Government Distrust and Lynching-Promoting Fake-News: Evidence from Mexico

• In Event: Elites Behaving Badly

Abstract

Across the world, fake-news about crime have derived into real cases of lynching. These manifestations of extralegal violence have often destabilized communities and, because they frequently target outgroups, have put the life of “the different” at risk. In this paper, we examine the relationship between government distrust and the spread of lynching-promoting fake news. We contend that lynching-promoting fake-news (fake-news known to have enticed lynchings) are more likely to be believed, accepted and shared when, in addition to threatening their audience, they portray the government as indifferent about crime and untrustworthy. Further, we argue that citizens’ belief and acceptance of this type of fake-news sets the basis from which extralegal violence emerges. To test these hypotheses empirically, we analyze an original (pre-registered) laboratory experiment conducted in rural Mexico during the spring of 2019. This is an ideal setting to investigate the subject since numerous cases of lynching have been registered in this area.
In the first section of the study, we presented participants with a real message known to have circulated in WhatsApp networks in rural Mexico and known to have triggered a lynching attempt. The message warns citizens about the presence of male criminals seeking to kidnap young women to sell their organs. Further, it warns individuals about the unwillingness of the government to do something about it. We randomly assigned participants to read one of two versions of the message. In one version, the message appeared complete. On the other version, we removed any mention of the government.
Consistent with my expectations we found that, independently of citizens’ pre-dispositions and the information contained in the message about the criminals, participants were more likely to consider the message to be believable and important when it portrayed the government as untrustworthy. Further, we found citizens to be more likely to say that they would share this lynching-promoting message among their contacts when it included a negative portrayal of the authorities than when it did not.
In the second section of the study, we examined the link between citizens’ beliefs about the message and their reaction to a hypothetical extra-legal detention. We asked respondents to imagine that they read a WhatsApp message that announced that a group of citizens extra-legally detained two individuals suspected of being the kidnappers mentioned in section 1. Then, we asked participants to choose between five potential responses to this message: the first condemned the extralegal-detention and urged citizens to free the detainees, the second condemned the extralegal detention, the third involved saying nothing, the forth approved of the extralegal-detention, and the last one involved approving of the extralegal detention and encouraging others to burn the suspects alive.
We found that less than 8% of the participants chose a message that condemned the extra-legal detention. 42% of the participants chose to remain silent upon hearing the news, and the majority (51%) chose a message that manifested approval of the extra-legal detention. Shockingly, of those approving of the extra-legal detention, 24.24% chose the response that involved enticing others to burn the suspects alive.
We found that men, those holding more hawkish security-policy preferences, and those with a less educated father were more likely to choose an aggressive message. Further, consistent with the main hypothesis of the study, we found that citizens’ willingness to believe the rumor significantly increased their aggressiveness when reacting to the extra-legal detention of suspects.
The contributions of this paper are twofold. On the one hand, the results of this study contribute to our understanding of fake news. It highlights government skepticism as a tool that those seeking to promote dangerous myths and rumors can exploit. On the other hand, they contribute to a growing literature interested in the politics of vigilante justice. It does so by empirically tracing the process by which distrust in government translates into the acceptance of fake news and the acceptance of fake news translates into deadly extralegal violence.

Authors

• Maria del Pilar Fuerte, Centro Geo

• Daniel Zizumbo-Colunga, CIDE