When it comes to spreading disinformation about climate change or the risks of smoking, I can clearly see how it protects economic interests (e.g. the value of the assets of the fossil fuel industry or the tobacco industry). I therefore understand that these lies are (have been) regularly pushed by people who do not necessarily believe in them.

But what are the strategic considerations behind the active spread of anti-vax theories? Who gains from this? Is it just an effective topic to rile up a political base? Because it hits people right in the feels? Is it just a way to bring people together on one topic, in order to use that political base for other purposes?

Or is anti-vax disinformation really only pushed by people who believe it?

  • SteveXVII
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    A little conspiracy theory that I made up myself is that pharmaceutical companies spread the antivax-theories themselves, to prevent the measles from going extinct like smallpox.

      • SteveXVII
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It was more to make fun of conspiracy theorists with conspiracy theories. What I find uncanny is how believable it is. Here is another one: a lot of ‘flat-earthers’ are actually paid by the government to make conspiracy theories look ridiculous so that they can get away with actual conspiracies a lot easier.

        I don’t actually believe in them, though I wouldn’t be completely surprised if one of them, or both, turned out to be true.