Yves here. While it may oversimplify the complexities of the topic, it’s fair to link immediate skepticism toward humanitarian efforts to the principles of neoliberalism. Neoliberals typically oppose charity, arguing that assistance should only be directed towards the so-called ‘deserving’ poor—those they believe are incapable of working. They also resist community engagement, fearing that organized groups might demand better living conditions or wages from the affluent. Lastly, when it comes to international aid, their preference leans toward forms of assistance that benefit their own economic or strategic agendas—often tarnishing the reputation of genuine aid initiatives.
By Chloe Bruce, a specialist in nonprofit communications and project management. Chloe has collaborated with various humanitarian organizations in the UK, Australia, Colombia, China, and Canada. She studied English and history at the University of Edinburgh before obtaining a master’s degree in leadership and international development from King’s College London. Additionally, she holds an advanced diploma in humanitarian education from the University of Teacher Education Zug and is a contributor to the Observatory. Produced for the Observatory by the Independent Media Institute.
In our current post-truth era, the concept of “objective truth” has lost its hold in public discussions, making it increasingly challenging for humanitarians dedicated to preserving human life to perform their work effectively.
“The post-truth era significantly impacts humanitarian efforts, not only by affecting NGOs’ reputations but also by fostering a warped perception of the realities faced by those in need,” states Lubiana Gosp-Server, a professional in humanitarian and development sectors.
Humanitarians address obscured or misunderstood social issues, assisting individuals in challenging or extreme circumstances. All of this becomes jeopardized when the public struggles to distinguish between what is true and what is not.
Despite its current ubiquity in conversation, fake news is not a new phenomenon. Misinformation and propaganda have existed throughout history and remain challenges that humanitarians must navigate, particularly in today’s information-saturated environment, which intensifies the issue.
An influx of propaganda and misinformation undermines public trust, causing people to question whether humanitarian workers genuinely prioritize humanity’s well-being.
Humanitarian Work and Its Challenges
The modern idea of humanitarianism emerged with the establishment of the Red Cross following the 1859 Battle of Solferino and the introduction of the First Geneva Convention, aimed at reducing harm to individuals, especially during warfare. Humanitarians adhere to a set of ethical standards, which may differ between organizations but generally emphasize truth, honesty, and integrity.
“At its essence, a humanitarian is someone committed to alleviating suffering and upholding human dignity. Whether in conflict zones, post-disaster scenarios, or health emergencies, humanitarians prioritize the needs of individuals,” explains the nonprofit Action Against Hunger.
However, humanitarian organizations face their own set of challenges. They often lack accountability to the individuals they aim to assist and have histories of perpetuating Western imperialism. In many cases, these organizations inadvertently support the political or military agendas of dominant powers that fund their operations.
“In numerous instances, NGOs have aligned themselves with Western foreign policy. This was particularly evident in Afghanistan, where many NGOs were integral to U.S.-led stabilization efforts post-invasion in 2001,” states Jonathan Whittall, head of humanitarian analysis at Médecins Sans Frontières/Doctors Without Borders (MSF).
Furthermore, humanitarian aid has sometimes acted as a means to interfere with a country’s sovereignty, raising questions about the true intentions behind the work. For instance, UN Peacekeeping missions have often aligned with the political motives of the United States and other Security Council members.
Whittall emphasizes the necessity for humanitarian organizations to adhere to their core mission of advocating for the marginalized rather than aligning with the “interests of core states.” Forming alliances with social movements and grassroots organizations is crucial to regain legitimacy and confront challenges posed by those in power who may view humanitarian aid as a threat to their political and military strategies.
Moreover, humanitarians must recognize how misinformation and propaganda (referred to alternately as disinformation) hinder their missions, complicate existing crises, endanger those they assist, and can even jeopardize their lives.
“The emergence of hybrid conflicts blending harmful information dissemination with combat operations creates additional suffering for affected populations. Misinformation obstructs humanitarian efforts by questioning their mandates and intentions, undermining their integrity, and exposing staff to harassment and violence,” according to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).
Humanitarians are uniquely positioned to combat this issue by engaging with communities to address concerns arising from both misinformation and the fallout it causes.
How Is False Information Spreading and Why?
