acceptance of a false message is not limited to political motivation ^[10]. S. Lewandowski and co-authors place the problem in a broader context of "post-truth", where the perception of facts identity, repeatability, and the information environment are affected ^[9].

At the same time, there is a terminological ambiguity in the source literature: it is more correct to separate unintentionally disseminated false information from misinformation suggesting the intention to mislead the audience. This distinction is crucial for this article, since measures to counteract an erroneous message and an organized manipulative campaign cannot be completely identical.

The study by S. Vosugi and co-authors shows a high rate of spread of false news in digital networks ^[12], however, this result should not be mechanically transferred to any political information and any youth audience. It confirms the structural advantage of novelty and emotional expressiveness, but does not prove the inevitability of influencing the political attitudes of a particular user.

Russian studies emphasize the influence of the digital media environment on the political worldview and subjectivity of youth ^{[2, 3, 5]}. The author's position is that this relationship should be considered not as a unidirectional "media impact", but as an interaction of content, platform architecture and user competencies. This framework allows us to move from the description of threats to the analysis of sustainability conditions.

Research results: risk mechanisms

A thematic comparison of sources made it possible to identify four recurring mechanisms through which political disinformation gains an advantage in the digital environment: emotionalization, repeatability, algorithmic reinforcement, and lack of verification skills.

Emotionalization increases the likelihood of a quick reaction before checking the content. Repetition creates the effect of familiarity, as a result of which a previously encountered statement may be subjectively perceived as more plausible ^{[9, 10]}. Algorithmic reinforcement increases the likelihood of repeated contact with thematically similar content. Finally, the lack of skills in verifying the source and primary context makes it difficult to correct an already accepted message.

For the youth audience, these mechanisms are significant not because of age per se, but because of the combination of high intensity of digital media consumption and the continued formation of sustainable practices of political orientation. Therefore, the thesis about the special vulnerability of young people requires specification: the risk is not belonging to an age group, but a certain configuration of media practices and competencies.

Research results: a model of counteraction

A comparison of the tools discussed in the literature makes it possible to combine them into a three-level model. Its principle is that each level compensates for the limitations of the other: individual skills do not eliminate platform-based dissemination of false content, automated labeling does not form critical thinking, and the educational program does not provide operational verification of a specific political message.

Table 1. A three-level model of countering political disinformation in the digital media environment

Source: compiled by the author

At the individual level, it is not abstract "critical thinking" that is of central importance, but a reproducible procedure: identify the original source, verify the author and date, compare the message with independent sources, separate fact from interpretation. In this sense, fact-checking is not only a professional media practice ^[4], but also a model of user behavior.

The institutional and educational level translates an individual skill into a stable habit. Works on media literacy and the political subjectivity of youth show the need for systematic training in source analysis ^{[3, 5]}. However, the author does not share the idea of media literacy as a universal solution: without regular practice and updating of cases, learning quickly breaks away from the changing digital environment.

The platform technology level is necessary because individual verification is always slower than mass distribution. Automated methods of text, image, and video analysis expand the possibilities of detecting manipulative content ^[11], but they cannot act as the final arbiter of authenticity. Therefore, technological moderation should be combined with transparency of criteria, the possibility of appeal and user access to the context.

Discussion

The proposed model makes it possible to clarify the existing discussion. Some of the research focuses primarily on user media literacy, while others focus on platform responsibility or professional fact-checking. The comparison shows the limitations of each of these positions in an isolated application.

The author's position is that resistance to political disinformation should be understood as a distributed characteristic of the information environment. The user is responsible for the verification procedure and critical perception; educational institutions are responsible for the formation and updating of relevant skills; digital platforms are responsible for reducing the artificial reinforcement of suspicious content and providing contextual information. At the same time, public policy should set a normative framework, without replacing independent fact-checking.

This approach avoids two extremes: the perception of young people as passive victims of digital manipulation and technological optimism, according to which the problem can be solved by automatic filtering. In both cases, the active role of the user and the institutional nature of information stability are underestimated.

The limitation of the study is due to the fact that the analysis is based on scientific literature and does not include its own experiment or a mass survey. Therefore, the model is analytical in nature and requires further empirical verification. A promising follow-up could be a survey of young people measuring verification practices and experimenting with various types of labeling of political content.

Conclusions

As a result of the research, a three-level model of youth resistance to political disinformation has been identified, including individual, institutional, educational, and platform-technological levels. Each of them responds to different risk mechanisms and cannot be fully replaced by the other.

Four main mechanisms have been identified that enhance the impact of unreliable political information in the digital environment: emotionalization, repeatability, algorithmic reinforcement, and lack of verification skills. Their combination explains why the opposition, based only on the subsequent refutation of the fake, has a limited effect.

The practical conclusion is that it is necessary to move from disparate measures to a linked system: training in information verification procedures should be complemented by available fact-checking tools and platform mechanisms for contextualizing and limiting the artificial spread of suspicious content. It is complexity, rather than a separate technology or educational course, that is considered in the article as a key condition for increasing the information stability of the youth audience.

The article is published in its final version as approved following the last positive peer review recommending acceptance for publication. It incorporates revisions made by the author in response to prior negative peer review reports that did not recommend publication. All peer review reports, including initial negative reviews, are published in open access alongside the article. All versions of the author’s revisions are archived in the publisher’s repository and may be made available upon reasonable request in accordance with Elsevier’s editorial policies and applicable data availability requirements.
Read all reviews on this article