A fake is usually understood as false information. It may seem that the problem begins when a person believes something untrue and ends when that falsehood is exposed. However, the modern information environment is far more complex. A fake can achieve its objective even before a person has decided whether to believe the message or not.
It is enough to provoke fear, irritation, doubt, aggression, a sense of urgency or internal confusion. After that, the person’s behaviour begins to change. They start choosing, buying, voting, trusting, investing, communicating, travelling or judging other people differently. The truth may become clear later, but the action has already taken place.
Therefore, a fake should not be viewed merely as a lie. It is an information impulse intended to alter human behaviour and then influence the further movement of choice, demand and money.
This mechanism can be understood through the Basic Law of Political Economy:
Personality → Behaviour → Choice → Demand → Money
Money → Form of the System
Form of the System → Demand → Choice → Behaviour → Personality
In the case of informational influence, an additional point of entry appears before Personality:
Information Impulse
Information Impulse → Demand → Choice → Behaviour → Personality
By understanding this formula, a person begins to see more than the content of a message. They begin to understand why the message appeared, which internal point it targets, which behaviour it is intended to provoke, which choice it is intended to encourage, which demand it is intended to create and where money, trust and public support are ultimately expected to move.
A fake is no longer merely false information
In the previous information model, a lie could be understood as the opposite of a fact. There was a real fact, a false message appeared, verification followed, and after verification a person was expected to accept the correct version. This model assumed that the main conflict took place between truth and falsehood.
Today, this is no longer enough.
A modern fake does not exist only to make a person believe a particular statement. Its purpose may be to change an emotional state, destroy trust, create a sense of danger, provoke conflict or force someone to act immediately.
A person sees a message about a possible shortage and begins buying goods. They hear a rumour about a bank’s financial problems and withdraw their money. They watch a video that provokes hatred towards a certain group and change their attitude towards people they have never personally encountered. They read a prediction of an unavoidable disaster and abandon a decision that seemed reasonable only the day before.
Several hours or days later, the message may be disproved. However, the purchase has already been made, the money has already been withdrawn, relationships have already been damaged and the decision has already changed.
The result of a fake therefore cannot be measured only by the number of people who believed it. A more accurate indicator is the number of people who changed their behaviour.
A fake may be weak as evidence but powerful as an emotional impulse. A person may even say, “I am not sure this is true,” while simultaneously beginning to act as though the danger has already been confirmed.
This is why a modern fake should be viewed as an instrument influencing the following movement:
Personality → Behaviour → Choice → Demand → Money
A false message becomes significant not at the moment of publication, but at the moment when it begins to alter human action.
The main target of a fake is Behaviour
There is a widespread assumption that the author of a fake always seeks to convince a person completely of a particular version of events. However, complete belief is often unnecessary in order to achieve a practical result.
Sometimes it is enough to make a person afraid. Sometimes it is enough to make them doubt. Sometimes the objective is to make them stop trusting. In other cases, the aim is to provoke anger, humiliation, a desire to punish someone or exhaustion from information itself.
If a person begins to behave differently after receiving a message, the informational influence has already taken place.
In the Basic Law of Political Economy, Behaviour is the first externally visible reaction of Personality. It is through Behaviour that a person’s internal condition is converted into real decisions.
A person may refuse to admit that they are frightened, yet begin avoiding certain places. They may claim that they do not believe rumours, yet withdraw money from their account. They may say they remain calm, yet cancel a journey, purchase or business meeting. They may deny the influence of propaganda, yet gradually stop communicating with people whom the information environment has designated as a threat.
This means that the main question when analysing a fake should not be:
“Did the person believe it?”
The necessary question is:
“What changed in the person’s behaviour after they received this message?”
If a person takes an action that benefits the source or distributor of the information impulse, the fake has already achieved its objective.
The result may be political, economic, social or personal. A person may change their vote, reject a product, transfer money, support a restriction, demand punishment, stop trusting an organisation or begin spreading the message further.
