#and that there's intentional misinformation/no information about elections | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

thebreakfastgenie · 3 months

Text

It is extremely disturbing how many posts I see claiming that Roe v. Wade was overturned on Biden's watch and blaming him and the Democratic Party for it. It's disturbing on a number of levels.

First, it was Trump and Bush-appointed justices who handed down the Dobbs decision. This is a flagrant example of blaming Democrats for things Republicans did, and not coincidentally is one of the the most widely felt differences between the two parties. As a result, it's usually the first example Democrats and their allies point to; this misappropriation suggests a deliberate attempt to undercut that fact.

Secondly, and related to the first point, it obfuscates who the real enemy is, and I am comfortable using word "enemy" to describe the Republican Party because of the policies they advocate and enact. The truth is that states controlled by the Republican Party were where the effects of Dobbs are most severely felt, while states controlled by the Democratic Party are passing laws to protect abortion. It is important to know which party opposes abortion and which party supports it. If the Republicans gain control of the House, Senate, and White House, they will pass a national abortion ban, as they have done at the state level in several places.

Thirdly, blaming Biden for Dobbs demonstrates a very concerning lack of understanding of how the government functions. The judiciary is its own branch of government; judges are appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate. It doesn't matter who is president when a decision is handed down, it matters who was president when the justices were appointed. People sometimes react to this by moving the goalposts and claiming the real issue was a failure by Democrats to "codify" Roe v. Wade. I am not sure what "codify" means in this context, and I'm not sure they are either. One thing it does not mean is that congress can pass a law saying "abortion is legal forever." Republicans could easily repeal such a law and it the federal government cannot necessarily prevent states from restricting abortion at the state level. Roe v. Wade was a ruling stating that the constitution guaranteed a right to privacy, which included the right to have an abortion. This prevented abortion restrictions in a way federal law cannot. That doesn't mean passing federal law protecting abortion is a bad idea, but it isn't a foolproof protection. It's fair to argue that the Democratic Party and the left of center generally were complacent about abortion. The form of this complacency was not taking the courts seriously, while the right spent fifty years openly filling the courts with anti-abortion judges.

The last thing that worries me is that this is popping up phrased almost the exact same way all over the place. I am afraid that it is not merely incompetence, but intentional misinformation, that is then repeated by the incompetent who believe it.

I know some will probably dismiss this post as being from a "vote harder" liberal Biden supporter, but whatever your feelings about Biden, the Democratic Party, or the democratic process in the U.S., you should care about the truth. The truth is that Roe v. Wade was overturned by Republican-appointed judges and abortion bans are being enacted by Republican elected officials, and Joe Biden opposes these things. You can do with that information whatever you wish, but you denying it is dishonest.

#you can't build a leftist movement on dishonesty #i might have to mute this one too but i needed to say it

5K notes · View notes

juana-the-iguana · 6 months

Text

Navigating media during war

Here are some tips to navigate the conflict without a paid subscription. Disclaimer, I am based in the United States and this advice is for people in the US. These tips may apply for all wars, but I wrote this with the Israel-Hamas conflict in mind.

My qualifications: I am a reporter who has worked on both local, state, national and international stories. I have covered breaking news, and have done enterprising news and investigative journalism. I will graduate with a MA in Journalism in a month.

Reasons to question my authority: I have less than five year of professional experience. I have never reported on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or anywhere else in the Middle East. I speak neither modern Hebrew nor Arabic.

Moving on:

The best tip I can give you is pick a few good news sources and wait two days after any given event or incident before claiming to understand what happened.

In the United States, our news industry is incentivized toward breaking news, which means that organizations sometimes air information without having time to thoroughly fact check it. This becomes especially evident in times of war, when it is hard to obtain information and even on-the-ground reporters don't have the full picture of what's happening.

You are not going to find a perfect news organization. They're all going to fuck up in some capacity. If you have a strong stance on this issue, you're going to be more sensitive to those mistakes and real or perceived biases. (And, for the record, it is possible for one organization to hold multiple biases depending on the time of day, presenter and facet of the war being discussed.) That's why it is genuinely important to consume multiple news sources.

So if you're wondering why I chose these sources it's because a) they're free, b) they issue corrections when they're wrong and c) they do not engage in disinformation.

In no particular order: BBC, Reuters, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, AP. You should not rely on only one of these. You should fact-check these against bias sources that don't outright lie.

Now onto the sources you should avoid. Let's get into disinformation: What is it?

Disinformation is the intentional spreading of false information. It's lying. Misinformation is inaccurate information that is spread around, but not done with malice.

All news organizations have misinformation at some point. You should NEVER trust a news organization that engages in disinformation, about anything, unless several years have passed, the people responsible for the disinformation have been thoroughly purged from the group and they cite every goddamn thing they said.

The two big organizations I recommend avoiding because they engage in disinformation are Fox News and Al Jazeera.

Fox News lied about the 2020 election in the United States and actively contributed to an attempted insurrection. Al Jazeera is an arm of the Qatari state and has lied repeatedly about, well, just about everything of interest to the Qatari government, but especially Israel. They have made several highly consequential lies in this ongoing conflict that have had tangible, catastrophic consequences on the entire globe.

