Leaked Documents Outline DHS's Plans To Police Disinformation (theintercept.com) 329
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Intercept: The Department of Homeland Security is quietly broadening its efforts to curb speech it considers dangerous, an investigation by The Intercept has found. Years of internal DHS memos, emails, and documents -- obtained via leaks and an ongoing lawsuit, as well as public documents -- illustrate an expansive effort by the agency to influence tech platforms. The work, much of which remains unknown to the American public, came into clearer view earlier this year when DHS announced a new "Disinformation Governance Board": a panel designed to police misinformation (false information spread unintentionally), disinformation (false information spread intentionally), and malinformation (factual information shared, typically out of context, with harmful intent) that allegedly threatens U.S. interests. While the board was widely ridiculed, immediately scaled back, and then shut down within a few months, other initiatives are underway as DHS pivots to monitoring social media now that its original mandate -- the war on terror -- has been wound down.
Behind closed doors, and through pressure on private platforms, the U.S. government has used its power to try to shape online discourse. According to meeting minutes and other records appended to a lawsuit filed by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, a Republican who is also running for Senate, discussions have ranged from the scale and scope of government intervention in online discourse to the mechanics of streamlining takedown requests for false or intentionally misleading information. [...] There is also a formalized process for government officials to directly flag content on Facebook or Instagram and request that it be throttled or suppressed through a special Facebook portal that requires a government or law enforcement email to use. At the time of writing, the "content request system" at facebook.com/xtakedowns/login is still live. These are the key takeaways from the report: - Though DHS shuttered its controversial Disinformation Governance Board, a strategic document reveals the underlying work is ongoing.
- DHS plans to target inaccurate information on 'the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic and the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, racial justice, U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the nature of U.S. support to Ukraine."
- Facebook created a special portal for DHS and government partners to report disinformation directly.
- The work is primarily done by CISA, a DHS sub-agency tasked with protecting critical national infrastructure.
- DHS, the FBI, and several media entities are having biweekly meetings as recently as August.
- DHS considered countering disinformation relating to content that undermines trust in financial systems and courts.
- The FBI agent who primed social media platforms to take down the Hunter Biden laptop story continued to have a role in DHS policy discussions.
Behind closed doors, and through pressure on private platforms, the U.S. government has used its power to try to shape online discourse. According to meeting minutes and other records appended to a lawsuit filed by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, a Republican who is also running for Senate, discussions have ranged from the scale and scope of government intervention in online discourse to the mechanics of streamlining takedown requests for false or intentionally misleading information. [...] There is also a formalized process for government officials to directly flag content on Facebook or Instagram and request that it be throttled or suppressed through a special Facebook portal that requires a government or law enforcement email to use. At the time of writing, the "content request system" at facebook.com/xtakedowns/login is still live. These are the key takeaways from the report: - Though DHS shuttered its controversial Disinformation Governance Board, a strategic document reveals the underlying work is ongoing.
- DHS plans to target inaccurate information on 'the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic and the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, racial justice, U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the nature of U.S. support to Ukraine."
- Facebook created a special portal for DHS and government partners to report disinformation directly.
- The work is primarily done by CISA, a DHS sub-agency tasked with protecting critical national infrastructure.
- DHS, the FBI, and several media entities are having biweekly meetings as recently as August.
- DHS considered countering disinformation relating to content that undermines trust in financial systems and courts.
- The FBI agent who primed social media platforms to take down the Hunter Biden laptop story continued to have a role in DHS policy discussions.
Hidden gem at the end (Score:3, Insightful)
For those of you not paying attention, the Hunter Biden laptop story was NOT disinformation or misinformation.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The strange thing is that the hacker (in the 2600 sense of the word) and tech community used to be libertarian, almost anarchist in pursuit of liberties, where now a large part of that community -- or the loudest at any rate -- are in favor of the state curbing all kinds of freedoms because covid, Nazis etc. (Next thing they'll say it's necessary to de-Nazify the internet.) A great subculture has been drowned, if not lost, at least for the time being.
Re: (Score:3)
It's really depressing. It used to be great [mit.edu].
I don't know why it changed, but there was a huge turning-point in politics when Bush invaded Iraq.
Re: Hidden gem at the end (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Vietnam was before the end of the libertarian time mentioned in this post [slashdot.org]. By the time Vietnam ended, internet culture was just starting to be created.
I don't think much changed as a result of Noriega, if that's what you're referring to by "Panama."