In this case, the fake operates as a trigger. It enters through Personality, touches fear, resentment, hope or hatred, and then converts an internal reaction into an external action:
Information Impulse → Personality → Behaviour
After that, the further movement begins:
Behaviour → Choice → Demand → Money
A fake destroys the pause between a message and an action
For a conscious decision, a person needs a pause. They must receive information, compare it with previous knowledge, assess the source, check the context and only then determine their own position.
A fake seeks to destroy this pause.
To achieve this, it uses urgency, emotional pressure, categorical language and the feeling of an immediate threat:
- “They are hiding this.”
- “You must act immediately.”
- “In a few hours, it will be too late.”
- “Everyone is already saving themselves.”
- “Forward this message to everyone.”
- “Sell now.”
- “Buy while supplies are still available.”
The person is moved from a state of analysis into a state of reaction. They no longer treat the information as something that must be verified. They perceive it as a danger signal.
At this point, speed becomes more important than content. A fake may be poorly written, contain no evidence and contradict known facts. However, if it manages to provoke an immediate reaction, its objective has already been partially achieved.
The mechanism is reduced to several stages:
Information Impulse → Emotional Reaction → Behaviour
If a person is placed in a state of fear, they begin choosing protection. If they are placed in a state of anger, they choose conflict. If a sense of shortage is created, they begin buying. If a sense of helplessness is formed, they withdraw from participation.
The reaction then becomes a systemic movement:
Behaviour → Choice → Demand → Money
For example, a rumour about a fuel shortage may create mass demand even when no real shortage initially existed. However, once thousands of people begin buying fuel at the same time, a genuine shortage may emerge.
A false information impulse is therefore capable of creating a real consequence.
This is why the first defence against a fake is not limited to searching for a rebuttal. The pause between receiving information and acting must be restored. As long as a person remains inside an imposed sense of urgency, their behaviour continues to be directed by someone else’s impulse.
A fake finds an already existing weak point in Personality
A fake rarely creates fear, hatred or distrust from nothing. It usually finds an internal point that already exists within Personality and strengthens it.
A person may fear poverty, the loss of housing, war, illness, loneliness or the future of their children. They may distrust the state, banks, medicine, politicians, foreigners, employers or the mass media. They may carry an old resentment, a sense of injustice, social humiliation or a lack of control over their own life.
A fake selects precisely such a point.
If a person has long expected a financial crisis, they are more likely to believe a message about the imminent collapse of banks. If they are already afraid of migrants, one video without context may become confirmation of a broader threat. If they believe that the state is constantly concealing the truth, any absence of information will be interpreted as evidence of a conspiracy.
This is why the same message provokes different reactions in different people. One person calmly closes it, another checks it, a third immediately shares it, while a fourth begins to act.
An information impulse gains strength only after it connects with the internal condition of Personality:
Information Impulse → Internal Point of Personality → Behaviour
A fake can operate not only through activity, but also through passivity. Its objective may not be to bring a person into the street, but to make them refuse to participate. It may seek not to encourage support for one side, but to convince people that all sides are the same. It may seek not to encourage the purchase of a particular product, but to create refusal of any decision. It may seek not to create trust in a new source, but to destroy trust in all sources.
When analysing a fake, it is therefore important to identify not only its subject, but also the internal point it was designed to target.
- Which fear does it intensify?
- Which resentment does it confirm?
- Which distrust does it turn into a conviction?
- Which sense of helplessness does it make permanent?
The answers reveal which part of Personality the information impulse is attempting to pass through.
A fake turns doubt into an instrument of control
Doubt is a normal part of thinking. A person is not required to believe immediately every message they see on social media, hear in the news or receive from an acquaintance. The ability to pause, ask questions, check a source and compare information with other data usually protects a person from hasty conclusions. However, in an environment filled with constant fakes, doubt itself can be transformed from a means of verification into a means of control.
It is not necessary to make a person believe one specific lie. A deeper result is achieved when their trust in the very possibility of establishing the truth is destroyed. Documents begin to appear fabricated, experts appear bought, journalists appear dependent, research appears commissioned, official data appears falsified and independent sources appear to be part of hidden influence. The person no longer compares the quality of evidence because they regard all evidence as unreliable in advance.
