Case Facts
On which platform did the false message about Diana Uribe first appear?
What feature of WhatsApp makes misinformation nearly impossible to trace?
End-to-end encryption
What democratic event in Colombia was most directly affected by the spread of false information?
The peace referendum
What is the ethical risk of staying silent in response to misinformation?
It allows false narratives to spread unchecked.
If you were writing the problem statement for this case, what would you identify as the central issue facing Diana Uribe?
The spread of a false message that misrepresented her views, damaging her credibility and threatening public trust in democratic dialogue.
How was the false message written to sound like it came from Uribe?
It imitated her storytelling style but opposed the peace process.
Why do corrections often fail to stop viral misinformation?
Falsehoods spread faster and linger longer than clarifications.
Why did the false message attributed to Diana Uribe strike such a blow to her credibility, considering her decades-long work and public identity?
Because it directly contradicted her reputation as a respected advocate for peace and nonviolence. By imitating her style while promoting the opposite stance, the misinformation weaponized the very credibility she had built over decades, making the attack more believable and damaging
Why is transparency important in correcting misinformation?
It builds credibility and reinforces democratic values.
In analyzing the causes of the problem, what technological and social factors allowed misinformation about Uribe to spread so widely?
WhatsApp’s end-to-end encryption made detection nearly impossible, while trust in private group sharing and algorithms on open platforms fueled viral spread.
Arrange these events in the correct chronological order:
1.Uribe issues her rectification video
2.The false “open letter” begins circulating on WhatsApp
3.The false message resurfaces ahead of presidential elections
4.Colombia’s peace plebiscite vote
A) 1 → 2 → 3 → 4
B) 2 → 1 → 4 → 3
C) 2 → 1 → 3 → 4
D) 4 → 1 → 2 → 3
What social factor makes misinformation powerful in private groups?
People trust messages shared by friends/family, even if false.
Beyond individual reputations, how do misinformation campaigns like the one targeting Uribe disrupt democratic institutions over time?
They distort facts and inflame polarization, creating an environment where citizens lose faith in the fairness of elections and the credibility of institutions. Over time, this erosion of legitimacy undermines the very foundation of democracy, since informed, rational dialogue is replaced by suspicion and manipulation
What is one ethical principle Uribe should follow when responding publicly?
Avoid retaliation; focus on truth and civic trust.
Suggest two plausible alternatives Uribe could consider for responding to the misinformation, and explain one risk for each.
Alternative 1: Launch a public clarification campaign → Risk: May unintentionally re-amplify the false message.
Alternative 2: Collaborate with civic organizations and fact-checkers → Risk: Relies on external actors and may be slow to impact.
In what years did the misinformation resurface during major events?
2016 (peace referendum) and 2018 (presidential elections).
What role do algorithms play in amplifying misinformation on open platforms?
They reward content that gets engagement, even if it’s false.
Why is protecting civic dialogue especially critical during elections in a deeply polarized context like Colombia’s peace referendum?
Because when societies are already divided, misinformation can weaponize those divisions, turning debate into hostility. Safeguarding civic dialogue ensures citizens can engage with differing views on the basis of facts, preventing misinformation from further destabilizing fragile democratic processes
How can collaboration with fact-checking groups help Uribe?
It amplifies corrections with independent credibility.
If Uribe chose to prioritize protecting democratic trust, how should she justify her recommended strategy without repeating her analysis?
She should emphasize how her chosen strategy (e.g., collaboration with institutions) addresses both credibility and systemic trust, highlighting why it’s stronger than the other option based on long-term democratic resilience.
The false message about Diana Uribe resurfaced in February 2018, just before Colombia’s presidential elections. Why was this timing particularly damaging compared to when the message first appeared in 2016 during the peace plebiscite?
Because by 2018, concerns about the global spread of fake news had intensified, making the misinformation more politically explosive. Its reappearance at a sensitive electoral moment not only threatened Uribe’s credibility but also deepened public distrust in democratic institutions
Suggest one ethically sound digital strategy Uribe could use in closed networks.
Partner with trusted voices inside communities to share corrections organically.
If Uribe had chosen to ignore the false message instead of releasing a correction video, what might have been the short-term and long-term consequences for both her personal credibility and democratic trust?
In the short term, ignoring the message could have prevented re-amplifying it and avoided giving it further attention. However, in the long term, silence would likely have allowed the misinformation to solidify unchecked, undermining Uribe’s credibility and eroding public trust in democratic dialogue. By failing to respond, she would risk being permanently associated with views she never held, weakening both her personal reputation and broader institutional legitimacy.
What ethical balance must Uribe strike in her response?
Defending her reputation while promoting dialogue that unites rather than divides.
If Uribe selected collaboration with civic organizations as her recommendation, what specific 3–4 steps could she implement to make the strategy effective before the presidential elections?
Partner with fact-checkers to publicly debunk the false message.
Coordinate with electoral authorities to raise awareness of misinformation risks.
Engage trusted influencers to circulate her correction in private spaces.
Host public forums or media appearances to promote transparency and reinforce her peace advocacy.