Disinformation Governance Board to tackle spread of misinformation in U.S., focusing on Russia and U.S.-Mexico border (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    SaintForLife

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Oct 5, 2019
    Messages
    4,979
    Reaction score
    2,407
    Location
    Madisonville
    Offline
    The Department of Homeland Security is setting up a Disinformation Governance Board to try to counter the spread of false information. The board will focus on disinformation coming from Russia as well as misleading messages about the U.S.-Mexico border, the Associated Press reports.

    The immediate focus will be on misinformation from human smugglers, who spread false claims about U.S. border policy to migrants to help drum up business.

    White House press secretary Jen Psaki said during a briefing Thursday that the board will tackle misinformation on a range of issues, and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said part of its intention is to counter misinformation in Hispanic communities especially.

    Disinformation expert Nina Jankowicz will lead the board. Jankowicz, who has researched Russian misinformation tactics and online harassment, is author of the book "How To Lose the Information War: Russia, Fake News, and the Future of Conflict." She has also advised the Ukrainian government on strategic communications, according to the Wilson Center think-tank, where she served as a global fellow.






    I actually can't believe the Biden administration created this. This was obviously a horrible idea and it's a potential threat to free speech. Is this a response to Mush buying Twitter since they can't use Twitter as their censor anymore? Either way the government has no business telling us what's misinformation.

     
    I don’t think Steele should be silenced, the dossier was presented as raw intelligence, some true some not true, every single time it was mentioned. I would imagine he would have some insights into this field.
     
    I feel like this tweet points out how impossible this task will be, and why I'm not sold on this existing. A tweet from the new head of this board promoting Christopher Steele's discussion on disinformation. I'm surprised she hasn't scrubbed this.


    Yea, i can't see the lady they've tasked with running it being able to keep the job.

    Just too much silly social media out there. People who hope to have high profile jobs in government should be more mindful of posting things that can be used to make them look crazy.

    If they want to run for office, then it's fine though.
     
    It's funny that all of a sudden that many people think its a bad idea that a billionaire owns a media company. I don't recall hearing that same kind of concern about the other billionaires owning the media companies especially the Washington Post owner by Jeff Bezos.

    John Henry bought The Boston Globe, Patrick Soon-Shiong bought the Los Angeles Times, Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post, Laurene Powell Jobs The Atlantic, Chatchaval Jiaravanon Fortune, and Marc Benioff, of course, Time.
    I'm not 'many people.' I think both are a bad idea whereas you only think one is a bad idea. That's the hypocrisy.
     
    This is how I see it, just a specific channel to counter misinformation with official information. However, two concerns:

    1. what happens when the GOP gets to staff the agency?
    Probably not a lot? You have the First Amendment there. Given that, I'm not sure what they can realistically do beyond putting out official information, so if we're talking the current incarnation of the GOP, presumably they'd put out endless amounts of ludicrous claims and assert that anything they don't like is disinformation, or, to suggest an alternate phrase just off the top of my head, 'fake news'. The last GOP administration seemed to have that covered anyway.

    2. given this statement:
    The immediate focus will be on misinformation from human smugglers, who spread false claims about U.S. border policy to migrants to help drum up business.

    Smugglers don't need to drum up business. The business comes to them. They don't go around leaving flyers on windshields promising visas or safe passage into the U.S. or have an office at the mall. If the U.S. government thinks the crowds at the border are the result of misinformation spread by coyotes, they are wrong.
    Cynically, I suspect that while there presumably is some truth in it - there presumably are some people turning up who've been misled by the people smuggling them - they're flagging that one initially because it's perceived as being more of a non-partisan issue, in order to establish the premise of disinformation being a genuine problem that should be addressed. But in terms of disinformation targeting national security, no, I'm not sure it'd be top somehow.
     
    Given that, I'm not sure what they can realistically do beyond putting out official information
    Not put out official information, put out misleading information of their own.
    Cynically, I suspect that while there presumably is some truth in it - there presumably are some people turning up who've been misled by the people smuggling them
    ... which one probably can count on one hand...
    they're flagging that one initially because it's perceived as being more of a non-partisan issue, in order to establish the premise of disinformation being a genuine problem that should be addressed. But in terms of disinformation targeting national security, no, I'm not sure it'd be top somehow.
    If that's the goal, it's going to be practically useless.
     
    I don’t think Steele should be silenced, the dossier was presented as raw intelligence, some true some not true, every single time it was mentioned. I would imagine he would have some insights into this field.

    Oh he should be silenced, I'll disagree with you on that one. He is one of the most well known propagators of disinformation in the last decade. What is this about raw intelligence? He was hired to dig up dirt. He didn't work for a three letter agency. He worked for HRC. You frame this as if you believe he was on some fact finding mission.
     
