Governing Health Risk Communication in the Age of AI: Approaches from Brazil and Germany

Misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation pose a challenge to health risk communication. These information disorders can be amplified and altered by AI. In this article, we compare governance approaches from Germany and Brazil to understand how these two democracies address the role of AI in both exacerbating and mitigating health information disorders. Drawing on document analysis of hard and soft law governance approaches, the study shows that both countries frame AI as an ambivalent tool: While AI enables large-scale production and spread of misleading content, it also provides mechanisms for detection and monitoring of this content, and allows tailored communication. In Germany, information disorders are addressed through a multi-level governance strategy that combines national regulation with international frameworks. At the same time, independent fact-checking organizations and individual actors play a complementary role by monitoring public discourse, verifying claims, and fostering media literacy. In Brazil, efforts include legislative proposals on AI, the National AI Plan, and fact-checking services, though implementation is complicated by political and economic dynamics. Across both contexts, governance measures emphasize individual and organizational responsibilities, particularly through platform regulation, transparency, and digital literacy, but often underplay broader societal and interactional factors such as political structures, trust, and post-truth dynamics.