A new form of propaganda has begun to permeate and poison debates over data centers in Utah: “slopaganda.” Left unaddressed, fear and polarization will win over facts and principles, resulting in misinformed Utahns, degraded dialogue and missed opportunities.
Slopaganda refers to low-cost, AI-generated, highly shareable propaganda that tries to influence people through missing context and vibes instead of solid arguments. The posts rely on clickbait culture, speed, and scale to be successful. They are designed to provoke alarm, not to inform or educate.
A perfect example is the recent claim that a proposed data center in Box Elder County would produce the heat of 23 atomic bombs every day. Thousands of posts promoting this claim have exploded across social media in recent days after a news article included the comparison. The posts are often accompanied by AI-generated images of data centers alongside mushroom clouds spewing radioactive material into the air.
It’s not shocking that regular Utahns then get nervous about data centers, especially when these posts are shared by trusted members of the community. When statistics about atomic weapons are paired with AI-generated images of mushroom clouds and radioactive symbols, however, the posts cross the line from misleading rhetoric into actual misinformation.
The environmental impact of any fossil fuels that data center power plants may use has no legitimate comparison with a nuclear explosion that can kill hundreds of thousands of people instantly, while simultaneously making an area unlivable for generations. But seeing such comparisons hundreds of times on your social media feed can make even the most reasonable Utahn start to wonder. That is not clarification. It is a misdirection packaged for maximum engagement.
Cheap AI image and video-generation tools have allowed creators to do in minutes what used to take production companies weeks. One of AI’s most democratizing features, the ability to produce content quickly and cheaply, has also become one of its most exploitable. Slopaganda is uniquely effective because it exploits both how people consume social media and how platforms reward content. These posts are designed to maximize engagement, generating clicks, likes, shares and comments. Data centers raise legitimate questions about energy demand, water use, land use, tax incentives, and local infrastructure. Those questions deserve serious public consideration, not cheap clickbait.
Legitimate comparisons do exist to help the public understand data center energy use. For example, aluminum smelters are among the most energy-intensive large-scale industrial systems in the world. At its originally stated production of 3 gigawatts, the data center would be equivalent to 2.4 aluminum smelters, and at full potential, it would be closer to 7 smelters. More recently, the proposal has been revised to an initial production capacity of 1.5 gigawatts, equivalent to 1-2 smelters. This example doesn’t change the fact that this is a lot of energy, but it isn’t as susceptible to slopaganda campaigns because it doesn’t inspire the same level of fear as atomic weapons do.
Thankfully, we already know the strongest defense against the growing wave of slopaganda: high-quality, data-driven storytelling. Rather than trying to rebut every post, advocates on both sides should elevate clear, compelling stories built around credible facts. This approach can help shape public understanding before false narratives harden into conventional wisdom. Just as important, the public should be equipped to recognize the tactics behind slopaganda: repetition, emotional framing, selective statistics, and cultural cues designed to make weak claims feel persuasive.
The problem is not that people are asking hard questions about data centers. That is what is good about the current public debate. To be sure, this issue merits thoughtful, robust deliberation about how best to balance opportunities for innovation and development with appropriate safeguards for Utahns’ energy and environmental priorities. The problem is that those questions are increasingly drowned out by viral content designed to stoke fear rather than inform.
Slopaganda works by turning complex policy questions into viral emotional shortcuts. Data centers are only the latest example. Voters and citizens using social media need to be vigilant and discerning in their use of this valuable tool. We need to look beyond the surface and remember that high-quality information is often unsuitable for clickbait culture.
As Utah voters and elected officials approach this issue, they should reject the temptation of AI slopaganda, and instead reach for thoughtful, deliberative and evidence-based discussion to ensure we get it right.