The 21st century is the age of disinformation. Yet again we’ve seen the potential impact of disinformation on the political winds of elections, but another storm of disinformation is brewing – when it comes to disasters. Recent environmental disasters in the United States and Spain have shown just how vulnerable we can be to disinformation in the crises caused by disasters.In September and October 2024, Hurricanes Helene and Milton bore down on the south-eastern United States.But disinformation – that is, misleading content deliberately spread to deceive people – muddied the waters.There were claims that:Among other things, these conspiracy theories led to threats against Federal aid workers and meteorologists, and delayed the emergency response.A few weeks later in Spain, emergency response to widespread flooding was marred by disinformation claiming the government had concealed risks and fatalities.Australia is not immune from disinformation.During the fires of 2019/20, the hashtag #arsonemergency emerged and grew, linked to bots and trolls as part of an apparent attempt to divert attention away from linking those fires with climate change.Emergency response to disasters relies on the ability of authorities to rapidly get accurate information to impacted people. It also relies on those people trusting authorities to act in their best interests so that they’re willing to follow official advice.These are both impeded by disinformation, which can make it hard for people to distinguish and act on accurate information, inflame heightened emotions and exploit fears, and diminish trust in official instructions. And the consequences can be deadly. As another high-risk Australian weather season looms, with a prediction of a hot, sweaty summer that brings with it an increased risk of bushfires, the issue of disaster disinformation needs the immediate attention of emergency services, governments, community organisations, the media and policymakers.The ‘why’ of disinformationThere are three key types of disinformation when we’re talking about disasters:Disinformation about the existence, severity or cause of a disaster or weather event: These question whether the situation is accurately represented by authorities – and as we’ve seen in the US, even accusing authorities of creating the disaster.These narratives often promote climate disinformation in the form of climate delayism or climate denialism.Disinformation about disaster response effort: These manipulate heightened fears and uncertainty during disasters to promote distrust and chaos.In the US, this included claims of favouritism; in Spain, the focus was on official cover ups including purported fatalities and secretive government agendas.Disinformation that uses disasters as an opportunity to exacerbate other prejudices: Pre-existing societal divisions offer fertile ground for disinformation, and these are often used to gain a willing audience for unrelated disaster disinformation.For example, anti-Semitic narratives were used in disinformation during Hurricanes Milton and Helene.Reinforcing prejudice in these ways harms the targeted groups, impacting social cohesion and community resilience. It's an issue of trustTrust is critical when it comes to managing disasters.Every stage of any disaster response relies on information and engagement to help people make decisions to avoid or reduce risk, avoid threat, and navigate the complexity of the recovery process.As people prepare for disaster, they look for information from trusted authorities, like fire and emergency services, or people they trust.The effectiveness of critical warnings increases when they come from multiple, trusted sources. People are more likely to act on a warning when the source is someone or something they trust.Almost always, people will want to verify a warning by looking for more information or finding out how others are responding.This confirmation is an important step in the warning response – and even more important as disinformation spreads around disasters.Emergency responses are usually highly localised, relying heavily on robust local information ecosystems designed to address disinformation and build sustained trust through transparency, consistency and accessibility.The effectiveness of critical warnings increases when they come from multiple, trusted sources. Picture: Vic EmergencyHow can authorities prepare for disinformation?The Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience manages the Australian Disaster Resilience Handbooks Collection on behalf of the National Emergency Management Agency.This collection provides trusted, authoritative advice on community engagement, preparedness for effective response and recovery.The Disinformation in the City Response Playbook also aims to help. It provides valuable insights for emergency management at the local level.The playbook includes significant preventive work to understand community risk factors to disinformation. It also includes information on establishing trusted and trustworthy communication networks to rapidly facilitate information between communities and governing bodies.These steps include:Pre-emption: Disinformation often follows paths of existing political and societal tensions, as they encourage people to buy into false narratives. These can often be anticipated by understanding local fault lines of prejudice, distrust and perceived grievances. Understanding these requires local authorities to develop comprehensive and trusted information-sharing networks across communities.Pre-bunking: Disaster-related disinformation usually follows known narratives of climate denialism, climate delayism, government distrust and prejudice. Proactively pre-bunking to get ahead of disinformation before disasters and can help people identify and refute false content.Debunking: Simple debunking can be effective, using models like this one from the UK Government’s RESIST 2 toolkit:Fact: Lead with the truthMyth: Point to false information Explain The fallacy: why is it false?Fact: state the truth again (and again and again).Recovery: Disinformation can impact on communities in long-lasting ways. Disaster recovery is a complex process that requires people to be able to come together, share their experiences and access support.Disinformation adds an additional layer, with potentially heightened polarisation, fragmentation and hostilities that can continue in communities well after the initial crisis has subsided. Emergency recovery plans should recognise and incorporate the specific needs that people may have because of disinformation campaigns, so that they can be addressed and do not erode community resilience in the future.In this disinformation age, trust in our institutions cannot be taken for granted.Local government Emergency Management teams and their partner authorities, including Victoria’s State Emergency Service and the Country Fire Authority (CFA), can help to proactively build a network of trusted institutions, trusted people, trusted sources and formats, and trusted places.This can help ensure that all parts of a community provide and receive rapid accurate information that they are likely to listen to and act on.