Researchers like Zoë Adams and Magda Osman suggest that worries about misinformation leading to adverse behavior may be overstated. “The assumption that a direct causal link exists between the prevalence and consumption of misinformation and subsequent harmful actions has yet to be sufficiently demonstrable,” their 2023 study notes. They stress that we have transitioned from viewing the world through “objective facts” to interpreting it through “intersubjectivity,” defined as the collective effort to understand entities through social interaction. They argue that this shift may have some advantages in democratizing concepts of truth.
However, there are many instances when a rapid spread of misinformation has led to real human suffering. “Disseminating harmful information may exacerbate the suffering of the most vulnerable populations and hinder humanitarian missions. Misinformation is reported to provoke psychological and social harm in communities affected by conflict and among aid workers. Additionally, incorrect information obstructs access to essential and lifesaving services for communities in crisis, thus hindering humanitarian organizations from implementing effective interventions,” according to the Lancet.
Understanding the dynamics of misinformation and propaganda is vital to finding effective responses. Mark Thomas Kennedy from Imperial College London argues, “Unless we grasp how individuals consume information and learn, we will have little more than a conversation that is hostile or dismissive.”
According to a 2021 MIT study, most individuals are unaware that they are circulating false information online. Nonetheless, other research indicates a small percentage seeks to mislead for motives ranging from financial gain to ideological beliefs. A 2022 U.S. survey indicated that 14 percent of participants were conscious of sharing false information on social media. Those who disseminated disinformation often exhibited antisocial behaviors, such as a psychological need for chaos, tendencies toward psychopathy, sadism, and paranoia, as well as a likelihood of supporting extremist groups like QAnon and white supremacists. Furthermore, there is significant evidence suggesting foreign governments actively disseminate disinformation to influence global affairs.
Additionally, technology plays a substantial role in the spread of false information. Social media has emerged as the epicenter of harmful information. Investigations by Amnesty International reveal that X’s “For You” page incentivizes content that sparks outrage and heated discussions, fueling user engagement. Allowing influencers who have previously shared fake narratives to spread such information further contributes to an increase in online misinformation.
The rapid emergence of large language models (LLMs), commonly referred to as AI, has resulted in a surge of computer-generated imagery. Stock image platforms such as Adobe now offer AI-generated content without warnings indicating whether the images are authentic. Alarmingly, AI systems are increasingly propagating misinformation in their responses to user inquiries. As people pivot from seeking information from experts, their control over the information they receive diminishes. This also leads to the inadvertent sharing of inherent biases embedded in these systems, contributing to a phenomenon known as “hallucination,” where inaccurate information is presented as fact. Such developments have profound implications for humanitarian efforts and efficacy.
How False Information and Lack of Trust Are Impacting Humanitarian Work
As reported by the Lancet, “Complex humanitarian settings have become fertile grounds for misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation.” This poses particular challenges for individuals witnessing humanitarian crises, as distinguishing between false and constructive messages becomes difficult amidst the overflow of information on social media platforms.
Counteracting propaganda and misinformation becomes even more arduous when the public lacks faith in humanitarian organizations as credible sources. “Regrettably, many human-rights NGOs—both large and small—struggle with credibility issues. Ongoing doubts regarding their funding sources, political biases, and deficient due diligence diminish the reliability of the information they provide,” noted a National Interest article.
To assess how propaganda and trust affect humanitarian efforts, we will delve into its implications across three vital areas: global health, war and conflict, and support for refugees and asylum seekers:
Global Health
Journalist Erica X Eisen highlights that skepticism surrounding vaccines and the associated propaganda campaigns are as old as vaccines themselves. Previously, misinformation regarding vaccines was confined to a few pamphlets; today, thousands of posts, articles, and videos perpetuating doubt are consumed daily. The World Health Organization (WHO) has termed this rapid spread of misinformation as “infodemics,” representing a direct threat to public health. “Fake news travels faster and more easily than this virus and poses equivalent dangers,” stated WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus during the COVID-19 pandemic. A review by the WHO revealed that 51 percent of posts discussing vaccines contained inaccurate information.
Addressing vaccine hesitancy has become a significant focus in humanitarian responses during disease outbreaks, consuming valuable time and resources. The British Red Cross initiated a campaign aimed at dispelling misinformation to support the COVID-19 vaccine rollout in the UK, while UNICEF provided a “Vaccine Misinformation Management Field Guide” for its personnel.
