The figures speak for themselves. The number of STI infections is rising, unwanted pregnancies are on the increase, and outbreaks of measles,once a rarity in the Netherlands, are now almost a daily occurrence. Some of these developments are linked to medical disinformation on social media. This is the conclusion reached by, amongst others, the Federation of Medical Specialists and major European studies into vaccination behaviour. Martin Buijsen, Professor of Health Law at Erasmus School of Law, spoke about this on RTL Nieuws [in Dutch]. The House of Representatives wants influencers without a medical background who spread inaccurate medical information to be prosecuted. But how legally feasible is that, really?
Young people are the most vulnerable
“Medical disinformation spreads most effectively via social media,” says Buijsen. “The groups that derive most of their knowledge of the world from these media are also the most vulnerable. That is young people,” says Buijsen. Influencers sharing medical information is a relatively new development closely linked to the rise of social media.
The consequences are tangible. According to Buijsen, the falling vaccination rate is at least partly due to disinformation by influencers, with the result that measles outbreaks in the Netherlands are becoming less and less rare. Medical professionals also point to disinformation about hormonal contraception as one of the causes of the rising number of unwanted pregnancies.
Buijsen finds it understandable, in itself, that people first try to find information online. “Seeking help from a healthcare professional isn’t always easy. It’s not really surprising that people try to find information for themselves first.”
A crucial distinction: disinformation or misinformation?
Anyone seeking to take legal action against influencers soon comes up against a fundamental problem. Not all incorrect information is punishable by law. Buijsen draws a clear distinction: in the case of misinformation, someone unwittingly spreads incorrect information, whereas disinformation is deliberately spread with an ulterior motive, such as financial gain or sowing mistrust. “With disinformation, there is intent; with misinformation, there is not.”
It is precisely this distinction that makes criminal prosecution so complicated. Criminal law requires that someone knowingly and wilfully spreads false information. “But many influencers sincerely believe in the accuracy of what they share. They are spreading misinformation, not disinformation.” From a legal perspective, the necessary intent is therefore lacking. Buijsen acknowledges the complexity, but also points out that a similar distinction is already made in criminal law. “The distinction can be made in the case of an offence such as fraud, so why not here?”
The intention is sympathetic, but the implementation is not
Buijsen does understand the call from the House of Representatives to make influencers liable to prosecution. “The intention is indeed sympathetic,” he says, but he immediately raises some reservations. “Formulating such a prohibition is no easy task, let alone enforcing it.” He has serious doubts as to whether a specific criminal offence would actually be effective.
Existing legal frameworks offer limited solutions. The Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets can take action against misleading advertising, but only if it is systematic. Health regulations set requirements for information provided by healthcare professionals, but influencers are not usually covered by these. Consumer protection rules also have a limited scope.
If criminal law isn’t the solution, what is?
Buijsen strongly advocates a different approach. “The message that reliable medical information cannot be obtained via social media is much easier to get across.” In his view, upbringing and education offer the greatest protection, both for members of the public and for healthcare professionals themselves.
In addition, Buijsen sees a role for the government in strengthening reliable sources of information such as Thuisarts.nl. “The government must encourage professional bodies to take responsibility in this area. Members of the public must be able to turn to websites where it is certain that the information is in line with the current state of medical science.”
The question is therefore not just whether influencers can be held legally liable, but whether that is the most effective approach at all. According to Buijsen, the key lies not in the courtroom, but in the classroom.
- Professor
- More information
Are you unsure whether medical information you find online is accurate? If so, always check reliable websites such as https://www.thuisarts.nl/ first (translation possible on website), or contact your doctor.
- Related content