Advocacy groups are not news outlets.

Also, don't trust terrorist organizations. Yes, the UN, WHO, Amnesty International and pretty much every NGO under the sun and the vast majority of news organizations cite them, but that's not because they're reliable, it's because they're the only group releasing information from Gaza.

You shouldn't take the IDF at face value either, but if what the IDF is saying is verified by the US, EU and/or other reliable, third parties, then that information is probably true.

No news source is perfect. That's just a fact. I cannot stress the importance of looking at multiple sources.

Here are some things to look out for when watching/reading the news.

- If a news source is attributing facts to two different sources, ask yourself, "why?" Information is hard to come by. Sometimes one source doesn't report everything you want to know. But sometimes you know your source is unreliable, you don't have any alternatives, so you want to distance yourself from that. What does this look like?

You might see people cite two sources to report death counts in Gaza: the Palestinian Health Ministry, which is run by Hamas, and Save the Children which analyzes information about the number of children killed. Save the Children gets the estimated number of deaths from Hamas.

- Does it make sense to have this information at this time? If there was an explosion and a government states that 500 people died in it, well, how much time did it take them to count those bodies? Does that sound feasible?

- When you're listening to eye-witness interviews, do their perspectives or narratives match up with the physical scenes you are seeing? They might not be lying, it could be a miscommunication, but for the context it is presented in, it might not be accurate.

Language to look out for:

Occupation, blockade, siege, war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, ethnic cleansing, legitimate military targets and apartheid are all distinct things. All of them, with the exception of apartheid, have specific legal definitions. If people are using these things interchangeably, maybe they're sharing opinions. That doesn't mean that what they're saying isn't valuable, but it does mean that you probably shouldn't cite them when debating international law.

Now let's elaborate on "occupation" for a second. Egypt occupied Gaza from 1949 to 1967. Then Israel occupied Gaza until 2005. In 2007 Israel started the blockade on Gaza and last month, after the 10/7 massacre, they started a siege. As noted above, these are distinct things.

If people are talking about occupation or settlements in the context of this conflict it means either one of four things:

- They are talking about the West Bank, which is under occupation and where settlements do exist

- They are talking about the history of Gaza pre 2005

- They do not know that Gaza isn't under occupation and that there are no longer settlements there (which means that they are not an informed source)

- Or they assume the entire Israeli state is occupying Palestine which, whether you like it or not, is not factually or correct

Just because something feels wrong doesn't mean it is illegal. Occupations, blockades, sieges, the use of white phosphorous and bombing areas where you know there are civilians are all legal in certain contexts.

Legality might not matter to you personally, but when you're watching the news and trying to assess who is sharing facts and who is sharing opinions, you should keep this in mind.

Other notes:

- Rockets need fuel. Ventilation systems in tunnels need fuel.

- Movies and tv shows are filmed in Gaza and the West Bank. If you see a photo of someone in a body bag texting or women laughing while painting a baby doll red, it might be a behind-the-scenes video from one of those things.

- There are a lot of AI generated pictures being used, especially in propaganda. Count fingers, arms, legs and look at backgrounds to see if what you are seeing makes sense. But for the love of god, if you don't like something, that doesn't mean it's AI.

- There are a lot of photos circulating from past wars. Be careful before you reblog. Reverse Google image search is your friend.

- If you are not sure if something is real or not, wait a week. If the US, EU and dozens of journalists say it is true, believe it.

Finally, social media. When is it appropriate to use social media for news?

News aggregates are usually okay. I'm talking places like r/worldnews. They are pulling from other news organizations, so they can repeat those flaws, but they give you a mix of headlines from multiple sources. And they'll very often post large parts, if not the entirety, of articles from sources from the New York Times, Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal that have paywalls in the comments. But also beware the comments because they can be disgusting.

Social media is also very good for sharing the individual human experience. The issue with that is that you can't always vet the person on camera or being spoken about, so they could be lying, spreading misinformation and it isn't the whole picture.

This needs to be said again and again: social media dehumanizes people. You know this, but you will fall victim to it anyway. Your algorithm will do its best to show you the best versions of the people and groups you like, and the worst versions of the people and groups you don't like to make you feel justified in adopting dehumanizing beliefs.

For anyone interested, I'm going to update the list of news sources I think are trustworthy in the next few days. I've found a few small, independent and/or foreign outlets that use open source intelligence (OSINT) in their reporting and they seem pretty reliable to me, but I want to vet them a bit further.

EDITED: Removed the name of a news organization that I previously said I thought was reliable. They did not issue a correction after uncritically repeating Hamas's lie that the al-Ahli hospital parking lot bombing was an Israeli airstrike that killed 500 people, and spent days repeating these false claims as if they were fact.

#israel #palestine #i/p #hamas #media literacy #journalism

48 notes · View notes

terriblesoup · 3 months

Text

Political theory in the digital age and the rhetoric of political speeches: a blog about politics n stuff.

