From certainty to curiosity: How journalism can correct itself.
In an era of polarized debates and widespread misinformation, journalism faces a critical challenge: how to inform the public without reinforcing division or spreading inaccuracies. This question was at the heart of a thought-provoking session led by Ola Rosling, co-founder of Gapminder, and Keith Moore, Head of Editorial, who explored a simple but uncomfortable idea, what if journalists themselves are sometimes wrong?
Drawing on the work of Gapminder, the speakers introduced a constructive journalism approach grounded in data, humility, and audience engagement. Their core argument was clear: journalists cannot claim authority over truth without first acknowledging their own susceptibility to misconceptions. As Rosling stated, “Journalists are not in the position to tell the public the truth if the journalists are also wrong.”
Notably, the session itself reflected this approach. The audience was quizzed beforehand on key global facts, revealing that even an informed group frequently held incorrect assumptions. This interactive element immediately set the tone: rather than positioning the speakers as unquestionable experts, it invited everyone into a shared process of learning and reflection.
Gapminder’s Public Knowledge Initiative demonstrates how widespread misinformation truly is. Through short quizzes, audiences are asked basic questions about global trends, poverty levels, education, or public health. The results are striking: most people, including educated groups and media professionals, consistently answer incorrectly. Rather than embarrassing participants, these findings are used to open dialogue and spark curiosity. In this model, being wrong becomes a shared starting point for learning.
This approach has already been successfully applied in collaboration with The Washington Post and is now being adapted by Sveriges Radio P4 ahead of national elections. By integrating interactive quizzes into radio programming, journalists aim to engage listeners in a more participatory way. Surveys conducted before and after broadcasts help measure whether audiences gain more accurate knowledge, transforming journalism into a two-way learning process.
The session also highlighted several persistent misconceptions. For instance, the public often dramatically overestimates the proportion of foreign-born individuals in prison populations. Similarly, global poverty is widely misunderstood: only about 9% of the world lives in extreme poverty today, yet many assume the figure is far higher. These inaccuracies are not harmless, they shape public opinion, fuel fear, and deepen polarization.
A key reason for this disconnect is the media’s focus on negative events. Constant exposure to crises and conflict creates a distorted perception of reality, contributing to anxiety and a sense that the world is worsening. In contrast, data shows significant global progress in areas such as education, health, and economic development. The speakers argued that journalism must balance reporting problems with highlighting progress to provide a more accurate and constructive narrative.
Ultimately, this session called for a shift in the role of journalists, from authoritative truth-tellers to facilitators of understanding. By embracing uncertainty, using data responsibly, and involving audiences in the learning process, journalism can rebuild trust and foster more meaningful public dialogue. The impact of this message was clear, as Ola Rosling received a standing ovation at the end of the session, underscoring how strongly it resonated with the audience.
