Experts in autocracies have pointed out that it is, unfortunately, easy to slip into normalizing the tyrant, hence it is important to hang on to outrage. These incidents which seem to call for the efforts of the Greek Furies (Erinyes) to come and deal with them will, I hope, help with that. As a reminder, though no one really knows how many there were supposed to be, the three names we have are Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone. These roughly translate as “unceasing,” “grudging,” and “vengeful destruction.”
Today’s article does not really contain any new information, even to the furies, but it puts a great deal of information together which we have looked at sepratatey, and does so at a good time. If you think you have already seen this article this week, you have – because The Conversation uses a Creative Commons license, it is easy tp republish their material, and several good sites did. But that only shows how important the information is. And, if you missed it, it might be easier to find it hear to review down the road than many of the other places it’s found.
==================================================================
How disinformation could sway the 2020 election
Paul M. Barrett, New York University
In 2016, Russian operatives used Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to sow division among American voters and boost Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.
What the Russians used to accomplish this is called “disinformation,” which is false or misleading content intended to deceive or promote discord. Now, with the first presidential primary vote only five months away, the public should be aware of the sources and types of online disinformation likely to surface during the 2020 election.
First, the Russians will be back. Don’t be reassured by the notorious Russian Internet Research Agency’s relatively negligible presence during last year’s midterm elections. The agency might have been keeping its powder dry in anticipation of the 2020 presidential race. And it helped that U.S. Cyber Command, an arm of the military, reportedly blocked the agency’s internet access for a few days right before the election in November 2018.
Temporarily shutting down the Internet Research Agency won’t be enough to stop the flow of harmful content. Lee Foster, who leads the disinformation team at the cybersecurity firm FireEye, told me in an interview that the agency is “a small component of the overall Russian operation,” which also includes Moscow’s military intelligence service and possibly other organizations. Over time, Foster said, “All of these actors rework their approaches and tactics.”
And there’s more to fear than just the Russians. I’m the author of a new report on disinformation and the 2020 election published by the New York University Stern Center for Business and Human Rights. In the report, I predict that the Russians won’t be alone in spreading disinformation in 2020. Their most likely imitator will be Iran, especially if hostility between Tehran and Washington continues to mount.
Disinformation isn’t just Russian
In May, acting on a tip from FireEye, Facebook took down nearly 100 Iranian-related accounts, pages and groups. The Iranian network had used fake American identities to espouse both conservative and liberal political views, while also promoting extremely divisive anti-Saudi, anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian themes.
As Senate Intelligence Committee co-chair Mark Warner, a Virginia Democrat, has said, “The Iranians are now following the Kremlin’s playbook.”
While foreign election interference has dominated discussion of disinformation, most intentionally false content targeting U.S. social media is generated by domestic sources.
I believe that will continue to be the case in 2020. President Trump often uses Twitter to circulate conspiracy theories and cast his foes as corrupt. One story line he pushes is that Facebook, Twitter and Google are colluding with Democrats to undermine him. Introducing a right-wing “social media summit” at the White House in July, he tweeted about the “tremendous dishonesty, bias, discrimination, and suppression practiced by certain companies.”
Supporters of Democrats also have trafficked in disinformation. In December 2017, a group of liberal activists created fake Facebook pages designed to mislead conservative voters in a special U.S. Senate race in Alabama. Matt Osborne, who has acknowledged being involved in the Alabama scheme, told me that in 2020, “you’re going to see a movement toward [political spending from undisclosed sources] on digital campaigns in the closing days of the race.” He suggests there could be an effort to discourage Republicans from voting with “an image of a red wave with a triumphal statement that imbues them with a sense of inevitable victory: ‘No need to bother voting. Trump has got it in the bag.’”
Spreading fake videos
Also likely to surface next year: “deepfake” videos. This technique produces highly convincing – but false – images and audio. In a recent letter to the CEOs of Facebook, Google and Twitter, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, a California Democrat, wrote: “A timely, convincing deepfake video of a candidate” that goes viral on a platform “could hijack a race – and even alter the course of history. … The consequences for our democracy could be devastating.”
Instagram could be a vehicle for deepfakes. Owned by Facebook, the photo and video platform played a much bigger role in Russia’s manipulation of the 2016 U.S. election than most people realize, and it could be exploited again in 2020. The Russian Internet Research Agency enjoyed more user engagement on Instagram than it did on any other platform, according to a December 2018 report commissioned by the Senate Intelligence Committee. “Instagram is likely to be a key battleground on an ongoing basis,” the report added.
Companies could step up
The social media companies are responding to the problem of disinformation by improving their artificial intelligence filters and hiring thousands of additional employees devoted to safety and security. “The companies are getting much better at detection and removal of fake accounts,” Dipayan Ghosh, co-director of the Harvard Kennedy School’s Platform Accountability Project, told me.
But the companies do not completely remove much of the content they pinpoint as false; they merely reduce how often it appears for users, and sometimes post a message noting that it’s false.