Okay let's start with explaining some of the words in the title:

Political theory: is the study of politics, its concepts and even historical figures that took part in its advancement or the historical record of political thoughts overall.

the digital age: meaning this day and age, where all information is available to everyone all the time and accessible through computer technology or any other modern device that we use.

the advent of digital technology has significantly transformed political communication, it reshaped the way political information is spread, especially when elections are about to start, social media platforms transformed into this fast news dissemination hub that's even faster than what it usually is. the news, regardless of being true or just a misinformation strategy to gain audience to the politicians' campaigns are and will stay at the top of the charts until the end of the battle between the amount of adversaries.

And not only did this technological progress impact the desperate tries of the politicians and their contest to ridicule themselves while making sure to announce every thought they have, problematic or not; but it has also affected the relationship between governments and their constituents. Yes, it has become a transparent one where the voices of the people are easier to hear as well as their complains, but what has also become transparent is the clear lack of will of these governments to help these people and how much they're actually working to make the positive change in their lives, which is very little. The poor management of the e-governments moderation showed the poor management of projects made in real life as well as their capacity to handle crisis and emergencies and should it continue as such, it will only lead to more deterioration in aspects of life as well as the luxury of thought to afford a roof to live under.

E-governance might sound like a fancy term, but it could evolve into an even fancier monster with blockchain technology. While it promises transparency and security, it also encourages the rise of a high-tech surveillance state, where every move is watched and recorded, and every opinion is and will be punished regardless of the intention.

Let's talk about the debates on technological determinism and how it messes with our political theories. Some people believe that technology is like a bossy puppeteer pulling all the strings in politics. It's not a happy thought because it makes it seem like we have no say in what happens and technology just takes over. and this is like giving up on trying to make things better. We might think, "Why bother discussing politics or trying to change things if technology is running the show?" It's a bit like saying we're stuck on a ride we can't control.

This view makes everything seem too simple. Politics is already complicated, but if we blame everything on technology, we miss out on important discussions about power, how we're governed, and how society works because we're too busy blaming technology for everything. This way of thinking also lets people off the hook. Instead of holding political leaders accountable for their dumb and thoughtless decisions, we can just blame it on technology. It's an easy way out, and it stops us from asking the tough questions or thinking about the consequences of political choices.

Which leads us to topic of the rhetoric of political speeches, and how leaders use language to navigate this complex landscape and whether they're using technology as a scapegoat or addressing the real issues.

Rhetoric: means the art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing.

Political speeches often feature carefully crafted phrases, loaded with symbolism and connotations. Leaders may use positive language to inspire confidence or negative language to evoke fear or concern, which is very easy to achieve despite what many believe saying they can't be fooled by politicians.

The easiest strategy to use is emotional appeals where they use personal stories or shared values or any emotional resonance which evokes empathy and mobilizes support, influencing how individuals relate to the issues presented in the speech because there's nothing a human love more than making a story about them or remotely relatable to their personal share of emotional events.

The framing of issues through specific terminology can sway public perception, framing a topic in a way that aligns with the speaker's agenda and the use of repetition to certain convincing words can and will flip the coin to any desired side the speech figure chooses. And they do it so well because the confidence of a speaker can have a significant impact on what the people wants to hear, and even when rejecting the speaker's idea they will continue to listen to the entire speech simply because convincing you that you're listening with your own free will is the very essence of their intoxicating power on you.

Being charismatic and making simple faint jokes to loosen the seriousness of the topic will either make you comfortable with the speaker's public image, or in rage with the audacity and thus continuing to watch and listen regardless because you want to know more so you can know how to answer at the end or you want to give them the benefit of the doubt because their jokes weren't that bad ( and that's why most people feel intrigued by sociopaths and serial killers, they are charming).

Which is why using social media as the news platform for the political view is the best way to control the crowd, making users exposed to numerous opinions about the same topic all the time makes them vulnerable and confused and easy to sway with each new opinion freshly baked. And the simplicity demanded by platforms often lead to oversimplified and reductionist representations of complex political issues where everyone easily has a say in it.

Political debates devolve into divisive online battles and in this digital echo chamber, the ease in which political opinions are manipulated and distorted becomes increasingly concerning and the control of scandals is becoming easily moderated.

With all the created bubbles and trends and topics offered through direct engagement and the interactive nature of social media or any type of technological way of news spread, it is fast to have new distractions every minute of using our devices and though it is what most people hope for to run from the reality of their lives even for a couple of hours, it has become the very essence of power for most corrupted political parties to use in order to have control over everyone and sadly we have offered it to them on a plate of gold. Easily showing our personal lives to the public and leaving a very dark digital footprint that can be used against us by the same parties that offer transparency and security won't lead to any good no matter how much we evolve technologically.

------

I think the idea stops here, I shouldn't ramble more because I know I will drive to more topics and this post will never end lol, I am not a native English speaker so please bear my language faults.

Please share your thoughts about this subject, I would love to hear from you guys.

#politics #my writing #blog #rambles #thoughts #late night thoughts #writing #writers on tumblr #politique #pov #opinion #writerscommunity #drink it write it #blogging #girl blogging #wow okay

2 notes · View notes

jcmarchi · 2 months

Text

Google Gemini AI Chatbot Restricted From Elections-Related Queries - Technology Org

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/google-gemini-ai-chatbot-restricted-from-elections-related-queries-technology-org/

Google Gemini AI Chatbot Restricted From Elections-Related Queries - Technology Org

Google has implemented restrictions on its AI chatbot, Gemini, preventing it from providing responses to inquiries regarding global elections slated for this year.

