"Malpublish" is a novel linguistic term designed to combat misinformation and nurture a healthy information ecosystem. 

Want to champion a healthier information ecosystem?
Contact Roarke at:   
Let's go to work  🤜⚡️🤛 

Is "malpublish" a real word? 

While 'malpublish' is a newly coined term and not yet widely recognized, this website is dedicated to defining and safeguarding its meaning. We aim to establish and protect the official definition of 'malpublish' to ensure it is used correctly and effectively across various platforms and media. Our goal is to provide a clear and authoritative source for this term to support a discerning public in identifying unethical information practices.

Coined: March 2023
By: Roarke Clinton






Compound of the prefix 'mal-' (meaning bad or wrongful) + 'publish'. This construction is similar to other terms like "malpractice" or "malfunction," where the prefix "mal-" denotes an incorrect or harmful action.


verb: malpublish; 3rd person present: malpublishes; past tense: malpublished; past participle: malpublished; gerund or present participle: malpublishing

Example Sentences

These illustrative examples highlight the various forms of malpublishment to clarify its definition:

Related Terms and Derivatives

These related terms extend the newly coined 'malpublish.' They are part of a developing linguistic framework to address unethical publishing practices and are not yet broadly recognized.


Malpublishing is characterized by deliberate actions that violate the principles of responsible publishing, such as:

Synonyms & Antonyms

One of the main reasons for coining the term "malpublish" is the lack of existing words or phrases that capture its precise meaning, leaving a gap in our language. While there are words that describe the various outcomes or consequences of malpublishing, such as "misinform," "deceive," or "mislead," these terms do not encapsulate the specific act of intentionally publishing false, misleading, or improperly attributed content and failing to correct it promptly.

Similarly, there are no direct antonyms for "malpublish" because it describes a specific set of actions rather than a single, easily negatable concept. Words like "inform," "verify," or "fact-check" describe responsible publishing practices that stand in contrast to malpublishing, but they do not function as direct opposites.

The absence of precise synonyms and antonyms for "malpublish" highlights the need for this new term to fill a gap in our language and enable more accurate discussions about the complex issue of misinformation in publishing.

Why "malpublish" is Important:
A Fresh Approach to Combating Misinformation

We've all felt the frustration of encountering misleading or blatantly false information online, in the news, or from other sources. Misinformation is a pervasive issue that can erode public trust, hinder informed decision-making, and even put people's well-being at risk. While fact-checking initiatives and media literacy efforts are valuable, they often treat the symptoms rather than the root cause.

That's where the concept of "malpublish" comes in - a new term that gets to the heart of the misinformation problem by calling out unethical publishing practices. By naming and clearly defining this phenomenon, we gain a powerful tool to drive positive change.

Simply put, to "malpublish" means to cause misinformation. It's knowingly making false, misleading, or improperly attributed content available to the public through any media channel or platform. It's violating widely accepted ethical publishing standards for truth, transparency, and accountability. Examples of malpublished content might include a news article that presents unverified claims as facts, a social media post that misrepresents data to support a biased narrative, or an advertisement that uses doctored images to mislead consumers.

Some may argue that the term "malpublish" oversimplifies the complex issues surrounding misinformation or that it could be misused to undermine legitimate journalism. However, the beauty of "malpublish" lies in its ability to provide clear, concise language for identifying and discussing the root cause of misinformation. Like how "plagiarism" redefined intellectual property norms, this new term could transform how we view and address unethical publishing practices.

For media professionals, it serves as a powerful reminder of journalism's sacred role in creating public trust.  By actively rejecting and calling out malpublished content, ethical journalists and publishers can differentiate themselves in an increasingly crowded and noisy media landscape.

But the impact of "malpublish" extends far beyond newsrooms. Every social media user, every reader of online content, can become an active guardian against misinformation by learning to identify malpublished material. It democratizes the fight for truth, empowering individuals to hold publishers accountable and demand higher standards.

Widespread adoption of "malpublish" has the potential to revolutionize how society approaches the misinformation crisis. By pinpointing the root cause - the violation of ethical publishing norms - we can create a future where accuracy and accountability are the default, not the exception.

Of course, this evolution won't happen overnight. It will require ongoing public discourse to refine and promote the concept, sustained pressure on bad actors to change their practices, and likely new policies or regulations inspired by the "malpublish" framework. Collaborative efforts between media professionals, policymakers, educators, and the general public will be essential to fully realize the potential of this term.

