By Debra Herrick, UCSB
In international politics, outcomes are shaped not only by what countries do, but by how those actions are perceived. UC Santa Barbara political scientist Julia Morse studies how information disorder — a media environment where it’s easy to create content and spread false or misleading material — shapes international politics.
“At the end of the day, it may or may not matter whether a behavior technically violates international law. It matters who wins the contest over public perceptions of behavior,” she said.
Across three recent papers, Morse examines how these dynamics are playing out in the international arena, from how governments respond to accusations of wrongdoing to how international organizations like the United Nations operate in a more fragmented information environment.
In “Smoke and Mirrors: Strategic Messaging and the Politics of Noncompliance,” published in American Political Science Review and co-authored with Tyler Pratt, an assistant professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Morse analyzes how governments defend themselves when accused of violating international law. The study identifies several common strategies, including outright denial, reframing the meaning of the law and challenging its relevance to a particular kind of behavior.
Drawing inspiration from current events like the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the researchers use survey experiments of U.S. respondents and international policy elites to test how different strategic messages affect willingness to punish violations. They found that while direct denials can be countered by credible evidence, other forms of messaging — particularly those that reinterpret legal standards — are more difficult to rebut.
“The good news is that denials are easily countered by credible independent authorities,” Morse said. “But the less good news is that trying to redefine the boundaries of the law is a pretty successful strategy.”
The study also highlights the role of international organizations in shaping these outcomes. When institutions such as the United Nations provide credible information, they can reduce the effectiveness of misleading claims, though their influence is not uniform across all types of messaging.
A second paper, “Information Disorder and Global Politics,” published in International Organization, expands the analysis to other areas of international politics. Rather than focusing on a single case, the article outlines how changes in the way information is created and shared are affecting core assumptions in international relations, with implications for both war and peace.
“There are so many theories in international relations that assume information is available in a consistent way,” Morse said. “And actually in the modern information environment, that’s just no longer the case.”
The paper points to several implications, including challenges for democratic systems, increased difficulty in sustaining international cooperation and new dynamics in conflict. It also raises questions about how both the public and political elites process information, noting that susceptibility to misleading or strategically framed content may not be limited to any one group.
In a third publication, “Information Fragmentation and Global Governance in Hard Times,” in Ethics & International Affairs, Morse focuses on how these trends are affecting global governance institutions. As formal international organizations face gridlock and competing signals, a growing number of informal institutions are taking on larger roles.
These newer bodies can be more adaptable and insulated from political pressures, but they also raise questions about transparency and accountability. The result, Morse suggests, is a shifting landscape in which the effectiveness and legitimacy of global governance are increasingly tied to how information is produced, shared and interpreted.
Across all three papers, a common theme is the central role of information in shaping international outcomes. Morse’s earlier work, including her book “The Banker’s Blacklist: Unofficial Market Enforcement and the Global Fight against Illicit Financing” (Cornell University Press, 2022), examined how international organizations influence behavior by sending credible signals to global markets. Her recent research suggests that this signaling function is becoming more contested.
“It’s less clear who is credible in this environment. Where should governments, publics, even corporations, look for reliable information?” Morse said. “And even if that credible signal exists, it’s harder for that signal to break through the noise.”
As the global information environment continues to evolve, her work points to a growing challenge: understanding what happens in international politics means knowing how those events are communicated and how they are understood.
Also Read
- Six Roads to Safety: New Study Finds a Critical Threshold for Wildfire Survival
- UCSB Library Honors Standout Undergraduate Researchers
- Symposium Celebrates UCSB’s Academic Excellence
- UC Santa Barbara’s 2026 Commencement Events to Celebrate 6,727 Graduates
- Schmidt Family Foundation Renews Multi-Year Funding of UCSB’s Environmental Solutions Fellows Program
This is a critical situation. Just look how lies coupled with ignorance and poorly educated racists put a convicted fraud, rapist and child rape defender in office. Our current state of affairs are due entirely to false information and bigotry. We can strive to end one through stricter controls in the media, the other is sadly part of our culture and is perpetuated by the very false information we should be trying to stop.
Calling out lies by the media which are then parroted by bigots and the educationally challenged (BASIC, STEVE, BEES, DOOLLY, KEVIN and all the others here) is essential but we need it at a much higher and more influential level. I can’t do it all!
We need journalists to start really taking politicians to task in the press conferences. We need more fact checkers like Snopes, etc. online and refuting false information in media reporting. We need to actively shout down all instances of lies in all places. Lies like those which our pathetic government spews daily get people killed. This is serious.
Like most good democrats, I voted for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 primaries. Unfortunately, The Party chose to run a candidate the voters didn’t like. Then they did it again in 2024, picked their candidate without a democratic process.
One of the best lessons in life is to take responsibility for your mistakes, only then can you expect to do better the next time around.
> The Party chose to run a candidate the voters didn’t like.