Elections, voting – artistic interpretation. Image credit: Manny Becerra via Unsplash, free license

The developers say this is a part of the company’s efforts to avoid potential pitfalls in deploying the technology. The Alphabet-owned company disclosed this information on Tuesday.

This development coincides with growing concerns about misinformation and fake news fueled by advancements in generative AI, including image and video generation, prompting governments to regulate the technology.

In instances where questions about elections, such as the upcoming U.S. presidential match-up between Joe Biden and Donald Trump, are posed to Gemini, the chatbot replies, “I’m still learning how to answer this question. In the meantime, try Google Search.”

Google had previously announced restrictions within the U.S. in December, specifying that these measures would be implemented ahead of the election. A spokesperson for the company stated on Tuesday, “In preparation for the many elections happening around the world in 2024 and out of an abundance of caution, we are restricting the types of election-related queries for which Gemini will return responses.”

Apart from the United States, several large countries, including South Africa and India, the world’s largest democracy, are gearing up for national elections.

India has taken a proactive approach by urging tech firms to obtain government approval before publicly releasing AI tools that are either “unreliable” or in a trial phase.

Furthermore, there is a request to label such tools, indicating their potential to provide incorrect answers.

Google’s AI products have come under scrutiny following inaccuracies in historical depictions generated by Gemini, leading the company to temporarily halt the chatbot’s image-generation feature last month.

Google CEO Sundar Pichai acknowledged the issues and committed to addressing them, describing the chatbot’s responses as “biased” and “completely unacceptable.”

In a similar vein, Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook, announced last month its intention to establish a team dedicated to combating disinformation and the misuse of generative AI in preparation for the European Parliament elections scheduled for June.

Written by Alius Noreika

0 notes

vivvvbar · 2 months

Text

Social Media Affecting the Modern Age of Politics

Just 15 years ago, it was difficult to imagine a world where social media would have such a significant impact in our democracy. As social networks were just beginning in 2009, most people found them to be mostly useful for connecting with others and staying up to date with people whom they wanted to know about. Fast forward to today, 2024, and it is no surprise to anyone the incredible impact that these networks have had in the political arena.

Social media has grown beyond people wanting to make simple connections with individuals in their social circle. It has become a large web of information, misinformation, and a way for people (with good or bad intentions) to spread messages across various platforms, reaching people close by or millions of miles away. This had made it easier for users to utilize social media as a way to spread information about their political opinions, whether it be every day citizens, or politicians themselves. Social media is no longer used in the capacity it was before. While there are many uses for it now, it's apparent that its creation will continue to prove its' importance in regards to politics and future elections, as it has for the past two presidencies.

#social media #politics #democracy #elections

0 notes

laibaceid100 · 2 months

Text

Disinformation, Misinformation, and Mal-information: Navigating the Complex Landscape of Modern Information Disorder

Unraveling Disinformation: A Deep Dive into Falsified Crime Statistics In the heat of the 2016 Presidential campaign, a tweet by Donald Trump misrepresenting crime statistics emerged as a stark example of disinformation, intentionally using concocted data to incite fear and propagate a racially charged narrative. This misleading action, devoid of credible evidence and employing fear-inducing rhetoric, was meticulously designed to skew public perception. A diligent analysis by Politifact debunked the claim, awarding it a "pants on fire" rating for its blatant falsity. This incident underscores the critical need for vigilant media consumption, urging readers to question the authenticity of sources and the intent behind the information shared.

Dispelling Misinformation: The Truth Behind COVID-19 Vaccine Ingredients

Misinformation surrounding COVID-19 vaccines, specifically the erroneous claims about harmful ingredients leading to severe health consequences, has been a significant barrier to vaccination efforts. Such misinformation often originates from misunderstandings or misrepresentations of scientific data, lacking any malicious intent. PolitiFact, among other fact-checking organizations, has refuted these claims through evidence from authoritative sources like the FDA, which openly discloses vaccine components. For individuals aiming to navigate through the sea of vaccine information, turning to reputable sources and scientific evidence is crucial for distinguishing misinformation from fact.

Deciphering Mal-Information: Unpacking the 2017 Macron Email Leak The CNBC article on the 2017 Macron email leaks serves as a quintessential example of mal-information, deliberately revealing campaign communications to cast doubt and sway the French presidential election. By intermixing legitimate emails with fabricated ones, and leveraging social media bots alongside far-right proponents for dissemination, this act was orchestrated to tarnish Macron's reputation. Discerning readers can identify this as mal-information by critically evaluating the origins of the leaks, understanding the timing and motives behind their distribution, and recognizing the targeted effort to mislead the public through selective presentation and emphasis on uncorroborated or distorted information, highlighting the strategic use of true information to inflict political damage.

0 notes

sarafawzy · 2 months

Text

Disinformation, Misinformation, and Malinformation

Disinformation

Vaccines containing mercury are “medical genocide” that target black community to damage their babies.

