Franshelly Martinez Ortiz, a doctoral candidate in political science and public policy at the Ford School, recently wrote a blog post, "In Michigan, conspiracy thinking can be rooted in real historic harm" for U-M's Center for Political Studies based on her co-authored research with Mara Cecilia Ostfeld.
Read the blog post: In Michigan, conspiracy thinking can be rooted in real historic harm
Read the paper: "Trauma and Trust: How familiarity with government harm and identification with harmed groups shapes government suspicion in Michigan"
In Michigan, conspiracy thinking can be rooted in real historic harm
By Franshelly Martinez Ortiz
Conspiracy theories are not a new feature of American Society. Throughout history, many conspiracy theories have become a standpoint of pop culture—even when debunked by scientific evidence.
Research shows that half of Americans consistently endorse at least one conspiracy theory. This pattern continues today. According to a Pew Research Center survey, 25% of U.S. adults believe there is at least some truth to the claim that powerful elites planned the coronavirus outbreak. The persistence of debunked claims underscores the broader role that conspiratorial thinking plays in shaping mass opinion.
In the past, conspiracy theories were confined to marginal outlets and fringe networks. Today, they are pervasive in mainstream media. The presence of political figures who openly endorse and promote conspiratorial thinking reflects the growing appeal of these narratives among the public. This has reached new levels of salience with the confirmation of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as the new Secretary of Health and Human Services, who has publicly claimed that Wi-Fi causes cancer and a “leaky brain.” His appointment indicates that conspiracy beliefs may play an increasing role in steering governance and public policy.
Government Suspicion
The mainstream assumption is that believing in conspiracy theories results from a deeper sense of paranoia or from falling for misinformation. However, conspiracy thinking is closely linked to government suspicion.
When people believe that powerful forces secretly control major events, they are more likely to question the motives and transparency of public institutions. Many people who are suspicious of the government have good reasons to be. Communities that have lived through government failures are often the most distrustful of public institutions.
This creates a tricky situation. How do we rebuild trust in government while recognizing the real harm it has done in the past?
Previous research has established a link between government suspicion, race, and education. However, my research (co-authored with Mara Cecilia Ostfeld) shows a more complicated story. It highlights a new factor driving this relationship: individuals’ proximity to and familiarity with government-inflicted harms.
For many communities, conspiracy thinking or suspicion toward government institutions is deeply rooted in lived experiences. Events like the Flint Water Crisis and the U.S. Public Health Service Untreated Syphilis Study conducted at Tuskegee are not distant historical moments; they are lasting traumas that continue to shape public perceptions of government accountability.
My research examines how familiarity with these injustices and identification with the communities affected contribute to government suspicion, particularly in Michigan.
Michigan Survey Findings
Through the Michigan Metro Area Communities Study (MIMACS), we surveyed Flint, Grand Rapids, and Ypsilanti residents to assess government suspicion levels and explore how past harm influences present-day trust.
The findings reveal widespread skepticism. Key findings:
- More than half of surveyed residents believe the public is routinely kept in the dark about major events.
- Black residents are the most likely to express government suspicion, with 64% holding this view, compared to 51% of Latino and 45% of White respondents.
- Education also plays a role—people without a bachelor’s degree report higher levels of suspicion 58% than those with more formal education 37%.
The impact of government suspicion extends beyond attitudes—it influences behaviors essential for democratic participation. Individuals who are more skeptical of the government are less likely to vote or trust public health guidance. Among respondents with low levels of suspicion, 87% reported that they planned to vote in the 2024 election, compared to just 71% of those with high levels of suspicion.
A similar pattern emerges with vaccine attitudes: while nearly all 98% of those with low government suspicion believe in vaccine effectiveness, support drops to 80% among those with high government suspicion.
Flint serves as a particularly striking example of how government failures contribute to long-term suspicion.
The city’s 2014 water crisis exposed thousands of residents to lead-contaminated water, leaving deep scars on public confidence in government institutions. Sixty percent of Flint residents surveyed expressed high levels of government suspicion– significantly more than in Grand Rapids or Ypsilanti. Familiarity with the crisis further amplifies suspicion—63% of Flint residents who are highly familiar with the water crisis report high levels of government suspicion, compared to just 37% of those with moderate knowledge of the event.
A similar pattern emerges when we examine the long-term effects of the U.S. Public Health Service Untreated Syphilis Study, in which Black men were intentionally denied treatment for syphilis between 1932 and 1972. The study has had a lasting impact on Black communities’ trust in medical institutions, and our data reflects this reality. Among Black respondents familiar with the study, 74% expressed high levels of government suspicion. While awareness of the study had a weaker effect on non-Black respondents, the historical weight of such an injustice continues to shape public trust in government and healthcare.
My findings demonstrate that government suspicion is not simply a product of misinformation—it is often a rational response to systemic failures and historical violence.
Government suspicion does not develop overnight; it is built over years of broken promises, neglect, and systemic harm. Understanding its origins is the first step toward repairing relationships between the government and the communities it serves.
