Fueled by a historically contentious election in the U.S. and conflicts across Eastern Europe, the Middle East and beyond, conspiracy theories flourished in 2024. Whether culled from the misinformative depths of social media or trumpeted by public figures to their enormous audiences, these theories set the stage for even more confusion and discord in the coming year.

'Little downside'
Disinformation narratives were "seeded and spread" across multiple social media platforms in the "buildup" to November's presidential election, said Wired. The "onslaught of high-stakes political upheaval" of the past year — from President Joe Biden's decision to end his reelection campaign to the two assassination attempts on Donald Trump — helped to create a fertile ground for conspiracy theorists, said NPR. Political conspiracy theories have grown so much in this past election cycle that they now help "define elections once defined by their winners," said The Washington Post. 

There's "little downside" for public figures who push questionable narratives in an age where social media is a major source of news," said NPR. Compelling explanations for major events can "boost an influencer's profile, whether or not their claims pan out." 

'Scale and speed' 
Conspiracies surrounding electoral politics were not the only flavor to make their presence felt. Figures like Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr. had their longstanding theories on vaccine efficacy and the Ukraine-Russia war thrust back into the public eye, thanks to Donald Trump's presidential victory and their newly elevated profiles.

Even the weather was not spared conspiratorial speculation. Disinformation over this summer's back-to-back hurricanes, Helene and Milton, proliferated at a "speed and scale" beyond "many of the frenzies" studied in the past, said the BBC.

Still, for as much as conspiracy theories and their proponents may have helped define this past year, so have attempts to neutralize their disruptive impacts. In particular, the efforts of satirical publication The Onion to purchase the remains of major disinformation figure Alex Jones' InfoWars empire was "nothing but karmic justice," said John Feinblatt, the president of Everytown for Gun Safety, to Variety. 

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation was born during the depths of the Great Depression as a means of shoring up banks when banks were routinely failing and erasing the wealth of Americans. But now the incoming Trump administration is looking to pare back, or even eliminate, the FDIC and other financial oversight agencies.

Instilling confidence
The FDIC was created in 1933 to "help the U.S. navigate a catastrophe that put thousands of banks out of business," said NPR. The key insight: Banks required customer confidence to function. It was a "vital part" of "assuring solvency," said an adviser to President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Deposit insurance helped bolster that confidence, and it worked. "Only nine banks failed in 1934, compared to more than 9,000 in the preceding four years," the FDIC said in a history of the agency.

"That guaranteed $250,000 does not come from taxpayers," said CBS News. Instead, the FDIC assesses quarterly premiums on insured banks and the money invested in Treasury securities. When a bank does fail, the FDIC moves in with three options: close the bank and pay off depositors, take over the bank operations, or find a new buyer. The most important factor? The "customer experience does not change much," said CBS.

Supervising and regulating banks
The FDIC does more than insurance — it also does regulation. The agency "directly supervises and examines more than 5,000 banks and savings associations" to ensure their operations are sound, according to the FDIC website. It also ensures those banks comply with consumer protection laws, including the "Fair Credit Billing Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Truth in Lending Act, and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, to name a few."

The confidence-building functions of the FDIC are why any effort to disempower the agency could "potentially be fraught," said The New York Post. The move could create the perception that the government is "weakening deposit insurance." It remains to be seen how the Trump administration will proceed, said the Post, but one aspect is clear: "A dramatic deregulation of the finance system is in the offing."