This claim appears to be a baseless statement. The claim of intentional harm specifically targeting the black community is a serious accusation that lacks evidence that contributes to vaccine hesitancy. As a result, people might feel discouraged to get vaccinated which might lead to harmful effects. Also, the claim might lead to a surge of anger and rage regarding the vaccine from the public due to this false claim. Therefore, the claim may lead to reduced vaccination rates. Public health experts ensure the prevention of the spread of infectious diseases as vaccines undergo testing for safety and efficacy before approval. It's important to look for reputable sources such as credible scientific studies and public health experts that make decisions about vaccination. It is also important to verify information on “Factcheck.org” and reach out to public health experts to confirm the claim. Also, readers can identify the disinformation of the claim by showing how it provokes an emotional reaction, it is an extraordinary claim and has spread virally on loosely vetted platforms.

Misinformation

“ Three reasons why you should stop eating Peanut Butter cups”

This is a viral post by Wolfe that misrepresents the science behind additives in Peanut butter. The post was from a 2015 post from the website named “Living Traditionally” which provides a misrepresentation of science found in peanut butter. The claim on the post was based on outdated, irrelevant or factually incomplete information. Wolfe intended to highlight the health impact that Reese has on the body to prevent people from experiencing health problems. However, the claim lacked credible scientific evidence from health experts and health organizations. It's important to check for credible scientific evidence and verify the claim by using external sources such as Factchecker to confirm the validity of the statement. This claim can be identified by readers as it uses small pieces of valid information that are distorted and exaggerated.

Mal-Information

Hackers leaking Hillary Clinton’s emails and established Democrat’s campaign during the 2016 US elections. Also, WikiLeaks was accused of releasing documents for maximum impact on the election campaign. The leak damaged Clinton’s campaign assisted Trump and put Hillary at the disadvantage of being elected. This is an example of malinformation because it's a deliberate publication of private information for personal gain to cause harm which is to have Hillary lose the election. Readers should see if the news contributes to polarized political positions and extremes and if the news makes a bold statement on controversial issues.

0 notes

bitcoinreportitalia · 3 months

Text

🧔‍♂️ “Digital Shadows: WEF and UN Join Forces for Global Censorship and Digital Monitoring” 🧔‍♂️

💰 Published by Bitcoin Report Italy, 01/23/2024 💰

🪐 In the informational darkness of a world shrouded in secrecy and servility, disturbing details emerge about the real intentions of alliances between the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the United Nations (UN), oriented towards global censorship and digital monitoring. A series of news reveals the unsettling alliance between the WEF, Moderna, and the promotion of online surveillance and global digital identities.

🪐 The WEF and the UN call for censorship, digital identity, and artificial intelligence everywhere

🪐 The WEF and the UN converge in calling for censorship, digital identities, and widespread artificial intelligence. The WEF’s proposals, put forward during the annual meeting in Davos, range from digital identities linked to bank accounts to censorship based on digital identities, promoting the war on misinformation to hide and suppress any form of dissent. A synergy that is not surprising, given the signing in 2019 of a Strategic Partnership Agreement between WEF and the UN to accelerate the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

🪐 Moderna and online surveillance against vaccine skeptics

🪐 Moderna, a WEF partner, is revealed to be involved in online surveillance practices to suppress vaccine skeptics. Recent documents unveil the use of online surveillance partners by Moderna, including the non-profit project Public Goods Projects, funded by Big Pharma. This project has helped silence critics of COVID vaccines on platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and others, presenting such censorship as an act of “medical misinformation.”

🪐 The UN proposes digital identity and data sharing at WEF 2024

🪐 UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres participates in the WEF’s annual meeting, emphasizing plans to implement the Global Digital Compact and Sustainable Development Goals. These include proposals for a digital identity linked to bank accounts and the UN’s vision for moderating misinformation, synonymous with censorship. This project is the evolution of the one promoted and funded by Gavi and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which in 2011, when it was presented, was called ID2020 and then underwent changes in name to fit the propaganda of the moment, such as when it was launched in 2021 (one year late) and called Green Pass and is now commonly known here in Europe as the European Digital Identity Wallet.

🪐 The Foreign Minister of the Czech Republic calls for a global solution against “fake information”

🪐 The Czech Foreign Minister, Jan Lipavský, also joins the chorus, calling for a global solution against “fake information.” During a panel in Davos, Lipavský emphasizes the need for global regulation to control technologies that, according to him, could disrupt the electoral process and societal decisions.

🪐 The WEF declares “Rebuilding Trust” through censorship and surveillance

🪐 The theme of the WEF for the 2024 conference is “Rebuilding Trust,” emphasizing the approach to censorship and surveillance as a means to do so. Requests include digital identities to track the unvaccinated, artificial intelligence to accelerate the development of new vaccines, and collaboration with corporate media. To these will be added the Carbon Credit Card to limit citizens’ freedom of movement and purchase, and there are rumors that even internet access will have to be done through the Digital Identity Wallet to monitor every online activity.

🪐 In this intricate scenario, the light of Resistance is reflected in the hearts of those who oppose the WEF’s agenda and its allies in bringing about a regime of horrors. In the coming days, we will delve into various aspects that emerged during the last Davos forum and concerns for the coming months, where the reigning system will have to step up its implementation efforts, also to try to avoid a re-election of Trump to the White House, which would slow down the project again and put them back in a situation where they would have to take other reckless actions to save their dominant position.

🪐 Many will wonder what all this has to do with Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. It has more to do than one can imagine because Bitcoin itself is the creature born and given to the world as a weapon to free peoples from ongoing oppression. However, too many ignore this aspect and see Bitcoin as merely a speculative tool, letting it be gradually defused and rendered harmless by the WEF and its followers.

🚀 Read all our articles: https://t.me/BitcoinReportChannel

🚨 Discover how Bitcoin is truly changing the world! Join our Telegram community to delve into discussions on the Bitcoin revolution, trading strategies, and more! 🚀

📣 https://t.me/Bitcoin_Report_Italy

#btc #cryptonews #blockchain development #decentralized #blockchain technology #cryptocurency news #cryptocurrency #bitcoin #bitget #dogecoin #davos #agenda 2030 #Miners

0 notes

leelee120000 · 4 months

Text

My Voice: The January 6 Commission

June 25, 2022

On January 6th 2021 a radical right-wing coup led by MAGA fanatics, QAnon believers, and neo Nazis inspired by President Trump nearly destroyed America as we know her. The mob’s actions killed a Capitol police officer and drove two others to suicide afterwards. 100s were injured. This attack is unacceptable.

We now know, thanks to the investigation, that the mob that had spent a considerable amount of the day building a gallow and screaming, “Hang Mike Pence!.” The group then got within 40 feet of the then vice President, with intent to murder him then and there for disobeying Trump and his orders to lie about the election results. Trump knew Pence, and no one, had power to change it but instead spoke; sparking a mob, and went silent as the mob went to attack. The direct actions of an American president nearly lead to the death of a vice president. It’s shocking. And with each hearing we learn more twisted details. What matters most however, is Trump knew the Big Lie that the election was stolen was baseless. He refused to intervene and stop the bloodthirsty mob. This is ridiculous and should be condemned.

The Big Lie is already being used among Trump supporting candidates and the conspiracies around the events of January 6 have only emboldened the right. If the Department of Justice doesn’t make arrests post hearing we will face an unprecedented uphill battle. The misinformation will thrive. The ever growing divide of the American people, half of which are being fed these lies to downplay this appalling event, will inevitably cause greater harm. Now is not the time to mince words or dance around the truth. Staying informed from as many credible sources as possible and sharing them is vital.

Tension is higher now than ever and the response to the attack will influence the shape of American politics for the next century. Will we coware each time a President attempts a coup? Or will we stay faithful to the fact that even a President isn’t above the law? There are no second chances, we need to make sure this never happens again. We should never look at the Capitol and see a President’s logo in place of a torn down and discarded American flag among bodies.

Has the damage already gone too far? Are we now stuck in an unrepairable mess? The fear of our future presses on, like a crushing weight. What comes of this, what happens to democracy? How were we so close to losing it all to an egomaniac? These questions can make anyone spiral.

The only thing we have is hope, and gratitude. Gratitude that good people refused to lie, and endangered themselves to protect democracy. Hope for a brighter future, where QAnon conspiracies are treated as laughable, the Proud Boys and all neo Nazis are universally shamed, and no President believes themselves above the will of the people.

LeAnne McPherson

#my writing #politics #january 6th

0 notes

shellysmediamusings · 6 months

Text

Fake news

The book this week explores the role of the media in shaping public perception, the challenges of reporting the truth, and the historical context of media's evolution, from the printing press to the digital age. It also touches on the psychological and cultural factors that influence how we perceive and consume news and information.

I actually really loved the comic book! I thought it such an interesting choice to illustrate this sort of content and I also really enjoyed the illustration style a lot. I also think the choice to demonstrate this information via a shorter comic book probably makes the information more approachable and accessible.

The Guo and Vargo (2018) article examined satirical, fake news and misinformation websites to determine how they interacted with traditional news media during the 2016 election. Overall, purposeful misinformation sites followed the agenda-setting pattern the traditional news media did. However, satire sites broke away from what the traditional news media was creating and focused on other topics. To me, the results of this study make a lot of sense. Of course, the fake news websites would focus on the stories other news outlets may also be covering because they want to seem more legitimate. It reminds me of the piece we read last week on the way online conspiracy theories and the news media were so interconnected. I really liked this article as well because I love satire sites like The Onion and Reductress.

The Donovan and Boyd (2019) article discusses the concept of strategic silence in the news which occurs when news media uses editorial discretion to try to reduce harm related to a specific topic. This article uses two case studies to understand this concept: white violence and suicide. I thought the points made on these two topics and their relation to the media was very poignant and not something I had ever thought of. Then the article discusses how the new focus on user-generated content has reduced the well-intentioned selective silence that news outlets used to employ.

The Ekstron et al (2020) paper discusses the evolving role of journalism in society due to the digitization of news media and the spread of misinformation. Journalists, long seen as keepers of reliable information, face challenges in maintaining their authority in an increasingly digital age.