In my view, provably false material should be eliminated from feeds and recommendations, with a copy retained in a cordoned-off archive available for research purposes to scholars, journalists and others.
Another problem is that responsibility for content decisions now tends to be scattered among different teams within each of the social media companies. Our report recommends that to streamline and centralize, each company should hire a senior official who reports to the CEO and is responsible for overseeing the fight against disinformation. Such executives could marshal resources more easily within each company and more effectively coordinate efforts across social media companies.
Finally, the platforms could also cooperate more than they currently do to stamp out disinformation. They’ve collaborated effectively to root out child pornography and terrorist incitement. I believe they now have a collective responsibility to rid the coming election of as much disinformation as possible. An electorate that has been fed lies about candidates and issues can’t make informed decisions. Votes will be based on falsehoods. And that means the future of American democracy – in 2020 and beyond – depends on dealing effectively with disinformation.
[ Like what you’ve read? Want more? Sign up for The Conversation’s daily newsletter. ]
Paul M. Barrett, Deputy Director, Center for Business and Human Rights, Stern School of Business; Adjunct Professor of Law, New York University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
==================================================================AMT, please help us to keep our heads straight – and help us to help pthers do the same.
The Furies and I will be back.
14 Responses to “Everyday Erinyes #183”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
The best defense for Democrats is just to vote blue no matter what in 2020. Yeah, I know no matter who gets the nomination, somebody is going to whine because their personal savior didn’t carry the day. I have my preferences among the candidates and consider a few of them unelectable disasters. Whatever the case I will be voting for the nominee no matter who he or she might be.
That’s an excellent article, JD. The only thing I would add is this. When Democrats use disinformation to win an election, that’s an extremely rare exception. When Republicans don’t, that’s an even more rare exception.
Really good post, Joanne.
Personally, I think that misleading articles, or videos should be eliminated from the get go, I use Snopes alot if I’m in doubt of an article, or a ‘who said what’ at the time.
It’s hard to figure out who’s lying or not, nowadays…I don’t know anything about instragram or twitter, but I do read some of the comments on there.
The ‘deepfake’ video shows how it’s altered. Scary stuff.
Glad that you’re getting this out here, as folks need to know this.
Thanks, Joanne (and Furies).
After Trump very unwisely got into a Twitter war with John Legend and his wife Chrissy Teigen, I rather enjoyed this “deepfake” video of Trump boarding the recently renamed Air Force One plane in honor of Teigen’s Tweet … with toilet paper stuck to his shoe:
And there’s the difference. Republicans make deepfakes to disinform and deceive. We make them to satirize and laugh.
PAB flies!
Going back to Sen. Joe McCarthy’s doctored photos, the GOP has been honing its ability to bullshit their way through any issue they so choose!
Excellent read, Joanne. Thanks.
I agree obvious fake material should be eliminated immediately, but then we may have to do without such funny material as Nameless posted. I think that if the software can detect fake material, it can also determine whether it’s posted for malicious reasons or for a good laugh.
And that would be a grievous loss indeed. What if, instead of directly blocking it, the software sent it to a human for review? Of course there are problems with that too, but it would be easier to hire someone to review a list made for her than to hire bunches of humans to search for and read everything.
Apparently, there are thousands of people reading all the muck on Facebook already, deciding if it should be taken down or not. It is said that it is a terrible job, many of them quitting because they can’t stand to be inundated with all the filth day in, day out. With fake news, it might not get that bad, but I wouldn’t want to take on that job, would you?
Aitch – Eee – double Toothpick, NO!
I will vote for the Democratic nominee ~ no matter who that might be. That’s the attitude to embrace and remember when it’s time to vote. In the primary, I suggest using our heads instead of our hearts to choose. Number one goal is to defeat Trump.
The trouble with politics is it’s SO DAMN DIRTY!!! Liberals and conservatives alike indulge in all manner of sleazy, unethical tricks. And we encourage it with double standards: When people you hate use these tactics, they are filthy sons of she-dogs; when people you like do the same, they are clever and resourceful. No wonder there are so few good candidates out there.
Carrie, I’m with you – I will vote for whomever the Democrats nominate, even if I have to hold my nose whilst doing so. The Orange Ogre MUST be shoved out of the Oval Office!
Sleazy, unethical tricks by politicians are only effective when the voters either approve of such tricks or don’t care. Progressive voters don’t approve and do care. Of course Progressives are not perfect, but the numbers of progressive voters who do care make dirty tricks by Democrats virtually prohibitively expensive politically. Look at Rod Blagojevich for one example.
A more accurate accusation against Democrats is that they tend to fail to oppose Republican sleaze forcefully enough to defeat it. Not that forceful opposition would influence Republican voters, but it certainly could attract more unaffiliated voters.
An example of why I’m not trusting the social media sites to do what is needed about disinformation:https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/Facebook-took-down-our-fact-check-on-medically-14441175.php?fbclid=IwAR0o6Jw0fjqhZC50Tx1cHy4RhKb5M995LlfPwjPu1V6zutxLJL19mP8LX8g