To some extent, this hesitancy is understandable for newly introduced vaccines and in communities where vaccines are scarce or previously linked to negative experiences due to unethical practices by international entities. Incidents, such as those in 2010, when the Gates Foundation funded experimental vaccine trials in Africa and India, resulted in numerous fatalities and injuries, often due to forced vaccinations and uninformed consent according to Sharmeen Ahmed in the Annual Survey of International and Comparative Law.
The focus on profits over lives exhibited by pharmaceutical companies throughout the COVID-19 pandemic also contributed to vaccine hesitancy. Gloria Giraldo of Latino Health Access asserted that global vaccine distribution inequities could breed “skepticism about the motives of vaccine manufacturers and public health officials, particularly among immigrant populations.”
Mistrust from humanitarian organizations toward local communities exacerbates the situation. During the 2014 Ebola outbreak in West Africa, aid organizations stereotyped locals as “irrational, fearful, violent, and primitive,” underestimating their capacity for change. This led to interventions that prioritized central, resource-heavy facilities while neglecting to engage communities for months, thereby disregarding effective responses and strategies.
Humanitarian workers need to enhance their capabilities to address issues of distrust and misinformation surrounding public health and have been initiating necessary measures. Widespread vaccine hesitancy hampers efforts to save lives, complicating the work of humanitarian organizations.
“Diseases preventable by vaccines, such as measles and whooping cough, are resurging across the globe, compounded by cuts to foreign aid, growing vaccine hesitancy, and persistent gaps in vaccine accessibility,” states the Council on Foreign Relations.
Findings from a randomized 2021 trial revealed that misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines “reduced recipients’ willingness to vaccinate,” according to the BMJ. Missing vaccinations frequently lead to outbreaks of disease and preventable fatalities. These outbreaks of previously controlled diseases highlight the risks posed by increasing numbers of children missing essential vaccinations. Resources allocated to managing easily preventable diseases detract from efforts aimed at other pressing health crises.
In 2025, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. urged the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to reconsider its long-held stance that vaccines do not cause autism, as reported by Politico. These unsubstantiated claims fuel the spread of propaganda and support cutbacks to international funding for vital vaccination campaigns. Communities affected by conflict often rely on humanitarian organizations for vaccinations, placing children at greater risk in the absence of adequate resources while organizations become increasingly overwhelmed trying to tackle vaccine hesitancy in regions where vaccines are accessible.
War and Conflict
The proliferation of fake imagery and videos poses a growing threat in conflict scenarios. Since the 1850s, photography has shaped public perceptions of war by illustrating the harsh realities faced by combatants and civilians alike. Historically, photographs and videos have been viewed as reliable documentation of human conflict and humanitarian efforts.
However, the belief that photography and videos always present truth has always been somewhat misleading. From the moment photography was invented, manipulation or staging of images began. Previously, the ability to create fake images was limited to individuals with specific skills, but today, anyone with internet access can generate and disseminate misleading visuals in minutes. Misleading AI-generated war zone depictions are now prevalent.
Visuals have a significant impact on public perception. Humanitarian organizations have relied heavily on powerful images to draw attention to human suffering and emphasize the importance of their initiatives. The chaotic and secretive nature of conflict complicates the task of conveying on-the-ground realities to those unexposed to them. Nevertheless, images remain essential in portraying the actual state of conflict. The risk of fake visuals misrepresenting events poses a significant challenge, potentially diminishing the influence of visual media on public sentiment.
Moreover, fake imagery or inaccurate reports concerning conflicts can hinder humanitarian efforts to hold entities accountable for violating international humanitarian law (IHL). Following an explosion that killed hundreds at the Al Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza in October 2023, misinformation—including fake images, misleading videos, and unverified claims—flooded social media, complicating inquiries into accountability for the attack on the hospital, which is protected under IHL. According to John Scott-Railton, a senior researcher at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab, the extensive volume of false information creates an environment that is “uniquely unhelpful” for establishing truth and accountability. In essence, propaganda has become a critical component of conflicts. When trust in information erodes, both sides in a conflict can label all reporting and evidence of human rights violations as “fake.” This phenomenon is sometimes exemplified by the efforts to delegitimize journalists in Gaza, often used to justify attacks against them.
