My project is focused on the role of misinformation and disinformation and different understandings of truth in an international context. My recent research has focused on the changing conceptions of “honesty”, particularly the populist rebranding of authenticity as honesty, whereby “speaking one’s mind” has become an indicator of “honesty” even if utterances are factually incorrect. In consequence, a serial misinformer such as Donald Trump, who according to fact checkers made more than 30,000 false or misleading statements during his presidency, can end up being considered honest by his followers (according to survey data, 75% of Republicans considered him to be honest). The acceptance of authenticity as a surrogate for truthfulness is incompatible with democratic political discourse, in which arguments are supported by appeals to evidence rather than feelings. I suggest that much of the recent turmoil in western democracies, particularly the U.S. and U.K., can be explained by considering the clash between a populist understanding of truth as “speaking one’s mind” and a democratic understanding that rests on evidence rather than momentary feelings. During my fellowship, I will extend this analysis to an international context, using the Northern Ireland Protocol, and the relationship between the U.K. and EU, as a case study. I will examine the political discourse in the UK and in the EU to see if linguistic markers for the two concepts of honesty are identifiable, and whether they differ between the UK and EU. My expectation is that the UK discourse vis-à-vis the Northern Ireland Protocol will be distinctly more populist than its counterpart in the EU.