Open Collections

Abstract

Social media platforms have increasingly adopted fact-checking labels to combat the spread of misinformation. However, existing research has focused primarily on whether these interventions reduce belief in false claims, overlooking a potentially more harmful effect: the activation of prejudice against targeted groups. This study investigates whether fact-checking labels prevent prejudice activation when users encounter fake news targeting Muslims. Using an experimental design with three conditions: undisclosed fake news, disclosed (fact-checked) fake news, and a control group, I surveyed over 1400 participants across two studies to measure attitudes toward Muslims after exposure to fabricated anti-Muslim content. Results were inconsistent across my surveys: while the first study showed that disclosure significantly reduced negative attitudes compared to undisclosed fake news (p=0.009), the second study failed to replicate this effect (p=0.55). Notably, both disclosed and undisclosed groups consistently clustered together and separately from the control group, suggesting that mere exposure to inflammatory content may influence attitudes regardless of fact-checking. These findings indicate that current platform interventions may be insufficient to prevent prejudice activation, even when they successfully correct false beliefs. The study suggests a societal need for alternative approaches beyond labeling to protect marginalized communities from the harmful effects of orchestrated disinformation campaigns.