Re: (Score:2)
They grew up.
Re: Hidden gem at the end (Score:2)
Yeah. The Russians too.
Re: (Score:3)
I think you're bad at reading comprehension. You don't seem to have understood the person you were replying to.
Re: (Score:2)
You clearly don't know what anarchism is. Anarchists have fought nazis on the battlefield and the streets.
Stalin also fought the Nazis. This does not atone for his crimes one iota. In the first decade of the 20th century, anarchists caused a lot of terrorism. Then Lenin won and they largely faded from popular view.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah. Yeah it was. (Score:3, Insightful)
It's frustrating that I even have to engage with you on this but you did get modded up the plus five.
Although I wouldn't call it this information
Re: Yeah. Yeah it was. (Score:2)
You're right. Drugged out failsons of influential people get cushy jobs all the time. They don't have to actually go out and demand it, usually.
Some might say that the reality of that, which was illustrated quite crassly in various leaked Biden family documents, might have been newsworthy even if it was technically legal.
But either way, we don't have the lea
Re: (Score:3)
But either way, we don't have the leaked documents. Unlike WikiLeaks, which gave us the raw documents with a search engine, the right wing press never shared the actual contents of the laptop. They want the same world of propaganda as the Biden's, they just want to be in control themselves instead of barking at the sidelines.
If they had a smoking gun, they would have told us about it. Ultimately all that was ever proven is that the laptop had some of his email on it, which would have been the case if it belonged to someone who hacked his email, too. Just like they never had any evidence of election fraud, just stacks of papers that they thumped on but never showed to anyone, including a court. It's just an endless series of Nothingburgers.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I assure you that no one is intending to exploit any vague feelings of unease around Joe Biden [msn.com] in 2024. (Seek to 1:45 if you are impatient.) It would be counterproductive when there is so much specific unease to go around. You know, things like energy costs, inflation, and crime.
When the laptop story was coming down the pipes, government actors primed social media companies to suppress it. Because the story got out anyway, the usual liars went on TV to call it Russian propaganda, which it wasn't.
Joe Bid
Re:Yeah. Yeah it was. (Score:5, Informative)
The point of the story was 1) the lying, and 2) if you don't fire the guy investigating my son's employer, you don't get the billion dollars.
No, that's the disinformation. VICE President Biden was conducting PRESIDENT Obama's foreign policy when pressuring Ukraine to replace a corrupt official. He was ONE OF MANY diplomats doing the exact same thing at the time. MOST OF WESTERN EUROPE was pushing this position because...the guy was corrupt and all of the aid was pending progress on stemming corruption in Ukraine.
The photos of Hunter with prostitutes and drugs is what HUNTER WAS FAMOUS FOR. It was well publicized that he had serious addiction issues and none of that was NEWS is was OLD NEWS. He suffered TBI and a fracture skull as a child in the same automobile crash that killed his mother and sister and seriously injured his brother. That brother, Beau, that later died of a brain tumor leaving Hunter the sole survivor of the family, other than his father. The dude is seriously fucked up and has been since forever.
The pictures and recordings of Hunter totally trashed, with prostitutes, on multi-day benders WE NEVER CALLED RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA. The uncorroborated e-mails claiming payments to his father from foreign entities were.
Re: (Score:3)
"uncorroborated" is a funny way to refer to emails with valid DKIM signatures, that also match other copies of those emails from other sources.
Re:Yeah. Yeah it was. (Score:5, Informative)
Wait, what?
I mean,, speaking of "big lie"...
Hunter Biden had a ridiculously cushy, well compensated position in the famously corrupt Ukrainian corporate energy sector. This was a government who discontinued investigations into that energy sector and specific company, actually firing the lead investigator SPECIFICALLY at the behest of then give-president Biden. (You know the sort of do me a personal favour government-backed political threat a recent president was impeached for...?)
Very narrowly framing a strawman question ("did Biden actually get him that job?") is absolutely and exactly the sort of disingenuous building that would be called mal-information.
Further, the Hunter Biden laptop was swollen with pictures of simple illegal activities, to say nothing of ample communications talking about sharing illicit compensation with "the big guy" - who do you think he meant, Babar?
You are exactly the problem.
Re:Yeah. Yeah it was. (Score:5, Informative)
Wait, what?
I mean,, speaking of "big lie"...