For this week, I decided to write a shorter reflection, but I started thinking about social media campaigns that could be aimed at college-aged students. I designed a (very small) toolkit of posts that could be used in a campaign against fake news. One is very matter-of-fact and educational, but I tried to have fun with the rest!

0 notes

leiajoydesign · 7 months

Text

ISTD - Fake News in a Political Context

Thursday 12th October 2023 - Research in context

Fake News in a Political context

Fake news in a political context refers to the dissemination of false or misleading information, often with a biased or deceptive intent, to influence public opinion, elections, or political discourse. It is a significant concern in the modern era, where information spreads rapidly through social media and digital platforms.

Purpose: Fake news can serve various purposes in a political context, such as damaging a political opponent, advancing a particular agenda, or sowing confusion and distrust in the political system.

Creation and Spread: Fake news can be created by individuals, groups, or even state actors. It is often disseminated through social media, websites, or other online platforms. Clickbait headlines and manipulated images or videos are common methods used to grab attention.

Confirmation Bias: People are often more susceptible to believing and sharing fake news that aligns with their existing beliefs and values, a phenomenon known as confirmation bias. This can lead to echo chambers where individuals are exposed to and reinforce their preexisting viewpoints.

Misinformation vs. Disinformation: Misinformation refers to the spread of false or inaccurate information without a deliberate intent to deceive, while disinformation involves intentionally spreading false information to deceive, manipulate, or achieve political objectives.

Fact-Checking: Fact-checking organisations play a critical role in identifying and debunking fake news. They assess the accuracy of claims and statements made by politicians and news outlets, helping to separate fact from fiction.

Regulation and Responsibility: Many countries have begun to address the issue of fake news through legislation and regulations. Social media platforms have also taken steps to combat the spread of false information by implementing fact-checking mechanisms and content moderation policies.

Challenges: Identifying and combating fake news can be challenging due to the sheer volume of information on the internet and the rapidly evolving tactics used by those who spread false information. Balancing free speech with the need to prevent the harm caused by fake news is a complex task.

Media Literacy: Promoting media literacy and critical thinking skills is seen as a long-term solution to combat the influence of fake news. Educating the public about how to evaluate sources, fact-check information, and be discerning consumers of news can help reduce the impact of false information.

Fake news in politics can have serious consequences, including undermining the democratic process, eroding trust in institutions, and contributing to political polarisation. It is crucial for individuals to be vigilant and responsible consumers of information and for society as a whole to work towards combating the spread of fake news.

LO1

#specialist practice #istd

0 notes

mimigianfala-blog · 1 year

Text

Social Media: The Good, The Bad, and The Misinformation

In today's social media landscape, avoiding instances of misinformation or damaging content on your desired platform's feed is nearly impossible. Primarily during times of heightened political activity, like a presidential election year, more cases of misinformation are produced on outlets like social media to persuade or deter viewers into believing one way or the other. I see this as the "ugly" side of social media, where individuals or organizations manipulate the reach and exposure of these platforms to their benefit.

For example, look at the new Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook verification methods. Thanks to this introduction from Elon Musk, users can now pay to appear "verified" to their social media followers, which typically indicates a sense of high societal status. But what is so special about a silly blue check mark if anyone and everyone can now be "verified" if they want to be? The original intents of these verification methods were to indicate to users the authentic and factual accounts of major organizations or public figures. Now, Joey Nobody from down the street can have a verified account with just 200 followers and potentially use those original verification frames to publish his "factual" information.

In comparison to previous weeks, the articles for this week took a rather dark turn into this "ugly" side of social media use. The authors looked at visual communication's various roles in undermining trust in public discourse. Authors Vicari and Chadwick (2020) explored the impact of synthetic political videos on deception, uncertainty, and trust in news information. They referred to these "synthetic videos" as "deepfakes," a term I had not heard before reading this article. They discuss how visuals often enhance the transmission of information by helping users establish and retrieve memories (Vicari & Chadwick, 2020). This shows the increasing use of social media as a viable avenue of disseminating falsehoods and disinformation. But how can we combat this increased exposure to inaccurate information? Is there truly a way to foster a "diverse media diet" to determine what is accurate and false?

The authors of "Tackling Misinformation" promote the idea that increased access to social media data will enable researchers to perform more extensive studies to allow for improved characterization of misinformation in real-world contexts and facilitate testing interventions to prevent the spread of misinformation (Pasquetto et al., 2020, p. 2). In my opinion, I do not think the spreading of falsehoods can be combatted in a research setting. It has to deal with a more significant societal problem and understand the complexity of citizens' thoughts and feelings. While social media may be a prominent cause of this spread, there is a more significant issue at the root of this problem. As discussed by Sude and Dvir-Gvirsman (2023), differences in social media platform affordances often determine how users will respond and react to the content present on that specified platform. Their study showed that some users appeared more "uncivil" on one platform but did not engage in this same activity on another platform (Sude & Dvir-Gvirsman, 2023). This proves to me that researchers cannot look at social media as the sole root of the problem of the free flow of misinformation.