That’s a lie. Hillary got 4 million more votes in the primary than did Bernie. As for not being liked, Hillary was voted the most admired woman 22 times, including 16 consecutive years. When not running for office she was wildly popular, including having huge positives while serving as NY Senator. While running, not so much … why? Because of extreme propaganda campaigns run by “the vast right wing conspiracy”, which she was mocked for but was dead on about.
> Then they did it again in 2024, picked their candidate without a democratic process.
That’s a lie. Kamala got the votes of a large majority of the delegates, which is the process by which candidates are *always* selected.
And in 2020, Bernie knew that he couldn’t get more than 30% of the delegates so his strategy was to create a contested convention and try to win the floor vote, but Buttigieg et. al. cut him off at the pass by withdrawing and giving their support to Biden–who had massive support from the Black community, especially Black women.
I liked Bernie long before he was well known, I like his policy positions, and I supported him in 2016 up until he won in Michigan, started to think he could actually win the nomination, and switched from being a critical gadfly to being a typically conniving candidate, with misogynist attacks on Hillary for her speaking fees, accusing Planned Parenthood of being “the establishment”, and other nonsense. Now that he’s not a candidate he’s again doing what he’s good at, and he paved the way for people like AOC and Mamdani.
> One of the best lessons in life is to take responsibility for your mistakes
Which you refuse to do.
The proof is in the pudding.
Meaningless troll nonsense which I will take as a concession.
Yes, and Hillary won the popular vote in that election.
Your pudding is faulty.
“picked their candidate without a democratic process.” You claim to be a democrat, but you continue to use con talking points. The rulebook for the DNC and RNC are vastly similar. The scenario would have been similar if Trump had stepped down at the same time. Under Rule 9 of the Rules of the Republican Party, the RNC has the authority to fill vacancies in the presidential ticket that occur due to “death, declination, or otherwise”. Republiturds would have you believe otherwise.
Having an excuse is fine, but if no-one likes the candidate then you still lose.
You’re just saying stupid pointless things that I already refuted.
“No one” is generally not hyphenated. It is almost always written as two separate words (“no one”) to mean nobody or not a single person. While “no-one” (hyphenated) is occasionally used in British English, it is far less common.
Excuse? It’s in the rulebooks for both sides – but nice deflect.
OLDE – and? That has nothing to do with disinformation, just griping about “our” party (I doubt you are really a Democrat) and the poor choices the leadership continues to make.
Is that why you chose to continue staying in IV?
“I can’t do it all”.
What a silly rant. We’ve seen it all but this is truly ridiculous. Someone’s really wadded up.
Hashtag absurdity…
Good stuff from Edhat posting this crybaby nonsense.
Basic, your comments continue to make the site toxic.
BASIC – you’re the #1 source of lies and crying on this site. Your “opinion” on my comment is as valueless as every. single. comment. you make here 7 days a week.
Recent studies found that Republicans are 2.3 times more likely to have their posts flagged as misleading by community-based systems like X’s Community Notes than Democrats.
Susceptibility and Bias: Research published in Nature Communications Psychology suggests that Republicans may be less able to discern true from false headlines compared to Democrats, particularly during highly polarized periods like elections.
Some researchers argue the disparity is partly due to the supply of news. According to the Brookings Institution, Democrats can often find information that satisfies their partisan views from mainstream sources, whereas Republicans may turn to more extreme sources to find content that aligns with their political tastes.
That has something to do with the fact that Democrats’ “partisan” views are generally aligned with reality.
In other words, MAGA is a filthy cesspool of gaslighting, trolling, misogyny, sexual abuse, sadism, homophobia, bigotry and terrorism. The GOP is a pathetic mess that has even turned Christianity upside down. They can only say yes to its cult leader to please him and excuse him for any type of crime. The right has essentially created a disinformation machine based on their fascist media ecosystem. Republicans and Maga have essentially give the Anti-Christ the green light.
Here’s a thought – don’t watch TV and social media all day. Form your own opinions based on your observations and intelligence. Vote accordingly.
Here’s a thought, stop protecting child rapers
BASIC – once again, pointless. It’s the people who rely on biased news sources and social media memes/reels, etc (like you) who are the ones spreading disinformation. Heck, you spread it all the time here.
But do tell, how is your “observation and intelligence” telling you that Reef Balls aren’t artificial reefs? How tofu has “zero protein?” How Covid was nothing to worry about?
How are people supposed to “observe” what is happening around the world? It’s not about avoiding news, it’s about being smart enough (unlike you) to know which news sources are reliable and unbiased.
“don’t [inform yourself].Form your own opinions based on [basic’s] observations and intelligence.”
That explains a lot.
The MAGACRAT Repuglicans have completely bastardized Christianity to fit their own morally bankrupt agenda, and have completely corrupted the gospel. Very sick!
“Energy prices will drop 50% on day one”
“No new wars”
“The peace President”