Hunter Biden had a ridiculously cushy, well compensated position in the famously corrupt Ukrainian corporate energy sector. This was a government who discontinued investigations into that energy sector and specific company, actually firing the lead investigator SPECIFICALLY at the behest of then give-president Biden. (You know the sort of do me a personal favour government-backed political threat a recent president was impeached for...?)
You're lying about the order of operations there.
The Ukraine Prosecutor General was obstructing anti-corruption efforts and discontinued investigations of Burisma, his own fucking self, because the prosecutor general, the owner of Burisma, the former president of Ukraine, etc. were all corrupt as fuck.
Read this from 2015
https://www.congress.gov/116/m... [congress.gov]
Furthermore, despite overwhelming evidence suggesting criminal actions, the Prosecutors Office recently dropped its cases against Zlochevskyi and his company Burisma. The NABU continues to investigate[i] several cases.
He. Dropped. The. Case. Himself.
No one in the Prosecutor General’s Office has been punished for the dumping of Zlochevskyi’s case. No prosecutor or investigator has been found liable. The leadership of the office, which tried to cover up the dumping of the criminal case concerning Zlochevsky, resigned only under enormous public and diplomatic pressure.
Read it.
THAT is why our government wanted that corrupt asshole out. The whole "I was really close to really investigating Burisma's board, for realz guys!" BULLSHIT came out after he was forced out. Which was after he fucking AIDED the Burisma owner by stymying the UK's corruption investigations.
https://www.theguardian.com/wo... [theguardian.com]
Was appointing Hunter and his buddy to the board done in good faith? I doubt it, but stop fucking lying that the US officially or covertly through Biden, then the VP, somehow helped that dickweed in charge of Burisma, he was in everyone's sights as well as Ukraine's prosecution office, and the former president of Ukraine. Somehow you forget all that.
Re: Hidden gem at the end (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
For those of you not paying attention, the Hunter Biden laptop story was NOT disinformation or misinformation.
I've read the whole sorry saga and your statement is correct in the sense that the story was not even wrong, therefore it can't really be disinformation or misinformation. It's just so batshit-crazy and ludicrous that its true classification would be more like... I dunno, black comedy? Really bad third-rate thriller? Attempt at mystery crime drama written by a fourteen-year-old boy? Something like that.
Re: (Score:2)
For those of you not paying attention, the Hunter Biden laptop story was NOT disinformation or misinformation.
That's not what the story says.
For anyone wondering what it actually said who is too lazy to read the story (and not just intellectually lazy like Orgasmatron) it says:
None of that proves that it's Hunter Biden's laptop, or that if it was, it wasn't massively tampered with. It proves it had some of Hunter Biden's email on it. If I'm up in your data, I can have
Re:Hidden gem at the end (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that you’re suggesting we bring back Trump instead, or whatever Trumo-copy comes next. Oh, yeah, that’ll REALLY drain the swamp. He can reinstall family members on every floor of the white house and hand them control over projects with national importance, no qualifications necessary beyond family name. Other Trump relatives can staff the hotel across the street, checking in a steady stream of Russian and Chinese “businessmen” at a $10,000 per-night rate. Much better for the country.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The laptop was given to the FBI long before Rudy Giuliani entered the scene. And for some reason, the FBI decided to just sit on it rather than investigate the numerous crimes detailed on it. I wonder why that is.
Re: (Score:2)
The laptop was given to the FBI long before Rudy Giuliani entered the scene. And for some reason, the FBI decided to just sit on it rather than investigate the numerous crimes detailed on it. I wonder why that is.
What crimes? Hunter Biden trying to cash in on his family name?
It's sketchy, but not criminal.
After all that talk about emoluments... (Score:3, Insightful)
> What crimes? Hunter Biden trying to cash in on his family name?
Illegal drugs, prostitution, gun crimes... this is like a "tell me you didn't see the photos without telling me you didn't see the photos" bit right now. And yes, there was also that "consulting" work where he got $50k/month for doing nothing for Ukraine's national oil company, which makes a lot more sense to me now after Putin's warmongering, and gave kickbacks on the money to Joe "I lied about not knowing these business associates" Bide
Re: After all that talk about emoluments... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Not long after the story just broke, the laptop contents were published as an RAR file shortcut out in Reddit-world. Downloadable via Google Drive for maybe a week or so before finally being taken down.
All that being said, IIRC there were definitely some questionable e-mail threads regarding tax evasion. Basically a half dozen shell companies. Move money between them as taxes for each entity were being filed. Literally the shell game. But the doofus kept ignoring reminders from the tax attorney to follow th
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:4, Insightful)
Where is this evidence about President Biden?
