Introduction by Croakey: The New York Times is tracking President-elect Donald Trump’s Cabinet and staff nominations.
They include Dr Mehmet Oz, a celebrity physician with a history of dispensing dubious medical advice on his daytime show. In the early days of the pandemic, he clashed with medical experts by promoting the malaria drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine to ward off the coronavirus.
Then there’s Robert F Kennedy, an environmental lawyer who has no medical or public health degree, and is a vocal vaccine skeptic, critic of the Centres for Disease Control, and promoted theories that suggest HIV is not the true cause of AIDS.
In this post-truth world, scholars have a responsibility to resist rising authoritarianism and “embrace activism as a legitimate extension of their work”, writes Dr Aletha Ward, an academic at the University of Southern Queensland who is active in climate and health research and advocacy.
Aletha Ward writes:
In an era marked by rising authoritarianism, disinformation, and anti-science sentiment, academics face an urgent call to action.
The appointment of Robert F. Kennedy Jr – a vaccine and fluoride sceptic – as Secretary of Health and Human Services exemplifies a broader crisis: the erosion of evidence-based governance.
This trend, exacerbated by Donald Trump’s normalisation of misinformation and disdain for expertise, highlights the critical role scholars must play in resisting the collapse of truth and democratic principles.
Trump’s administration is systematically replacing qualified professionals with loyalists, undermining public trust in institutions. Kennedy’s appointment is a stark example, prioritising ideology over evidence in public health.
This pattern reflects a deliberate effort to dismantle governance structures reliant on expertise, amplifying the ‘post-truth’ era where conspiracy theories thrive, and evidence is delegitimised.
The consequences are tangible. During the COVID-19 pandemic, politically motivated misinformation about vaccines and public health measures resulted in preventable deaths.
Similarly, the ongoing climate crisis exemplifies how rejecting evidence that fossil fuels are a primary driver of climate change and associated health crises directly impacts public health.
Rejecting evidence allows leaders like Trump to endanger public health, weaken institutional integrity, and foster conditions where misinformation and anti-science rhetoric thrive.
Challenging authoritarian playbooks
Noam Chomsky’s concept of manufactured consent sheds light on how leaders manipulate public opinion to consolidate power.
Trump’s rhetoric, such as his “jokes” about serving a third term, signals a strategy to erode constitutional norms while testing public tolerance.
This playbook, founded on repetition and media manipulation, creates an alternate reality where disinformation replaces evidence and trust in democratic institutions erodes.
Social media platforms, with algorithms that prioritise engagement over accuracy, further entrench polarisation.
Echo chambers amplify divisive narratives, enabling authoritarian leaders to bypass traditional accountability. In this environment, the role of expertise is systematically diminished, creating fertile ground for fascism cloaked in populist appeal.
Academics hold a unique responsibility to counter these trends by stepping beyond the confines of peer-reviewed journals and classrooms.
Traditional academic outputs, while valuable, are insufficient to combat the immediacy of disinformation. To make evidence-based advocacy impactful, scholars must engage directly with the public, policymakers, and media.
Translating complex research into actionable insights allows academics to fill the vacuum left by misinformation and rebuild public trust in expertise through writing op-eds, participating in public forums, leveraging social media, and hosting accessible conversations.
Academics must also challenge disinformation at its core by fostering critical thinking.
Incorporating media literacy and analytical skills into education systems equips individuals to discern credible information, a critical tool in resisting propaganda.
Further, interdisciplinary collaboration between fields like health, climate science, and social policy can amplify the reach and relevance of evidence-based advocacy.
Path forward
Neutrality in the face of rising authoritarianism risks complicity.
Academics must embrace activism as a legitimate extension of their work, advocating for equity, justice, and evidence-based governance.
Scholars can collaborate with grassroots movements and underrepresented communities to amplify marginalised voices and promote inclusive policies informed by lived experience.
In this post-truth era, academics must reclaim their role as public intellectuals, using their platforms to challenge misinformation, champion evidence, and resist the erosion of democracy.
The fight for truth is not just an academic endeavour; it is a moral imperative.
Author details
Dr Aletha Ward is Senior Research Lead – First Nations at the University of Southern Queensland. She is active in climate and health research and advocacy, including as:
Co-Founder and Ambassador – Climate Action Nurses
Chair Climate and Health Faculty – Australian College of Nursing
Non-Executive Director – Climate and Health Alliance
Leadership team – Planetary Health Collaborative for Nurses and Midwives
Climate and Health Representative – Australian Primary Health Care Nurses Association.
Via social media
See Croakey’s archive of articles on the United States election and health
