Swiss survey finds widespread openness to discredited conspiracy theories

Nearly half of respondents considered a false coronavirus claim plausible. In a July 2026 survey, 49.4% of internet users questioned in German- and French-speaking Switzerland said it was rather or very plausible that the coronavirus had been manufactured as a biological weapon in a Chinese laboratory. The finding comes from a study by the University of Zurich’s Research Centre for the Public Sphere and Society, known as fög.

The wording matters: the statement alleged deliberate production as a weapon. It was not a general claim about a possible laboratory-related origin of the pandemic. Researchers surveyed 1,222 people aged 18 to 79 and presented 12 statements in random order. Six described events they classified as true or well supported, while six were unsupported or implausible. Mixing the two was designed to discourage respondents from dismissing every claim automatically.

The results point to broad willingness to entertain claims that researchers classified as unsupported. They also include an antisemitic conspiracy alleging secret Jewish control of Western politics, which 36% of respondents considered plausible.

The coronavirus allegation led the survey’s six unsupported claims. The next most accepted was the claim that political elites encourage immigration into Europe to change its population: 40.5% found it rather or very plausible. The figures were 36.9% for the assertion that governments use climate change as a pretext to control people, and 36% for the antisemitic claim about Jewish networks controlling Western politics.

The 5G claim, that communications technology has been proved to cause serious harm to health, drew plausibility ratings from 33.8%. Another 28.3% considered it plausible that the US government itself carried out the September 11 attacks.

These responses are not all declarations of firm belief. Someone rating a statement “rather plausible” may be expressing uncertainty as well as conviction. The study’s figures measure respondents’ willingness to assign plausibility, not proof that they accepted every claim as fact. Still, the rankings show how far unsupported narratives can register as credible across very different subjects, from public health and climate policy to immigration and antisemitism.

Established journalism was associated with lower susceptibility to the unsupported claims. Respondents who regularly used outlets such as public broadcasting and subscription newspapers were less likely to find the six implausible statements credible than people who consumed little journalism.

The pattern was not the same for every kind of media use. Occasional exposure to news on Instagram and TikTok made no difference, according to the study. Nor did heavy consumption of a broad mix of sources, including social platforms and alternative media. Simply encountering more information did not correspond to greater resistance to the claims.

Researchers also found that the ability to identify misleading arguments mattered. People better able to spot cherry-picked evidence, false comparisons and sweeping generalisations were less inclined to accept the unsupported conspiracy claims. Higher education was also associated with lower susceptibility. Age and gender, by contrast, were not significantly associated with it. The findings put news habits and the skills used to assess arguments at the centre of the study’s account of susceptibility.

Nearly four-fifths of respondents favoured expanding fact-checking teams at news providers. The study’s authors recommend stronger news provision, more visible fact-checking and education that helps people recognise manipulation and falsehood. Their findings suggest that the ability to assess how an argument is built can matter alongside the news people encounter.

For Swiss media organisations, the survey points to a practical role for clear verification: show readers how claims are checked and make corrections and fact-checks easier to find. Public broadcasters and subscription newspapers were among the established outlets associated with lower susceptibility in the survey. That association does not mean that any single news habit guarantees immunity from false claims, but it identifies trusted journalism as part of the response proposed by the researchers.

The study covered internet users in the country’s German- and French-speaking regions. Its results place disinformation and antisemitic conspiracy narratives within a wider Swiss discussion about news access, media literacy and how people judge evidence.