    Oh he should be silenced, I'll disagree with you on that one. He is one of the most well known propagators of disinformation in the last decade. What is this about raw intelligence? He was hired to dig up dirt. He didn't work for a three letter agency. He worked for HRC. You frame this as if you believe he was on some fact finding mission.
    He did work for whoever hired him, and yes, it was oppo research, done by every campaign. Raw intelligence is how the dossier was framed, repeatedly, from the beginning. Oppo research should be true if it is to have value, however this particular document was never touted as true. Not once did I ever read about it without the caveat that it undoubtedly contained material that was outright false and could be planted Russian disinformation. Steele didn’t know who he was preparing the files for anyway, not until months after he started working on it as he was hired by a third party. Nevertheless there are some true things in the dossier.

    I really don’t get the obsession with it anyway. It was but a footnote of no material importance. It was just a lurid gossipy interlude. It wasn’t responsible for the investigation of the Trump campaign.

    Silencing someone who has experience in the intelligence community because you don’t like who he worked for isn’t very smart, IMO. 🤷‍♀️
     
    He did work for whoever hired him, and yes, it was oppo research, done by every campaign. Raw intelligence is how the dossier was framed, repeatedly, from the beginning. Oppo research should be true if it is to have value, however this particular document was never touted as true. Not once did I ever read about it without the caveat that it undoubtedly contained material that was outright false and could be planted Russian disinformation. Steele didn’t know who he was preparing the files for anyway, not until months after he started working on it as he was hired by a third party. Nevertheless there are some true things in the dossier.

    I really don’t get the obsession with it anyway. It was but a footnote of no material importance. It was just a lurid gossipy interlude. It wasn’t responsible for the investigation of the Trump campaign.

    Silencing someone who has experience in the intelligence community because you don’t like who he worked for isn’t very smart, IMO. 🤷‍♀️

    The report's entire credibility was centered around Steele's own reputation. It was headlines like "ex MI6 spy who has produced credible reports in the past". He sent the document to the FBI, and the state department as well. That report was used for FISA warrants.

    It later came out that Steele used a former Clinton advisor as a source. It's hard to believe he didn't know who he was employed by, or the veracity of those claims. At the same time Steele was shoveling his load of BS to the FBI, so was a Clinton lawyer(who worked at the firm that hired Steele) about some imaginary bank story.

    The twitter post was Steele talking about disinformation, and Russian dissidents. Christopher propagated Russian disinformation widely into the public sphere that originated from a Russian dissident. What does he know about the topic? The incoming Ministry of Truth head looks like a clown if that's what she is listening too.

    Steele got his 160k from the Clinton's for his hack job. The tradeoff was a ruined reputation.

    Of course this discussion right here, brings up how do you even decide what is disinformation in real time? It took the FBI years to dig through that report.
     
    The main thrust of the dossier turned out to be true - Putin worked to elect Trump, and Trump was eager to accept that help. So you can have your take. But it’s not fact, it’s your interpretation and assumptions with the advantage of hindsight.

    You handle it basically the way it was handled - as unverified. It was repeated in every story that it shouldn’t be treated as true.

    The bank story isn’t imaginary at all. It’s significance is in question, but there wasn’t anything imaginary about it.

    I will be shocked if Durham turns up anything of significance. There is nothing there. Trump wasn’t persecuted by some sort of deep state, lol. It’s a bunch of conspiracy theories.

    Steele didn’t get anything from the Clintons. He wasn’t hired by them. Your biases are showing, possibly.
     
    I can't believe we're in 2022 and still talking about that stupid dossier like it happened yesterday. The dossier didn't even cause Trump to lose the election, so how significant is it really? The amount of attention and reporting still given to that dossier is just ridiculous. Republicans have moved on for Jan 6th, but not that dossier. Just proves that when the right wing holds a grudge against something, it last forever and they will NEVER let it go!

    :elefant::elefant::elefant:
     
    The report's entire credibility was centered around Steele's own reputation. It was headlines like "ex MI6 spy who has produced credible reports in the past". He sent the document to the FBI, and the state department as well. That report was used for FISA warrants.

    It later came out that Steele used a former Clinton advisor as a source. It's hard to believe he didn't know who he was employed by, or the veracity of those claims. At the same time Steele was shoveling his load of BS to the FBI, so was a Clinton lawyer(who worked at the firm that hired Steele) about some imaginary bank story.

    The twitter post was Steele talking about disinformation, and Russian dissidents. Christopher propagated Russian disinformation widely into the public sphere that originated from a Russian dissident. What does he know about the topic? The incoming Ministry of Truth head looks like a clown if that's what she is listening too.