The emails I've seen talked about how Hunter Biden had introduced his father to some people. And that's it.
It's not really evidence of anything.
A cut for the big guy (Score:2)
The "big guy" in those emails was Joe Biden himself.
But you'll be happy to know that this is not a Democrat issue, it's a whole political system issue since numerous Republicans and Democrats are implicated in these dealings including... Mitt Romney.
Re:A cut for the big guy (Score:4, Insightful)
The "big guy" in those emails was Joe Biden himself.
You mean the big guy who gave Hunter Biden an emphatic no [wikipedia.org]?
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
What, are we at the "everyone knew all along anyway" stage already? Most of the sibling commenters are at the "nothing at all interesting here" stage still.
Re: (Score:3)
They're both assholes, but there are degrees. Biden's a political asshole with the ability to talk nice. Trump's just an all around asshole. I'm not making any judgements about which is a better or worse person, just telling the truth. I'll let others tear themselves apart trying to defend either. In the game of "whatabout"isms and "but the other guy" shit? Nobody's really winning anymore.
Re: (Score:4, Insightful)
So numerous that you cannot even describe one, can you? It's a paralysis of choice that's keeping you silent...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a trick. Bit of classic political propaganda. If we had a functioning media you wouldn't get away with it. What was the state of our media apparatus you just might
Re: (Score:3)
Wait, that can be used as a valid defense? Can other criminals say "I didn't try to kill the man, it was just a small stabbing".
We spent 4 years investigating false corruption claims, and now we have real potential corruption and the democrats suddenly want nothing to do with it? Yeah OK... we see where the real corruption is lol.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
We spent 4 years investigating false corruption claims, and now we have real potential corruption and the democrats suddenly want nothing to do with it?
Honestly, regardless if the Trump corruption clains were true or false, the precedent should be now established that we investigate presidents when allegations arrise. The complete lack of any interest shows the partisanship. The Democrats were able to get a few Republicans on board for their insetigations of Trump, yet no Democrat will break rank.
Re: (Score:4, Informative)
The laptop was given to the FBI long before Rudy Giuliani entered the scene. And for some reason, the FBI decided to just sit on it rather than investigate the numerous crimes detailed on it. I wonder why that is.
The FBI went to a grand jury and got a subpoena for the laptop wrt an ongoing investigation https://www.foxnews.com/politi... [foxnews.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Media outlets like FNC, The Blaze, and OAN have covered the story many, many times already. CNN, MSNBC, NPR, etc. have been ignoring and denying it.
Thus is why you need to consume news from more than one source.
Re: (Score:3)
If the chain of custody includes Rudy Giuliani, then yes, it's both [disinformation and misinformation].
Even if that were true, for the main items of interest (the saved mail from senders using Google mail accounts) the chain of custody does not matter.
Google mail uses a standard anti-malware system on its mail servers, to let email clients detect forgeries - either injected malware and other alterations to a letter after it leaves their servers, or outright fakes. It computes a digest of selected headers
Re: (Score:3)
(continuing: yro.google.com demanded I enable javascript and cookies to post it all at once, "to verify the security of my connection" thanks to "security by cloudflare". WTF?)
Any downstream MTA, the user's mail reader, and later analysts, can verify the selected headers and body were what was actually digested, and (using an archived public key for the server) verify the digest and signature were generated by the Google server in question during the tenure of the key. (Unfortunately, the selected header
Re: (Score:2)
Speak for yourself. I will *never* vote for Hunter Biden.
So I guess it's back to the old analogue methods (Score:3)
If the U.S. Government is going to patrol the interweb we'll need to go retro for our disinformation - like playing vinyl records backwards to learn Paul is dead.
Re: (Score:2)
Remember to play The Number of the Beast backwards so you can listen to the backwards masking in the middle of the album. Fuck Tipper Gore and PMRC.
This should worry everyone of every political pov (Score:5, Insightful)
This is exactly what Authoritarian governments do. Anyone of any political persuasion should be horrified of this. Controlling "dangerous" information is always used and abused to keep those in power in power. Neither Democrat nor Republican administrations should be working with private companies to police information. If you want to talk about Fascism and 'Threats to Democracy', this is what it looks like.
Concentration of Social Media is the problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Social media should be like email. A standard for communication. Lots of different servers. You subscribe to what you want and post what you want, which other servers may or may not accept.
Then it is distributed and not open to censorship.
Why must I use Facebook to communicate with others on Facebook?!
Re: Concentration of Social Media is the problem (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I run a service that sends email reminders to people who have specifically requested them. No matter what I do, and what the users do, there are some people who simply can not receive the emails (to be fair, these people are dealing with email servers set up by their it departments, not gmail or something like that). It’s amazing that the spammers can get through, though they have the benefit of being able to put whatever they want in their emails, mine have to look like they’re a standard form.
Re: (Score:2)
That's basically what Mastodon is. It's struggling to gain popularity because although it supports federation, in practice it ends up being a bunch of smaller networks that are not well connected.
The EU may have the solution. It plans to force these platforms to offer federation and interoperability. Mastodon's problem is scale and lack of users, but forcing Facebook to open up would go a long way to fixing that.
Re: This should worry everyone of every political (Score:5, Insightful)
You're right. It's a national security issue, and Something Has To Be Done. It's quite clear that the suppression that has been done works, and doesn't risk producing backlash.
I know this because I've read the information carefully filtered to explain it to me in such a way that I believe it. If there has to be doubts, I'm sure someone responsible above me in the hierarchy have them, so that I don't have to.
(end sarcasm).
We have seen where this ends. We have seen it right in the heart of the enemy you so fear, Russia. They ran a very successful censorship regime for the better part of a century, suppressing both "foreign propaganda" and "unscientific theories". The problem was that as doubt died, so did faith. No one doubted the inevitability of scientific progress and class solidarity, but by the end, no one believed it either. They didn't believe in anything. That's why it's a mafia state now.
Ironically, you DO have something to fear from Russian propaganda, but it's not what you think. It's not that people should believe it, it's that the nihilism should spread. It's that you should become like them, eating up your own propaganda like a glutton, professing the words, but with ever less faith behind them.
The DHS, DOE, and FBI have run their course... (Score:3, Insightful)
They've lived long enough to see themselves become the villains.
Time for the next administration to disband them with extreme prejudice.
Re: The DHS, DOE, and FBI have run their course... (Score:4, Interesting)
No. The premise behind DHS was to solve the problem of the different agencies basically working against one another, which ultimately allowed 9/11 to happen. That was, and remains to this day, a good idea.
At the end of the day, it doesn't matter whether you tear them down, if you're not careful you'll always end up back where you started.
"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty" -- Wendell Phillips
Continual reformation is likely the best option rather than continual rip and replace, otherwise it's harder to benefit from the lessons of past mistakes.
And for fuck's sake, stop with the conflating of free speech absolutism with Nazism. Yes, they're bad people, but under both the letter and the spirit of the constitution they too deserve a voice, even if we don't like it. If ever, at any point, there's a category of people that you say don't deserve a voice, at some point you'll be tempted to expand the definition of what qualifies under that category, just as the progressive movement is actively doing right at this moment, that likely culminated in the problem at hand. And if you want to know where that eventually leads, set your gaze eastward.
Re: The DHS, DOE, and FBI have run their course.. (Score:3)
The problem stems from their belief these mechanism will never be used against them, that government, academia, media, and the corporate world walking in lockstep can be trusted. It's complete ignorance of history, not least of all the history of leftist movements.
Everybody gets their turn on the guillotine, even Jacobins.
Nice to see these people made it as far as (Score:4, Insightful)
The first amendment.
Really the current crop of Washingtonians seem hell bent on summoning a horde of guillotines.
Re: In the beginning... (Score:2)
hello dhs! (Score:2)
and the nature of U.S. support to Ukraine
who would have thunk! X'DDDD
this is terrifying (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're in support of this, in ANY WAY, you will learn to be terrified when the political party that you hate has control of this power.
There is no alternative? (Score:3)
I'm really struggling here. The explosion of social media combined with a population willing to believe anything is causing major problems; to pretend these aren't very real is foolish. IF we could trust the government, then this solution has something to commend it. The fact that we can't is actually the problem. Yet all newspapers can be shown to have lied on occasion.
I suspect a system where the government is required to make substantial payouts - starting at $1,000,000 for its first offence against a pe
First amendment, for real (Score:5, Insightful)
Lots of folks say that it doesn't matter, if private platforms censor speech, because the first amendment only applies to the government. This is,imho, arguably untrue, when those platforms have effectively become the public square.
However, thanks to this bunch of power-hungry bureaucrats, it doesn't matter anymore. If the government is involved in "shaping public discourse", the first amendment *is* fully applicable. Also, this is frighteningly Orwellian.
Re: Bureaucrats aren't power hungry (Score:2)
You should read what you wrote several times.
Re: (Score:2)
Orwell's Ministry of Truth (Score:3)
Wait until lolcatz as designated as a danger to society.
Orwell's book wasn't a novel, it was an implementation manual.
There's a lie going around (Score:3, Insightful)
It's brilliant. We're all talking about the fact that there's this insane lie going around and not the fact that a terrorist attacked the husband of a major political figure after being encouraged to do so by multiple members of the opposition party through stochastic terrorism.
When folks talk about misinformation this is what they mean. It's the ability to control the narrative to such an extent that truth can't even breathe. It's a level of control Joseph Goebbels could only dream of.
Re:There's a lie going around (Score:4, Informative)
That says the man who attacked Nancy pelosi's husband was his gay lover. It's ridiculous on the face of it but every single right-wing media outlet ran with it in some capacity.
Can you provide some links to this? This is the first I've heard that story. And by "in some capacity", do you perhaps mean: Reported that there was an obiously crazy story going around as a comment on social media or something? (As I said, I haven't heard about this at all until your comment here, though.)
It's brilliant. We're all talking about the fact that there's this insane lie going around and not the fact that a terrorist attacked the husband of a major political figure after being encouraged to do so by multiple members of the opposition party through stochastic terrorism.
The police have not established that this was a politically motivated attack. However, it seems unlikely that it was partisan, since the attacker was an ultra-lefty, rather than the opposition party.
Mainly, the guy is very mentally ill. For example, sometimes he says he is Jesus, among other things.
When folks talk about misinformation this is what they mean. It's the ability to control the narrative to such an extent that truth can't even breathe. It's a level of control Joseph Goebbels could only dream of.
I think when most folks talk about misinformation, they mean posts like yours here.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you provide some links to this?
Can you learn to internet [google.com]?
Re: There's a lie going around (Score:2)
Trolls internet better than we can.
Re: (Score:3)
What's funny about this "proof link" is that it's to a CNN article which just repeats the assertion, it doesn't offer any evidence. In fact, it doesn't even identify a single, solitary instance. The exact phrase it uses is "an explosion of social media posts". That's the sum of their in-depth reporting of the facts.
I do have to give them one pat on the back: in two places, they mention that the theory "traces back to an incorrect early news report". Do tell! You mean the very theory you're complaining about
Re: (Score:3)
link is ... to a CNN article
Which link? The link above is to a Google search.
And in that Google search, there's this CNN article:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/31... [cnn.com]
That CNN article lists some people who amplified the nutcase theory, including an obscure Twitter user named Elon Musk.
Musk deleted it later, but some users took screenshots:
https://twitter.com/emptywheel... [twitter.com]
Re: (Score:2)
What's funny about this "proof link" is that it's to a CNN article which just repeats the assertion, it doesn't offer any evidence.
You haven't offered any evidence. Now you want counterevidence to the evidence you haven't provided. Cheap tricks are cheap, and so are you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"It's ridiculous on the face of it but every single right-wing media outlet ran with it in some capacity."
Actually, you may not be quoting your sources correctly. The assertion I just read from CNN was that "social media posts" ran with it, not "right-wing media outlets".
I find this kind of equivalency really interesting. I hope no one actually thinks that random people talking on the interwebs are equivalent to media outlets, but if so, I guess that would explain a lot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
This is in direct reaction to the immediate corporate leftist media narrative that the hippie nudist hemp campaigner who lived in a commune was SOMEHOW BY DEFAULT a white supremacist Republican.
You might have accidentally left that bit out? I wonder why?
Personally, I'd like journalists to want to ferret out the truth.
How did this naked druggie manage to get past secret service level security, and never show up on what must be a plethora of cameras?
Do a lot of murderous home invaders give their victim a cha
DHS Plans To Police Disinformation (Score:2)
DHS Plans To Police Disinformation
Isn't that a violation of the 1st amendment and a frontal assault on the entire ideological framework of what used to be the Republican party?
Re: DHS Plans To Police Disinformation (Score:3)
Planning sedition isn't protected speech.
Re: (Score:2)
As below, to be a crime, something has to cause actual harm. The act of sedition is a crime. Talking about sedition, dreaming of sedition, writing a paper on sedition, meeting with others about sedition, telling jokes about sedition, none of those rise to the level of a crime.
