This article explores the circulation of rumors about pollution emanating from the Danish chemical company Cheminova. Emerging in a site of environmental contestation, rumors can be regarded as a mode of articulation submerged beneath technoscientific discourses that typically rely on objectivity and facts. They can also be a strategy pursued by corporations to create and exploit epistemic ambiguity around pollution through blurring of information or gaslighting the local community. As such, the article proposes rumors as an alternative analytical opening for understanding the flows of knowledge and information surrounding pollution. Instead of asking what counts as truth or facts, the article proposes to engage with an aspect of pollution that lies beside or beyond the politics of evidence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sebastian Lundsteen (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: