In the echo chamber of social media, I’ve collided with a relentless force – trolls who thrive on chaos. No matter how thoroughly their lies are dismantled, their trolling tactics exposed, or their provocations muted, they return, undeterred. Facts bounce off them. Reason fuels their defiance.
But why? What itch does this performance scratch? Is it rage, boredom, or a pay cheque? To find out, I stopped debating and started interrogating. Below are the questions I weaponised – not to shame, but to dissect the motives behind the mask.
Use them to disarm your own trolls. The answers (or lack thereof) might surprise you.
To effectively discern the beliefs and motivations of someone promoting anti-globalist conspiracies, climate denial, or COVID-19 misinformation (referred to here as “trolls”), ask targeted questions that expose contradictions, sources, and underlying agendas. Below are strategic questions tailored to unpack their rhetoric:
Core Beliefs and Motivations
“What specific evidence or sources convinced you that global institutions like the UN or WEF are a threat to national sovereignty?”
(Tests their reliance on credible evidence vs. conspiracy tropes.)
“Do you believe there’s a coordinated effort to suppress ‘alternative’ views on climate change or COVID-19? If so, who do you think is behind it, and what’s their end goal?”
(Uncovers conspiratorial thinking and scapegoating.)
Climate Change Denial
“You’ve criticised mainstream climate science – what, in your view, do scientists misunderstand about CO₂’s role in global warming?”
(Forces engagement with basic science; many denialists conflate weather/climate or misuse outdated data.)
“If renewable energy harms economies, as you claim, how do you explain countries like Germany or Norway successfully transitioning while maintaining growth?”
(Challenges oversimplified economic narratives.)
“Do you accept that fossil fuel companies like ExxonMobil internally acknowledged climate science decades ago while publicly funding denial? How does that align with your views?”
(Highlights industry-funded disinformation.)
COVID-19 and Public Health
“You’ve said masks are ineffective. How do you reconcile that with studies showing mask mandates reduced transmission rates in places like Japan or New Zealand?”
(Tests cherry-picking of data.)
“If public health measures are ‘tyranny,’ what alternative policies would you support to prevent overwhelmed hospitals during a pandemic?”
(Exposes lack of viable solutions beyond grievance.)
Do you think doctors and nurses who advocated for masks were complicit in a ‘hoax,’ or were they acting in good faith with the data they had?”
(Confronts dehumanisation of experts.)
Anti-Globalism and Solutions
“What specific policies or actions by global institutions (e.g., WHO, UN) do you think most threaten everyday Australians?”
(Demands specifics over vague fearmongering.)
“If global cooperation isn’t the answer to issues like pandemics or climate change, what’s your alternative framework for solving problems that cross borders?”
(Tests nationalist hypocrisy; e.g., relying on global supply chains while rejecting governance.)
Do you believe Australia should exit all international agreements, including trade deals? How would that impact jobs or industries reliant on exports?”
(Highlights economic illiteracy.)
Funding and Ideological Ties
“Have you ever collaborated with or received support from groups tied to fossil fuel lobbies, such as the Institute of Public Affairs or Mining Council of Australia?”
(Exposes potential financial motives.)
“Why do you think figures like Gina Rinehart or Clive Palmer fund campaigns against climate action? Do you see their mining profits as a factor?”
(Links ideology to vested interests.)
Conspiracy Thinking
“When you talk about a ‘globalist agenda,’ can you name specific individuals or organisations orchestrating it, and what proof you have of their coordination?”
(Most conspiracy theories collapse when pressed for evidence.)
“If your claims about climate science or COVID-19 were proven false, would you update your views? If not, what would it take to change your mind?”
(Reveals whether they prioritise truth or ideology.)
Key Strategy
Avoid “Why” questions (e.g., “Why do you believe this?”), which let them reiterate talking points. Instead, use “How” and “What” questions to demand evidence and specifics.
Compare their claims to reality: Ask them to reconcile contradictions (e.g., “How does your view align with [specific data]?”). Follow up: If they dodge, restate the question calmly.
By pressing for clarity and evidence, you’ll either expose the emptiness of their rhetoric or (in rare cases) uncover legitimate concerns buried under hyperbole. Most trolls rely on deflection – don’t let them off the hook.