Re: (Score:2)
DHS Plans To Police Disinformation
Isn't that a violation of the 1st amendment
Disinformation is fraud (as in, for profit or other gain) and fraud is a felony. You don't know how anything works.
Re: (Score:2)
No, "fraud" is fraud. It's an act. To be a crime, it has to cause actual harm. "Disinformation" is not fraud, it is lying. You can lie your head off all day in the United States if you want to. Heck, you can be the President of the United States and lie your head off on camera in front a flag-draped, red-lit building and not be charged with a crime.
Re: (Score:3)
No, "fraud" is fraud. It's an act. To be a crime, it has to cause actual harm.
It not only doesn't have to cause harm to be an attempt to defraud, but the election lies spread willfully by Republican senators (and also idiots who listen to them) have in fact caused harm. They have decreased faith in our election process to the benefit of our adversaries. If we were in a state of declared war and not just helping someone else defend themselves against an undeclared war, it would literally be treason. But since we aren't, it's just fraud.
Unpopular opinion: free speech doesn't work (Score:4, Interesting)
Let's face it. Bullshit abounds and if enough stupid people believe it, it's dangerous.
In the old days of centralized one-way media, this was controlled by editors - the mods of yesteryear. These days, media has become truly democratized. Any idiot and every idiot has a globe spanning bullhorn.
I'm not sure of much, but I'm sure this won't continue. The money will see to that. Even Elon will be censoring pretty soon at the behest of his cohorts.
Our only choice here is to regulate speech in a rational way. F'rinstance, what if there were severe penalties for publishing a story you couldn't prove?
That would be a start towards healing a media ecology that is sadly broken.
2 Channels (Score:2)
Again, we should have two channels:
Facts, information, boring s**t
I'm just f*****g with you
Regulate the first very publicly for factual statements by established standards.
The second one they can regulate in private or however they want, but the primary consequences are a div over the top that says "this guy is full of $#1+".
If they determine the latter *IS* dangerous, fall back to 'fire in a crowded theatre' and prosecute.
Why is this necessary? Because 'we' have decided that 2 can negate 1. Those people s
Nothing to worry about (Score:2)
That slippery slope looks like great fun, lets go slide! I'm sure we can find our way back up later.
Re:Gross violation of the 1st (Score:5, Insightful)
Since when do the DHS or CIA abide by the constitution?
The DHS has had Gestapo undertones ever since it's inception in 2002. This "policing the truth" business is right up their alley and exactly what you'd expect from them.
Ironically, the DHS was created by Dubya, who had a particular relationship with the truth himself. I wonder if the DHS would have turned on its creator and his administration when they loudly claimed Iraq was behind 9/11.
Re:Gross violation of the 1st (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, I remember GW well. I remember being horrified at the war mongering, the false justifications. The Patriot Act, and the ugly politics of the era. While I've changed and grown over the past 20+ years, my politics have remained relatively stable; which is why when people accuse me of being a republican or far-right wing nut job I can only smile.
The problem I reference is, of course, that this development represents a bit of a conundrum for the readership here; they supported silencing those who questioned the dominant narratives over the past couple years ( covid, russia russia russia, the laptop and all its implications ). Now they find themselves on the side of the tyrants, the fascists, an accusation for whom they have so gleefully lobbed at others ( I'll refrain, as best I am able, from saying I told you so ).
I'm not sure they can handle the contradiction, so instead I fully expect them to double down on the violation of the 1st as a reasonable course of action. It's the only course left to them which will allow them to maintain their dogma.
Re: Gross violation of the 1st (Score:3, Informative)
Dissent was patriotic until 2008. That's when this happened:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=51... [youtube.com]
Ever since then, dissent is racist.
Re: (Score:2)
I had never seen this.
Most of that video gave me type-2, and the end gave me nausea.
America is turning into such a fucked up place where someone thinks it's a good idea to produce a such a video, and where celebrities are happy to go along with the propaganda...
Re: Gross violation of the 1st (Score:2)
Re: Gross violation of the 1st (Score:5, Informative)
‘I drafted a terrorism bill after the Oklahoma City bombing,’ Biden was quoted as saying by the New Republic in 2001. ‘And the bill (former George W. Bush Attorney General) John Ashcroft sent up was my bill,’ Biden continued, referring to the Patriot Act.
On another occasion in 2002, when the FBI director was testifying before Congress, Biden said not only that he wrote the 1994 act, but Attorney General John Ashcroft called him to say it was basically the same as the bill they were introducing,” Kaczynski reported.