This contributes to a frightening trend: a weakening of IHL and of the foundational values of humanitarianism. Erica Harper, head of research and policy studies at the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights, notes that “International humanitarian law stands at a crossroads. Violations that were once seen as shocking exceptions have now become widespread and tolerated.”
In March 2025, 15 paramedics and first responders—including eight Palestinian Red Crescent paramedics—were killed by the Israeli military. Afterward, the military cited “professional failures,” claiming that soldiers acted in response to what they perceived as a “tangible threat” during an “operational misunderstanding,” according to CNN. Similar claims have surfaced regarding hospitals being used to shield combatants in the Israel-Palestine and Russia-Ukraine conflicts. These narratives not only threaten humanitarians but also endanger civilians by suggesting that any civilian structure utilized for shelter becomes a valid target.
Moreover, the prevailing mistrust in humanitarian organizations further complicates their effectiveness. Nonprofits and international agencies must cultivate and sustain trust within communities. A 2025 Washington Post article described a case where a mother of three in South Sudan rejected airdropped food supplies marked with the flag of the nation responsible for bombing her village.
Refugees and Asylum Seekers
Misconceptions surrounding the rights and situations faced by individuals seeking asylum have long plagued humanitarian organizations. While a 2024 Ipsos survey indicates a broadly favorable global attitude toward asylum seekers, sentiments are notably less positive in Western nations. Generally, people conflate refugees—individuals fleeing persecution or danger—with migrants—those relocating for familial or economic reasons. This atmosphere of uncertainty fosters a breeding ground for propaganda. “Migration is a prime topic for those spreading lies and half-truths to instill fear, confusion, or prejudice. It is a nuanced situation where facts are complex to determine or convey,” wrote Alberto-Horst Neidhardt and Paul Butcher for the Migration Policy Institute.
This issue becomes particularly salient when such topics dominate public debate, often filled with inaccuracies. During the 2024 international election year, migration became a key electoral issue. Continuous propaganda falsely attributes declines in living standards in the West to migration, despite evidence to the contrary. Individuals seeking asylum (or migrants more broadly) are often wrongfully blamed for housing shortages, straining healthcare systems, and competing with citizens for jobs, regardless of counter-evidence.
Many individuals tend to overestimate the immigrant population in their country. Persistent claims in nations like the UK, Canada, and others assert that arriving asylum seekers or migrants receive substantial government assistance, a notion that is unfounded. During the 2024 U.S. elections, sensational claims asserting that Haitian migrants in Ohio were consuming pets became a focal point of discussion. Politicians increasingly attack migrants utilizing terms like “illegal aliens” to dehumanize them and further confuse issues surrounding their right to reside in the country.
“From Afghanistan to Ukraine and beyond, every development regarding global migration or cultural diversity management can ignite a new wave of disinformation, affecting policymaking, public discourse, and social relations. Conspiracy theories are often employed as tools by far-right movements and nativist politicians to advocate for stringent anti-immigration policies and mobilize voter bases,” explain Horst Neidhardt and Butcher.
False narratives about immigrants shape public opinion and motivate support for politicians advocating simplistic “solutions.” The All-Party Parliamentary Group on Refugees reported clear evidence that “providing safe and legal avenues can help diminish irregular migration and reduce loss of life,” thereby shrinking the number of individuals risking dangerous crossings of the English Channel. Nevertheless, the British government has adopted a hardline stance on this issue. The perilous journeys across the Channel result in fatalities, yet politicians appear more interested in satisfying voters influenced by misinformation than in implementing authentic solutions.
Humanitarian initiatives aimed at aiding refugees and asylum seekers are faltering due to misinformation. These campaigns often divert focus toward attacking “the other” rather than addressing broader societal issues. They foster divisions in diverse communities and threaten the rights of individuals seeking safety amid perilous conditions.
“Humanitarian organizations have grappled with how to best safeguard refugees and other vulnerable populations from the negative impacts of hate speech and misinformation,” notes the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The organization found that escalating violence against the Rohingya in Myanmar resulted from disinformation and hate speech proliferating on social media. Circumstances such as these lead to a questioning of “crucial protection information” that humanitarians must disseminate during crises.