See also: The Troll in the Machine: Unmasking Climate Change Disinformation
Dear reader, we need your support
Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.
One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.
With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.
Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
Thanks for this. I will be making use of your suggestions.
Trolls do not bother me personally, but even one negative comment seems to devalue the information. Also the trolls seem to swarm in with several backing up one undermining statement. It sometimes prevents me from sharing a good article because I don’t want to share the little niggles in the comments
I frequently ask for a link to evidence that proves their point.
I rarely get it and when l do it is usually a meme or a comment.
Lachlan, I
while I agree with what you say, I have tried, again and again and have come to the conclusion that critical thinking, which is really what you are asking is too much like hard work for such trolls.
The most effective way of dealing with them is to cop out, leave them to their laze fuelled delusions and get on with life.
Kerri,
They get their jollies out of it until someone shoves back and won’t let them off the hook.
I used to do the same thing, when I was using certain social media outlets before I lost interest and got sick and tired being pestered to buy, buy, buy goodies we know you’ll really like and want. When asking a poster to provide evidence to back up what they pushing as fact almost without fail the reply was to do your own research or (and I detest the word) google it. This sometimes made me even more determined to hold them to account and push the matter with the troll/moron, until it ended with them having a, so to speak, screaming fit and swearing at me before they got the shits and logged out.
One cretin even went so far as to try and back up his own garbage by creating several fake users, but this ultimately failed because idiots like him keep trying to disguise the fact that thay are the same person and without realising it their ingrained use of language and writing styles will always creep back in. He did not like it one little bit when I kept pointing these facts out. End result; screaming, swearing and log out.
Time for sleepy bobo’s, starting to make errors. Have a good night all.
Interesting on Koch Network climate science denial eg. IPA channeling their US Heartland Institute’s ‘research’ for feeding disinformation to policy makers and media, to misinform others; Jane Mayer (‘Dark Money’) described it as Koch’s ‘freedom works’ audit to create a ‘media assembly line’.
What’s missed are their US partners eg Project2025, fossil fueled, white Christian nationalist & anti-immigrant Tanton Network; locally SusPopAus, TAPRI, MB and SkyNews AD (FoxNews is US fulcrum); faux demographic and greenwashing focus on immigration and population growth
One had been trolled relentlessly at another indie news outlet in comments section by someone linked to SusPopAus, quite erudite, but predictable eg. putting out data without context or question, focus on short term & avoid trends, misrepresent research & others’ comments and disrupt narratives or analysis; backed up by Scientologist Ops and/or FoxNews style aggression and intimidation.
Learnt from or shared with techniques of climate science denial ie. focus on short term data noise & spikes via NOM net OS temporary border movements, but ignore long term trend of ageing & decline in permanent population; like short term focus on weather events, but ignore long term trends of warming. (nor is there any contradiction between promoting both ‘free market’ and ‘tariffs’).
US journalist Binkovski in Unicorn Riot (includes Koch & Tanton donors map):
‘The Tanton network is, as its name suggests, a criss-crossing mesh of politicians, lobbyists, think tanks, non-governmental organizations, pundits legitimized by op-eds in major newspapers, and billionaire money….By 2013, May’s Pittsburgh-based Colcom Foundation was the single biggest bankroller of the anti-immigration movement. (May also contributed funds to white nationalist group VDARE and paid to republish Jean Raspail’s work of deeply racist fanfiction, “The Camp of the Saints”, which former Trump adviser Steve Bannon calls his favorite book.)
But the family connections didn’t end with Cordelia May. Her brother, Richard Mellon Scaife, a major early funder and board trustee of The Heritage Foundation (= Project2025), gave his blessing to Tanton’s efforts through the Colcom Foundation.’
https://unicornriot.ninja/2022/eugenics-border-wars-population-control-the-tanton-network/
What binds Koch and Tanton Networks apart from donors and fossil fuels?
Eugenics or survival of the fittest for <1% based on Koch’s ‘segregation economist’ muse and Mont Pelerin’s James Buchanan, with the post KKK white nationalist John ‘passive eugenics’ Tanton.