In this situation, the choice of information begins to depend not on accuracy, but on emotional compatibility with the person’s internal condition. A message that matches their fear seems credible. A story that confirms an old grievance appears honest. A version that justifies hatred seems courageous and independent. Information that removes personal responsibility becomes especially convenient.
Through the Basic Law of Political Economy, this transition can be understood as the following movement:
Personality → Behaviour → Choice
First, internal trust is destroyed. Then the person’s behaviour within the information environment changes. They stop checking facts and begin looking for confirmation of their own emotional condition. After that, their choice of sources changes: they are drawn not towards the most accurate information, but towards information that best serves their fear, anger or disappointment.
A fake achieves its deepest result not when a person believes one lie, but when they stop believing that the truth can be established at all. At that point, their choices become easier to direct because emotions begin to replace evidence.
A fake creates demand for fear and simple explanations
Information ceased long ago to be only a means of transmitting knowledge. In the digital environment, it has become a product for which media organisations, platforms, bloggers, political forces and commercial companies compete. People choose information, consume it, distribute it and return for more. The information system therefore contains demand not only for facts, but also for emotional states.
Fear, outrage, hatred, scandal, anticipation of catastrophe and promises of simple solutions to complex problems can hold attention much longer than calm analysis. A fake uses this feature while simultaneously strengthening it. First, a person accidentally opens an alarming message. Then algorithms recommend similar material. After repeated exposure, the person begins independently searching for information that maintains their internal tension.
Gradually, calm explanations begin to seem boring, unconvincing or suspicious. A cautious conclusion is perceived as weakness. Calls for additional verification become irritating because the person already expects a simple answer: who is guilty, where the threat is located and what must be done immediately.
The movement changes in the following way:
Behaviour → Choice → Demand
First, a person begins opening emotionally charged messages more frequently. Then they begin choosing more aggressive sources. After that, they develop a permanent demand for information that maintains fear, anger or a sense of threat.
The economic part of the formula then begins:
Demand → Money
Mass demand generates advertising revenue, paid subscriptions, donations, political budgets and sales of goods, consultations, courses and different forms of protection from the created threat. The more frightened a person becomes, the more often they return to the source. The longer they remain inside the information flow, the more attention and money the system producing that flow receives.
A fake may therefore be not an accidental disruption of the information environment, but part of its economic model. It does not merely communicate a lie. It creates a consumer who gradually requires increasingly powerful emotional stimulation.
The direction of money helps reveal the purpose of a fake
When the origin of a fake is unclear, people usually attempt to identify its author. This is important, but it is not always possible. The original source may be hidden, the message may be distributed through anonymous accounts, and copies may appear on thousands of pages and channels. In such a situation, it is more useful to examine not only the beginning of the distribution, but also the direction of its consequences.
A fake rarely exists without a purpose. It may create attention, destroy a reputation, increase sales, weaken a competitor, strengthen a political position or generate demand for a particular solution. After the information impulse appears, it is therefore necessary to identify who benefited from the changed behaviour of people.
The Basic Law of Political Economy shows this movement:
Choice → Demand → Money → Direction of Money
A fake about a possible shortage may rapidly increase sales. A false message about the insecurity of an area may reduce property values. A rumour about a bank’s problems may trigger mass withdrawals. An information attack against a company may redirect customers towards its competitors. A political fake may increase support for a force promising to protect people from a created or exaggerated threat.
Money does not necessarily move directly to the author of the message. The benefit may appear through the redistribution of audience, trust, votes, control or public support. A person stops trusting one source and moves to another. They reject one product and purchase another. They leave an open information environment and enter a closed group in which their behaviour is easier to direct.
The purpose of a fake therefore often becomes clearer not through its wording, but through what happens after its distribution. If an information attack creates a mass behavioural change and someone then benefits from the new demand, this is no longer merely an accidental lie. It may be an element of an economic, political or social structure.
The direction of money does not always reveal the author of a fake, but it often shows who benefited from its effect.
A mass flow of fakes changes the Form of the System
A single fake can deceive an individual. A permanent flow of fakes can change an entire society. When the behaviour they provoke becomes widespread and repetitive, it begins influencing not only personal decisions but also the organisation of the system itself.