The failure of humanitarian organizations to meet the needs of migrants further erodes the confidence that people place in them. “[T]he vast humanitarian needs of migrants in vulnerable situations are often unmet for various reasons. Consequently, these migrants frequently possess only a fragile trust in humanitarian entities. When organizations fail to maintain independence or are perceived as compromised, it undermines their capacity to assist those in need,” stated a Migration Policy Institute article in 2023.
Potential Solutions to the Misinformation Problem
The UNICEF “Vaccine Misinformation Management Field Guide” underscores the importance of not getting sidetracked by falsehoods. It advises humanitarian workers on the ground to recognize that people are understandably distressed during crises and encourages active listening to their genuine concerns. As outlined by the American Psychological Association, anxiety increases vulnerability to believing misinformation, particularly as it preys on emotions like fear and anger. During crises, individuals often seek confirmation of their beliefs, falling back on narratives that provide comfort and assurance. Ultimately, this highlights the key to tackling propaganda: trust.
If the post-truth era reflects a shift in people’s understanding of whom or what to trust, it should likewise indicate a transformation in how trust is cultivated. Former president of the International Federation of the Red Cross, Francesco Rocca, succinctly observed, “When people don’t have faith in us, our capability to assist them—and to fulfill our mission—is diminished.”
Building trust within a community encourages individuals to listen more to credible sources than to arbitrary online information. By establishing strong trust, humanitarian organizations can inspire individuals to scrutinize their beliefs and accept alternative perspectives. It’s essential to realize that trust must be earned, not expected. People can be easily swayed by words and images, including those that are false, but losing trust can occur swiftly when actions do not align with promises.
Humanitarians should demonstrate tangible solutions to individuals’ concerns and take decisive action. Efforts to tackle poverty and inequality must be prioritized. Research indicates that low GDP levels correlate with distrust. Each community has unique challenges; those deprived of basic resources are less inclined to trust others due to repeated disappointments from governmental institutions.
Humanitarian organizations must also consider who should spearhead trust-building and deliver vital information to local communities. The existing international aid model reflects a “colonial mindset,” argues Kennedy Odede, head of Shining Hope for Communities in Kenya, overlooking the “cultural knowledge” held by grassroots organizations. Efforts often assume that money can solve problems without engaging local communities—a flawed perspective.
Studies suggest that individuals are more inclined to trust members of their own communities. Consequently, efforts to counter false information and cultivate trust should originate from within local networks. Greater responsibility and influence should be granted to grassroots leaders and groups to foster trust, challenge misconceptions, provide services, and share accurate information with their communities.
“Understanding where and how communities gather their information will enable humanitarian workers to pinpoint those they trust as well as the core channels that facilitate communication,” states Frontline Negotiations. This awareness can aid organizations in preparing strategies to counter misinformation before it spreads widely.
Once trust is established, a clear communication strategy must be implemented to ensure misinformation is addressed while challenging biases and preconceived beliefs. Research indicates that storytelling approaches enhance the digestibility and understanding of factual information.
These strategies tackle misinformation, but can we mitigate its spread? The United Nations proposes that nations foster free, independent media as a means to curb misinformation rather than imposing restrictions.
“Some states have implemented digital and media literacy programs to enhance resilience for meaningful online engagement. These initiatives foster critical thinking skills, empowering individuals to identify, counter, and debunk disinformation. Nations should also invest in tools to support independent fact-checking, involving journalists and civil society,” the organization details.
It is also crucial to hold accountable those whose decisions inflict harm—whether political leaders, military officials who misuse misinformation for manipulation, or tech companies allowing harmful content to proliferate.
While it may be impossible to ensure all information in the world is truthful, humanitarians can still contribute by building trust within communities and addressing concerns that help counter misinformation and alleviate harm. This priority falls squarely within the humanitarian mission of preserving human life.
The ICRC has outlined three approaches for humanitarian organizations to combat misinformation: prioritizing the protection of those most affected during conflicts, bolstering the “resilience and agency” of communities, and ensuring “principled humanitarian action in the digital age” both online and offline.
Addressing the issue of misinformation necessitates collaborative efforts on every level. Globally, as humanitarian efforts become more vital in the face of rising conflicts, a unified platform rooted within humanitarian structures is essential to frame a shared agenda. This might entail developing joint advocacy stances on digital platforms, increasing collaboration, and pooling necessary resources.