But one thing is clear: giving this insidious practice a name and a clear definition is an essential first step. "Malpublish" equips us with a powerful tool to identify and combat misinformation at its source. It's a rallying cry for a new era of ethical publishing - one that we cannot afford to ignore.

Clarifying the Scope

Understanding the scope of what constitutes "malpublish" is crucial for both content creators and consumers. It's important to note that "malpublish" specifically refers to the dissemination of information that fails to meet ethical publishing standards—this can include spreading misinformation, not verifying facts, or not clearly distinguishing between opinion and fact.

However, writing opinion pieces, theories, or fiction does not automatically fall into "malpublishing" as long as these forms adhere to ethical practices. For example, an opinion piece is perfectly valid under ethical publishing standards provided it is clearly labeled as opinion and not misleadingly presented as fact. Similarly, fictional works or theoretical explorations must be upfront about their nature. The audience should never be deceived about the content's intent or factual accuracy.

In essence, "malpublish" isn't just about what you publish, but how you handle the responsibility that comes with publishing. It's a commitment to truth, accuracy, and clarity, ensuring the audience receives content they can trust and rely on.

Practical Applications

The term "malpublish" has a wide range of practical applications across various fields, as outlined in the comprehensive white paper on "malpublishing."

Instructions to Avoid Malpublishing

To help content creators, publishers, platforms, and everyday users avoid "malpublishing," here are some instructions grounded in guidelines from reputable publishing standards and media ethics boards:

By following these guidelines, content creators and platforms can ensure that they are engaging in responsible publishing practices and avoiding the pitfalls of malpublishing.

Role of Readers

While content creators, publishers, and platforms have a responsibility to avoid malpublishing, readers also play a crucial role in combating the spread of misinformation. As consumers of information, it's essential that we approach content with a critical eye, questioning the sources and accuracy of the information we encounter.

When we come across content that appears to be malpublished, we should feel empowered to call it out and demand better from publishers and platforms. By holding them accountable and actively seeking out reliable sources of information, readers can help create a culture of responsible publishing and promote the spread of accurate, trustworthy information.

The Future of Publishing

As the concept of "malpublish" gains traction, it has the potential to revolutionize the way we approach publishing in the digital age. By establishing clear standards for responsible publishing and holding publishers and platforms accountable for the content they produce and disseminate, we can create a more trustworthy and reliable information ecosystem.

In the future, we may see the development of new technologies and processes designed to identify and prevent malpublishing, such as open-source certification systems that prove ethical publishing practices have been adhered to. Publishers and platforms may also adopt more rigorous editorial processes and training programs to ensure that their content meets the highest standards of accuracy and integrity.

Ultimately, the widespread adoption of "malpublish" has the power to restore trust in the publishing industry and promote a more informed, more discerning society. By working together to combat malpublishing and promote responsible publishing practices, we can create a future where accurate, reliable information is the norm, not the exception.

Neologist/Publisher Statements

As the neologist and publisher of the term "malpublish," I want to emphasize the factual nature of this newly coined word. While "malpublish" may not yet have achieved widespread use, its accuracy in describing a real and observable phenomenon is inherent in its clear definition.

The practices encapsulated by "malpublish" – such as knowingly presenting false claims as factual, misrepresenting information, failing to properly attribute sources, and refusing to issue timely corrections – are demonstrably occurring in the modern publishing landscape. By identifying and naming these practices, "malpublish" provides a factual framework for discussing and addressing the issue of irresponsible publishing.

It is important to note that the factual nature of "malpublish" is independent of its adoption. Just as a scientific discovery remains factual even before it is widely accepted, "malpublish" is inherently factual because it accurately describes a real problem. As more people recognize the importance of responsible publishing practices and the term gains traction, its status as a fact of language will likely become more widely acknowledged.

I coined "malpublish" in March 2023 to fill a gap in our language and to enable more precise discussions about the complex issue of misinformation in publishing. By providing a clear and specific term for these irresponsible practices, I hope to contribute to a more informed and discerning society, where accuracy, transparency, and accountability in all forms of publishing are the norm. For those interested in diving deeper into the concept of malpublishing and its implications, I will be publishing a comprehensive white paper on "malpublishing" and the book "Malpublishers" in 2024. 

Neologist & Publisher - Roarke Clinton
Coined - March 2023
Publication Category - Linguistic Innovation; Neologism

Have a suggestion?  Let's connect