People begin choosing information sources differently, relating to the state differently, storing money differently, purchasing goods differently, judging neighbours differently and participating in public life differently. If a significant part of society constantly expects deception, trust in institutions gradually declines. If people live in permanent anticipation of danger, they accept restrictions more easily. If citizens believe that every decision is made secretly, they stop participating in open procedures because they no longer see any purpose in doing so.
The full formula shows how individual influence becomes systemic change:
Personality → Behaviour → Choice → Demand → Money → Direction of Money → Form of the System
First, the fake affects Personality. Behaviour then changes. New behaviour influences Choice, Choice forms Demand, and Demand directs Money. Money begins supporting media organisations, political forces, companies and platforms that best serve the new condition of society. As a result, the Form of the System gradually changes.
After that, the reverse movement begins:
Form of the System → Demand → Choice → Behaviour → Personality
A system built on fear and distrust begins producing even more fear and distrust. Media organisations compete not through accuracy, but through the strength of their emotional impact. Political forces benefit from permanent conflict. Companies are forced to spend increasing amounts on protecting their reputations. The state expands control while explaining that this is necessary to fight disinformation.
A fake therefore stops being an isolated lie. It becomes part of an environment that shapes the person, while the person continues strengthening that environment through their behaviour. The information impulse becomes a social reality.
A rebuttal does not always reverse the consequences of a fake
There is a widespread belief that a fake can be defeated through a correct rebuttal. The original source must be found, the mistake must be demonstrated, evidence must be presented and the truth must be communicated. Fact-checking is indeed necessary, but it cannot always return the situation to its original condition.
The main problem lies in the different speeds of a fake and its rebuttal. A fake usually arrives in a simple and emotional form. It requires no lengthy explanation and immediately provokes a reaction. Verification, by contrast, takes time. The date, location and source must be established, documents must be checked, testimony must be compared and specialists may need to be involved.
While verification is taking place, people are already acting. They forward the message, withdraw money, buy goods, accuse others, cancel journeys, break relationships or change their political position.
The fake follows a short route:
Information Impulse → Personality → Behaviour
Verification follows a longer derived chain:
Source → Context → Evidence → Comparison → Conclusion
A fake therefore often wins not through quality, but through speed. By the time the rebuttal appears, it has already created a behavioural and emotional trace.
Even after exposure, a person may retain their original attitude. They acknowledge that the specific message was false, but add: “It could still have happened.” Sometimes the rebuttal itself is perceived as part of a cover-up. In other cases, the person forgets the details but continues distrusting the person, company or institution targeted by the attack.
It is therefore insufficient to establish only whether the message was true. It is also necessary to analyse which behaviour it has already provoked, which choice it has changed, which demand it has created and where money and trust moved afterwards.
A rebuttal can correct a fact, but it cannot always reverse the movement that the fact has already set in motion.
The formula makes it possible to analyse a fake as a single process
Without a systemic model, a person often remains trapped in an argument about the content of a message. They try to determine whether it is true or false, who said it, where the evidence is and whether the video was fabricated. These questions are necessary, but they cover only the informational surface of the fake.
A deeper analysis begins when the message is viewed as movement through Personality, Behaviour, Choice, Demand and Money.
The first task is to understand which internal point of Personality the impulse targets. This may be fear of poverty, anger, a sense of injustice, hatred, hope for rescue or a sense of urgency. The next task is to identify which Behaviour is expected to change. A person may be encouraged to buy, sell, refuse, attack, distribute the message or withdraw entirely from participation.
The next stage is connected to Choice. The information impulse may direct the person towards supporting a particular force, rejecting a product, moving to another location, investing, voting or remaining silent. Demand then appears: demand for protection, authoritarian power, foreign currency, medicine, closed borders, punishment or a new information source.
The next step is to trace the movement of Money, attention and trust. They may move towards a particular company, political force, platform, leader, foundation or channel. The final stage of analysis reveals which Form of the System is strengthened by this movement: open or closed, based on trust or fear, participation or passivity.
