The article examines the negative downstream effects of alarmist disinformation discourse in the United States. It presents a preregistered experiment with two treatments: T1, which emphasizes the dangers of disinformation in alarmist terms, and T2, which provides a balanced account of disinformation. The results show that T1 increased perceived threats of disinformation and support for restrictive regulation of speech, while T2 lowered perceived threats and did not lead to negative downstream effects. The study highlights the importance of balanced discourse in disinformation discussions to avoid undermining public trust in democratic systems. Alarmist warnings can exacerbate fears and lead to increased support for restrictive regulation, while balanced accounts provide a more accurate understanding of disinformation's reach and impact. The findings suggest that public discourse on disinformation should be nuanced to avoid unintended consequences for democracy. The study also notes that while disinformation may have limited reach, its effects can still be significant in shaping public perception and attitudes. Overall, the research underscores the need for careful, evidence-based communication about disinformation to maintain democratic integrity.The article examines the negative downstream effects of alarmist disinformation discourse in the United States. It presents a preregistered experiment with two treatments: T1, which emphasizes the dangers of disinformation in alarmist terms, and T2, which provides a balanced account of disinformation. The results show that T1 increased perceived threats of disinformation and support for restrictive regulation of speech, while T2 lowered perceived threats and did not lead to negative downstream effects. The study highlights the importance of balanced discourse in disinformation discussions to avoid undermining public trust in democratic systems. Alarmist warnings can exacerbate fears and lead to increased support for restrictive regulation, while balanced accounts provide a more accurate understanding of disinformation's reach and impact. The findings suggest that public discourse on disinformation should be nuanced to avoid unintended consequences for democracy. The study also notes that while disinformation may have limited reach, its effects can still be significant in shaping public perception and attitudes. Overall, the research underscores the need for careful, evidence-based communication about disinformation to maintain democratic integrity.