‘Civil libertarians were opposed to it,’ Biden said. ‘Right after 1994, and you can ask the attorney general this, because I got a call when he introduced the Patriot Act. He said, 'Joe, I'm introducing the act basically as you wrote it in 1994.'
Re:Gross violation of the 1st (Score:5, Interesting)
This begins a slippery slope that must be carefully balanced and viewed with great oversight if it is going to have any benefit at all.
There are some types of speech that we can mostly agree isn't covered by the protection of the 1st Amendment. The classic example of shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater is one type of speech that can have dire consequences if harm results. But what about shouting "Fire!" in an empty theater? Or a mostly empty theater? Of a theater where nobody panics so nobody is hurt? So the speech is protected unless it is a trigger for damage that occurs that wouldn't have happened without the false alarm? If some sort of "damage mitigation" is agreed upon it should go no further than pause any immediate harm and then be reassessed.
What about longer lasting misinformation and disinformation? Back in the late 1990s, someone had the idea that the Measles, Mumps, and Rubella vaccine was causing autism. [chop.edu] Many people read the study and believed there was a true relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism. After critical reviews, pointing out flaws in the one study, and many follow-on studies it was found the original conclusion was flawed. However, some people still believe MMR causes autism and refuse to get their children vaccinated. How would the "Disinformation Governance Board" (DGB?) handle something like this? Have Google/Bing/DDG flag any references and results to this query with a big "Caution! Misinformation might be present." flag so people realize there are credited studies that refute the original study? What about people that believe ELF radiation from high-tension power lines cause autism? Flat earth queries? Covid vaccine queries? Voting irregularities in 2000 and 2020? UFOs? Bigfoot?
Does the amount of harm an article might cause get factored into how the DGB will reacts to it? If it is just a wild theory (David DePape was a male prostitute and the attack was a lover's quarrel) does the DGB need to react? It will be interesting to see what the DGB's charter states and how we as voters react if it seems to have too broad and ill-defined a mission. It is also important to remember that censoring any speech before damage is proven should be forbidden, and flagging any information as "Possibly incorrect and harmful" should be reviewed monthly.
I yield the soapbox for the next opinion.
Re:Gross violation of the 1st (Score:5, Insightful)
The answer is, "Congress shall make no law regarding" these things. One avoids a slippery slope by staying on the high ground where your footing is sure.
Re:Gross violation of the 1st (Score:5, Informative)
Speaking more directly to the overall gist of what you're saying, I think those are some good points. I'm generally of the opinion that organizations like this shouldn't exist; the truth is hard enough to make out and people in general are too self-motivated for ideas like this to work, even if they're well-intentioned. People must be free to discuss what they think the truth is, even in cases where they're provably wrong, because to do otherwise invites abuse of power. Free speech is a fundamental check against power and is something that must be preserved for a society to be free in any meaningful sense.
Re:Gross violation of the 1st (Score:5, Informative)
There is a critical flaw in your entire premise; who determines the speech is "possibly incorrect and/or harmful"?
Remember; the government can not be trusted. While people aren't to be trusted either, the gov is the only entity which is specifically designed and highlighted as untrustworthy. So if your 1st amendment exceptions are predicated on the gov being trustworthy then it's already flawed.
This was, in fact, the entire premise behind the 1st; our founders very well understood this.
Re: (Score:3)
A couple of things. First, it was "FALSELY shout fire in a crowded theatre".
Second, that particular bit of jurisprudence was tossed by a later Supreme Court ruling.
In other words, no, you can't override the First based on the "fire in a crowded theatre" argument.
Sorry
Re: (Score:2)
Department of Heimat Sicherheit.
Re: (Score:2)
"Disinformation" is by itself not a crime. Like lying, it only becomes a crime when it produces actual harm. Misinforming someone on the interwebs isn't going to land you in the pokey. No one believes what some rando says in a comment thread like this one. But sending a fake voter registration card to people that actually misdirected them to a polling location most definitely will. No harm, no foul is the rule. The problem with the current crop of thought police is they want everyone to believe that the wor
Re: (Score:2)
And yes, the neo-Left and the warmongering-Right are more or less one-in-the-same anymore and they control the DHS.
get on with the times, the democrats are the ones spraying the gasoline now. republicans have been pretty restrained in that regard for a while.
Re: Good. (Score:3)
Thank you for being honest about your authoritarianism. I wonder if your opinion would change if Trump were the one pushing this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)