The full chain looks like this:
Information Impulse → Personality → Behaviour → Choice → Demand → Money → Form of the System
This approach makes it possible to understand the purpose of a message even when its author is unknown. A person begins to understand not only what they were told, but also what they are expected to do after hearing it.
The most dangerous fake is the one whose influence a person does not notice
People often believe that fakes affect only those who are less educated, more trusting or more emotional. This belief creates a false sense of security. In reality, a fake is not always designed to exploit a lack of intelligence. It may be designed to exploit exhaustion, lack of time, information overload, personal pain or the desire to receive confirmation of an existing belief.
An educated person can also become a target. A professional may make a mistake in a field outside their expertise. A critical thinker may overlook manipulation when it coincides with their fear, resentment or political position.
The most dangerous situation arises when a person does not notice that their own behaviour has changed. After receiving a message, they suddenly feel a strong desire to argue, accuse, buy, sell, forward information, isolate themselves or withdraw from participation completely. They perceive this reaction as a free decision even though it may have been prepared by an external impulse.
This is where the formula becomes a practical instrument. It makes it possible to see not only the message, but also one’s own movement after receiving it. If Behaviour has changed, it is necessary to identify which Choice this reaction leads towards. The next step is to understand which Demand is being created and where money, attention, trust or public support may be directed.
This does not mean that every powerful message is a fake. A genuine danger may also require rapid action. The difference is that a conscious person is able to separate the need for action from emotional pressure.
A fake receives maximum power when its route remains unnoticed. If a person sees how information is attempting to pass through fear, alter behaviour and push them towards a particular choice, the automatic influence weakens.
The person does not become completely protected, but they stop being a simple conductor of someone else’s impulse.
Understanding the formula helps people navigate the world of fakes
It is impossible to remove fakes completely from the information environment. Technologies for creating images, voices, videos and documents are becoming increasingly accessible. The speed of information distribution is rising, while verification often fails to keep pace with publication.
The question is therefore no longer limited to how every fake can be found and exposed. People must learn to live in an environment where any message may be false, incomplete, removed from context or deliberately designed to alter behaviour.
The Basic Law of Political Economy provides an instrument for this understanding:
Personality → Behaviour → Choice → Demand → Money
Money → Form of the System
Form of the System → Demand → Choice → Behaviour → Personality
By applying this formula to the information environment, a person stops examining each fact in isolation. They begin to see which emotion the message is intended to provoke, which behaviour is expected to follow, which choice is being encouraged, which demand is being created and where money, trust and public support will then be directed.
This approach does not replace fact-checking. It complements it. Verification answers the question of whether a message is true. The formula helps explain why the message appeared and which movement it was intended to initiate.
A fake loses part of its power when its route becomes visible. A person notices the point of entry, their own reaction and the possible direction of the consequences. They understand that an information message may be only the first stage of a much longer chain.
A fake enters the information environment as a message.
- Within Personality, it becomes a condition.
- Within Behaviour, it becomes an action.
- Within Choice, it becomes a decision.
- Within Demand, it becomes a mass need.
- Within Money, it becomes a direction of resources.
- Within the Form of the System, it becomes a new reality.
This is why fakes cannot be treated merely as false information. They become a mechanism of pressure capable of controlling a person before that person has time to understand that their behaviour has already begun to change.
MediaIEU teaches people to understand not isolated news reports, slogans or interpretations imposed by others, but the real world and the movement of processes within it. Our professional tests help people recognise their own behaviour, choices, dependence on external pressure and the points through which they can be more easily influenced. MediaIEU lectures teach people to connect separate events into a single system, understand the causes of what is happening and recognise earlier where changes in behaviour, demand, money and the Form of the System are leading.
Understanding the Basic Law of Political Economy does not provide ready-made answers to every question, but it provides a way of thinking. It helps people not merely accept or reject information, but understand how it operates, which choices it creates and who benefits from the movement that follows. This is the purpose of MediaIEU tests, lectures and analytical materials: to develop the ability to understand reality before someone else’s explanation becomes your decision.
Iv.Spolan
Author of the model “Basic Law of Political Economy”
