Absolutely! I'm afraid they're actually pretty boring though.
The most common informational hazards are varying forms of behavioral modifiers, e.g. advertising, religions/cults, state-sponsored propaganda. Edward Bernays' is one of the more interesting people to study here, both through his written works (namely Crystalizing Public Opinion and Propaganda, both from the 1920's) and his later actions (popularizing female smoking, helping fruit companies and the CIA overthrow South American governments, etc). Roko's Basilisk falls into this category, if you want to think about it really hard it can hurt you but(somewhat ironically) the only people really susceptible are pseudo-intellectuals who congregate on places like lesswrong.
Next up are simple forms of adversarial inputs such as discordant sounds or rapidly blinking lights. People's susceptibility to these varies, generally only those with neurological disorders (epilepsy, severe misophonia) are severely impacted by known tech. Applied examples include LRADs, dazzlers[0], and/or some bowling alleys.
Last up there is at least one true informational hazard where perception alone is enough to disrupt the underlying structure of your brain (or at least your visual cortex). It's called the McCollough effect, and I'm not going to link to it but if you're curious a quick glance is generally safe. On the surface it's a simple color shifting optical illusion, but unlike most of those, if you stare at it for more than a handful of seconds, the aftereffect lasts for months.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzler_(weapon), the boring ones are based on just blinding while the interesting ones attempt to disorient your brain with high frequency color patterns