    Steele got his 160k from the Clinton's for his hack job. The tradeoff was a ruined reputation.

    Of course this discussion right here, brings up how do you even decide what is disinformation in real time? It took the FBI years to dig through that report.


    so you have totally swallowed the "Ministry of Truth" eh?

    My my my....how in the world have we gotten to a place where adults simply cannot contain their own political rhetoric from general discussion?

    I bet you think Birds arent Real too?
     
    so you have totally swallowed the "Ministry of Truth" eh?

    My my my....how in the world have we gotten to a place where adults simply cannot contain their own political rhetoric from general discussion?

    I bet you think Birds arent Real too?

    I'm generally not ok with the entire authoritarian track of Democrats. From, the censorship on social media platforms, essentially closed primaries, or now a "disinformation board". Liberal media itself doesn't have a great track record on figuring out what is, or isn't disinformation.

    It sucks most Democrats are just tribal as Republicans.
     
    Last edited:
    The main thrust of the dossier turned out to be true - Putin worked to elect Trump, and Trump was eager to accept that help. So you can have your take. But it’s not fact, it’s your interpretation and assumptions with the advantage of hindsight.

    You handle it basically the way it was handled - as unverified. It was repeated in every story that it shouldn’t be treated as true.

    The bank story isn’t imaginary at all. It’s significance is in question, but there wasn’t anything imaginary about it.

    I will be shocked if Durham turns up anything of significance. There is nothing there. Trump wasn’t persecuted by some sort of deep state, lol. It’s a bunch of conspiracy theories.

    Steele didn’t get anything from the Clintons. He wasn’t hired by them. Your biases are showing, possibly.

    No, MT15, you don't get to say that's my interpretation, and not fact. You are outright proclaiming false statements as truth for some reason.

    Read the CNN breakdown on this: https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/18/politics/steele-dossier-reckoning/index.html

    The bank story. The lawyer involved? Jail.

    From that article:

    The Trump Organization and Alfa Bank both denied there was a backchannel. The FBI investigated the underlying data and ruled out any improper cyber links by February 2017.

    You outright have no idea what you are talking about. Stop watching MSNBC, and thinking it's all true.
     
    No, MT15, you don't get to say that's my interpretation, and not fact. You are outright proclaiming false statements as truth for some reason.

    Read the CNN breakdown on this: https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/18/politics/steele-dossier-reckoning/index.html

    The bank story. The lawyer involved? Jail.

    From that article:



    You outright have no idea what you are talking about. Stop watching MSNBC, and thinking it's all true.
    If you are talking about Sussman - he is not in jail. He’s indicted, but not convicted. Who are you talking about if not Sussman?

    Honestly, this is just ridiculous. You insult people almost reflexively. I really, really don’t care enough about this non-story to deal with this crap, not today.
     
    I can't believe we're in 2022 and still talking about that stupid dossier like it happened yesterday. The dossier didn't even cause Trump to lose the election, so how significant is it really? The amount of attention and reporting still given to that dossier is just ridiculous. Republicans have moved on for Jan 6th, but not that dossier. Just proves that when the right wing holds a grudge against something, it last forever and they will NEVER let it go!

    :elefant::elefant::elefant:

    Don't make me bring up Hillary's emails.
     
    Terrible name, terrible optics.

    What really matters is what this program will do, what its authorities are, and how it could leverage them. The federal government does engage in information publishing, if this is limited to identifying area where this board thinks there is misinformation and attempts to counter misinformation with the publication of "official" information, that's neither new nor Orwellian.

    If the board is using federal power to attempt to regulate how misinformation is being created and disseminated, that's another matter entirely. Yes, the quote to NPR sounds more like the latter than the former, but it's also presented in terms of what "should" be done - that doesn't mean they can do it based on existing authorities.
    Considering the history of the government of violating civil liberties then I would think your 2nd paragraph is more likely. We'll see.
     
    I think it'd be a good idea if you tried acknowledging accurate criticism once in a while, instead of just posting endless idiotic tweets and objectively terrible articles, and then avoiding responses and valid criticisms with evasive and poorly framed questions or by posting yet more of the same, and then acting like people ignoring the endless stream of crap is somehow symbolic of anything other than the abysmal quality of content you're putting on here.

    As for disinformation, governments can, should, and inevitably will respond to disinformation. Do you think it's a good idea for governments to actively avoid communication?
    It would be a good idea if you would stop acting like you are smarter than everyone. The government should never be involved in policing disinformation and considering their history of constantly lying to us I'll remaine skeptical until proven otherwise.

    I await your complaint about others posting tweets because it's funny how you guys only cry about tweets from people you disagree with? Where are the complaints about the person who parrots the Jeff Bezos Washington Post by posting just about every article from them?
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom