po polsku
illustration: DALL-EThe phenomenon of fake news, especially strong in the age of social media, presents a tough choice for governments and citizens. Should we protect freedom of speech at all costs, or impose restrictions to shield the public from manipulation? The report Explanatory factors for the dissemination and control of fake news in the Latin American context, published in the journal Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, seeks to answer this question.
The report was authored by four researchers from the University of Santiago de Compostela: Paulo Carlos López-López, María Pereira-López, Erika Jaráiz-Gulías, and Nieves Lagares-Díez. Their analysis is based on data from the 2023 Latinobarómetro survey, covering six countries in the region: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru.
The researchers aimed not only to describe public opinion on fighting disinformation but also to identify the factors influencing citizens’ support for regulating online content—even at the expense of freedom of speech. As it turns out, the decision to support fake news control is closely tied to political context, trust in institutions, and personal ideological beliefs.
Majority supports control, even at the cost of freedom
The authors analyzed data from the 2023 Latinobarómetro survey, which included Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru. The results were clear: in each of these countries, the majority supported controlling fake news—even if it meant limiting freedom of expression.
| Country | Support for Fake News Control | Support for Freedom of Speech |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 70.4% | 29.6% |
| Chile | 68.5% | 31.5% |
| Brazil | 66.7% | 33.3% |
| Peru | 63.4% | 36.6% |
| Mexico | 59.5% | 40.5% |
| Argentina | 61.9% | 38.1% |
The highest support for regulation was seen in Colombia, which the researchers link to recent political crises and protests, where fake news spread widely. In contrast, citizens in Mexico and Argentina were more likely to defend freedom of speech, possibly due to a stronger tradition of liberalism or opposition to current leadership.
Social media under scrutiny
Citizens were clear about where they believe fake news spreads the most:
- 75% of Brazilians said fake news most often appears on social media.
- Over half also pointed to television as a source of disinformation.
- Radio and print media were seen as relatively more reliable.
This shows that how people view disinformation depends on their trust in the medium. In Mexico, 12% of respondents said the press contains no fake news—the highest result in the region.
Social profile of those who support information control
According to the report, a typical supporter of fake news control is someone who:
- voted for the ruling party,
- is unhappy with democracy,
- has low political interest,
- prefers authoritarian governance,
- comes from a lower social class.
In Brazil, 40.7% of the variation in responses could be explained by these variables. In Chile, it was 40.8%. In Mexico, 41%.
Education does not shield against support for censorship
It may be surprising that higher education levels don’t always lead to stronger support for freedom of speech. In some countries—like Peru and Chile—people with higher education were more likely to support fake news control. In Brazil, the gap between education levels reached 16 percentage points.
There was also an opposite trend: in Argentina, those with higher education were more likely to defend freedom of expression. This shows that the impact of education is highly contextual and depends on the local political situation.
Political ideology: surprising findings
Contrary to stereotypes, it`s not just the political right that opposes information control. In Argentina and Brazil, it was the far left that more often supported fake news censorship. This is linked to current political tensions—such as Milei’s election or Bolsonaro’s controversial presidency.
In Colombia, those with centrist views were more likely to favor restrictions. Mexico and Peru showed a different pattern: the further to the right, the more support for information control. This means ideological divides are not universal—they depend on local context.
Media use and online behavior data
The analysis also looked at specific platforms and their users:
- Users of Instagram in Brazil and Argentina were more likely to support information control.
- In Mexico, using YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok was linked to greater support for freedom of speech.
- Those who believed social media has a positive impact on politics were less likely to support control.
These findings show that it’s not just the media itself, but also how people perceive its role in democracy that shapes their views on censorship and freedom of information.
The report also describes the case of Brazil, where a court ordered the shutdown of platform X (formerly Twitter) for failing to remove accounts spreading disinformation and hate speech. The decision affected over 40 million users. According to an AtlasIntel poll, Brazilian society was nearly evenly split on the matter—with a slight edge to opponents of the decision.
***
The study was based on Latinobarómetro 2023 data, including 7,204 respondents from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru. Logistic regression analysis and descriptive statistics were used, considering 44 variables grouped into four blocks: demographic, political, cultural, and media-related. The goal was to identify which factors influence citizen support for fake news control at the expense of freedom of speech. Full results are available at https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-025-05100-7
COMMERCIAL BREAK
New articles in section Media industry
Streaming platforms in Poland. What criteria determine the choice
Paweł Sobczak
Price, indicated by 54.2% of respondents, and subject matter (54% of indications) are the most important factors influencing users' choice of content on streaming services. The service brand is mentioned by 18.1% of those surveyed.
Yellow Badge. Jan Bluz's documentary on political prisoners in Belarus
BARD
Imagine writing three posts on a social networking site. For a few clicks on a keyboard, you get three years in a penal colony. Sounds like a grim joke? For political prisoners in Belarus, this is the reality that Jan Bluz shows in the documentary "Yellow Badge", produced with the support of the Pulitzer Center.
Advertising market 2025. Poland, Europe and the World
Marcin Grządka
The global advertising market is growing by 8.8% in 2025 and will reach a value of 1.14 trillion dollars. The industry result in Europe records slightly lower dynamics, at the level of 5.8%. In this comparison, Poland performs clearly above the average. We will record an increase of 8.9% this year and a value of 18.56 billion PLN - estimates WPP Media in the annual report "This Year Next Year".
See articles on a similar topic:
First Trillion Dollars. Advertising Market 2024 and Forecasts for 2025
DUG
GroupM, in its cyclical report "This Year Next Year," summarizing the past year and predicting trends for the next, has published the latest forecasts for global advertising markets. The estimated advertising market growth rate in 2024 is as high as 9.5%, bringing its value globally to over 1 trillion dollars.
Paid journalistic content. Market trends and forecasts by Reuters Institute
Krzysztof Fiedorek
Only 18 percent of internet users pay for online news access, and the rate has not increased for the third year in a row. Norway sets records with 42%, while Greece does not exceed 7%. Globally, nearly one in three subscribers cancels after a year.
Books, e-books and audiobooks about the media and for journalists [LINK]
AUTOPROMOCJA Reporterzy.info
Thanks to cooperation with the Amazon, we may suggest you wide offer of great reading opportunity. Studies on the history and media market, interviews, reports and photo guides. Ordering and delivering a book now only takes a few moments. We invite you for a good lecture!
How do we assess news credibility? Data analysis from 40 countries
Krzysztof Fiedorek
Are people defenseless against false information? Do they really fall for clickbait and fake news? A meta-analysis of 67 studies involving 200,000 people shows the problem is different than we thought. Instead of excessive gullibility, we are dealing with the opposite.
