Australia is facing a wave of misinformation and disinformation on climate change and energy. This is being fuelled by the growth in artificial intelligence and allowed to spread freely on social media, according to the findings of a Senate inquiry^[1].

This misinformation presents a threat to action on climate change, but also challenges the health of Australia’s democracy, the committee found^[2]. AI was even used to generate fake content in some of the submissions to the inquiry.

Drawing on 247 written submissions and 11 days of public hearings – including some extraordinary revelations I’ll get to shortly – senators from all sides of politics heard about the challenge our society faces to combat misinformation and disinformation.

Why does misinformation matter?

First, it’s important to understand why misinformation matters, and why about 74% of Australians are concerned about it^[3].

Misinformation is the spread of false information^[4], regardless of whether there is an intent to harm or mislead. But when an individual or organisation spreads misinformation with the intent to influence public opinion, this is known as disinformation.

Both are important. In democratic societies, public opinion is the link between what people want, their electoral behaviour, and what politicians do on their behalf. Democratic representation is therefore predicated on knowing and understanding public opinion^[5].

If misinformation starts to warp or sever this link, our democratic societies can unravel. We only have to look across the Pacific to the United States to see what this looks like in real time.

What is happening in Australia?

The inquiry uncovered countless instances where misinformation – and often disinformation – was affecting public opinion on everything, from wind farms and whales to electric vehicles and batteries.

Indeed, one of the motivations^[7] for the Senate inquiry was evidence that emerged in 2025^[8] highlighting how anti-offshore wind campaigns had spread misinformation. They claimed turbines killed whales and would block out the sunrise – neither of which is true^[9].

It is not only wind farms that have been the target. Misinformation about batteries is rife too. For example, testimony from a NSW farmer^[10] told how a 500 kilowatt-hour community battery in Narrabri, initially supported by the local council, was later blocked following a campaign driven by misinformation on Facebook. These pages claimed the battery would blow up, catch fire, and might even shut down the town – assertions that were not supported by evidence.

For many people, misinformation and disinformation have become part of daily life. Survivors of the 2019 Black Summer bushfires submitted evidence^[11] describing how misinformation had created rifts in local NSW communities and driven family members apart. Those advocating for action on climate change had faced a torrent of abuse on social media, as lies about the causes of the fires spread online.

Who is funding and spreading it?

In my own testimony before the committee, I described how research from more than 100 scholars around the world^[12] has uncovered a network of organisations that exist to influence the public, media and political arenas to slow, stop or reverse effective climate action. This is what we refer to as climate obstruction.

In Australia this is not just gas and coal companies. But there are other players too, such as trade associations, think tanks and PR firms, among many others, that have a history of opposing climate policies.

For example, Australians for Natural Gas^[13], which appears to be a grassroots organisation that supports pro-gas policies, was in fact set up by the chief executive of gas company Tamboran Resources, with help from PR firm Freshwater Strategy, according to an investigation by the ABC^[14].

My own research^[15] has shown industry lobby groups historically opposed to climate policies in the US spent US$3.4 billion (A$4.88 billion) on political activities, especially public relations, between 2008 and 2018. In Australia, our knowledge of who is funding disinformation is hampered by a lack of transparency.

A number of participants to the Senate inquiry refused to reveal who was funding their operations.

The role of AI and social media

The committee’s report makes it clear that social media and AI are fuelling misinformation. Senators heard how the algorithms on social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram and TikTok often prioritised engagement over accuracy, “creating echo chambers that reinforce existing beliefs and can amplify misleading content”.

What is worse is that social media corporations are doing little to address it. Under a grilling from senators^[16], Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, conceded it spends more on lobbying than fact-checking in Australia.

AI was also used to generate fake content in Senate submissions to the very inquiry investigating misinformation. It was uncovered^[17] that Rainforest Reserves Australia (RRA), a conservative campaign group opposing renewable energy, had included information about wind farms that do not exist. It also cited academic articles that do not exist.

In one of the more ridiculous moments, when RRA was confronted by the media about its AI-influenced submissions, it sent a 1,500-word response. Later, it acknowledged this had itself been generated with the help of AI. You can’t make this stuff up!

AI is also making it easier for groups to spread false information by generating fake social media posts, pictures and videos.

Combating climate misinformation

While the committee acknowledged “there is no simple fix for the spread of false and misleading information”, it recommended a series of important actions. These included:

• greater transparency around political donations and lobbying
• strengthening media literacy
• funding independent monitoring programs to track misinformation across platforms
• funding independent media, among many others.

Additional comments from senators went further. These included banning donations from fossil fuel industries and legislating truth in political advertising. Significantly, they also called for powers to compel social media companies to remove fake content and bots used in coordinated campaigns to obstruct climate action.

The federal government should act on these worthy recommendations before the next election. Otherwise, this problem will only grow. As the senators pointed out, nothing less than the health of our democracy is at stake.

References

1. ^{^} Senate inquiry (www.aph.gov.au)
2. ^{^} committee found (www.aph.gov.au)
3. ^{^} concerned about it (www.aph.gov.au)
4. ^{^} false information (www.library.gov.au)
5. ^{^} understanding public opinion (www.pewresearch.org)
6. ^{^} Enrique/Pexels (www.pexels.com)
7. ^{^} motivations (reneweconomy.com.au)
8. ^{^} 2025 (www.aph.gov.au)
9. ^{^} neither of which is true (www.fisheries.noaa.gov)
10. ^{^} testimony from a NSW farmer (reneweconomy.com.au)
11. ^{^} submitted evidence (www.aph.gov.au)
12. ^{^} around the world (doi.org)
13. ^{^} Australians for Natural Gas (www.australiansfornaturalgas.com)
14. ^{^} ABC (www.abc.net.au)
15. ^{^} My own research (theconversation.com)
16. ^{^} grilling from senators (www.youtube.com)
17. ^{^} It was uncovered (www.theguardian.com)