Journalists and major news outlets are typically the primary focus for audiences to obtain their news information and make sense of the world around them. However, this has not been the case in the heightened times of "fake news." According to Miller and Nelson (2022), social media platforms created new risks and challenges for journalists, "most notably in the form of dark participation, which refers to negative, selfish or even deeply sinister forms of online audience engagement (Miller & Nelson, 2022)." Initially, people hoped social media would make news production more democratic and equal for journalists and audiences. However, the reality is that social media can be a very unfriendly place for journalists, particularly for those who are women or people of color (Miller & Nelson, 2022).

0 notes

generalsoullover · 1 year

Text

Module 5 Tutorial: Disinformation, Mal-information and Misinformation

Disinformation

Disinformation may be defined as false information circulated with the intent of harming. One example of this comes from the Russian invasion of Ukraine. A tactic used by the Russian government to garner the support of their invasion was to claim that the US and Ukraine were working together to create biological weapons, and by invading, Russia would prevent the development of those weapons. This disinformation was spread on different social media platforms at the beginning of the invasion. Research by credible sources indicated that no information was found to support Russia's claims. One way to combat disinformation is to use tools to provide fact checks by installing third-party fact-checkers and browser extensions that can determine the credibility of news.

Mal-information

Mal-information may be referred to as information disclosed with the intent of harming. One example of this in recent years is the spread of leaked photos of Justin Trudeau in blackface a month before the 2019 Canadian federal election. There are at least three different photos that circulated on the web in September 2019. Their spread by news outlets, political figures, and people online leading up to and following the election was then used by the opposition as a tool to push against Trudeau's campaign for prime minister in 2019 and 2021. One of the ways that mal-information can be identified is to think through the content being shared and consider what might be the purpose behind this "leak."

Misinformation

Misinformation may be referred to as false information that is spread out of genuine belief. One contemporary example of this is related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The World Health Organization has an entire section of their site dedicated to fighting misinformation by directly countering myths with scientific facts. One example is their counter to injecting bleach as a cure myth, stating that, since bleach is poisonous, consuming it as a preventative measure can lead to serious side effects and death. One way to counter the spread of misinformation like this is to consider the source's origin and verify whether or not the source is reputable.

0 notes

tipco613 · 1 year

Photo

New Post has been published on https://cryptonewsuniverse.com/social-media-censorship-increases-controlled-by-fed-agencies/

Social Media Censorship Increases Controlled By Fed Agencies

Decentralized Media Platforms On The Rise

Two investigative journalists from The Intercept published a recent article about social media censorship that captivated the internet. The account referred to leaked and litigated documents that revealed the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is working in tandem with tech giants to monitor online information. More specifically, what they consider is disinformation.

The article is quite eye-opening and detailed, so I’ll summarize the crucial points in this article. It will also be enlightening as to why we so desperately need a decentralized social media marketing platform like Markethive, and what we are building is the only solution to the oppressive censorship that the social media moguls and three-letter agencies are facilitating.

Image source: The Intercept

The authors explain that all the information in the article is based on years of internal DHS memos, emails, documents obtained via leaks and an ongoing lawsuit, and public records. This information proves the US government is actively policing information online. Their influence became apparent to the average person when the DHS announced the infamous disinformation governance board, dubbed the Ministry of Truth, earlier this year.

Interestingly, the disinformation governance board was announced right after Elon Musk announced he would acquire Twitter. The European Union also announced its censorship push with the Digital Services Act, which will set up a Ministry of Truth in every EU country. Although the disinformation governance board was decommissioned, the DHS is actively exploring other initiatives to police social media now that its original mandate, “the war on terror,” nears its end.

So, behind closed doors and through pressure on private social media platforms, the US government has used its power to shape online discourse. The authors point out the three forms of information they are targeting.

Misinformation: False information spread unintentionally.

Disinformation: False information spread intentionally.

Malinformation: Factual information shared, typically out of context, with harmful intent (that allegedly threatens U.S. interests.)

[Or perhaps it’s easier to combine these three explanations into one category: Anything the government doesn’t agree with or like.]

A formidable text message from a Microsoft executive (a former DHS official) to a DHS director expressing, “Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain.” Note that Microsoft owns LinkedIn and Skype.

The authors also highlight a recent meeting that Laura Dehmlow, an FBI official, had with executives from Twitter and mega-bank JP Morgan Chase. The topic of discussion was distrust in the US government on social media, with Laura stating that “we need a media infrastructure that is held accountable.”

It was also cited that a formalized process for intelligence agencies to flag content on Facebook or Instagram directly and request that it be throttled or suppressed through a special Facebook portal that requires a government or law enforcement email to use. Not surprisingly, both Facebook and the FBI declined to comment even though the portal was still live when the article was published.

When Did It All Start?

In the second part of the article, the authors pivot to discussing when all this social media censorship started happening. They identify that it began with the 2016 presidential election, which makes sense as this was around the time that fact-checking companies surfaced.

Predictably, the pandemic exacerbated the DHS’s social media censorship. An ever-progressive number of people see through that many of the theories that the DHS and army of fact-checkers labeled conspiracies ended up being correct. And some are still in the throes of coming to light and proven as facts, not fiction akin to a horror movie.

But the DHS’s narrative and censorship are not over. According to a DHS report obtained by the authors, its priorities for the coming year will be to fight “inaccurate information on a wide range of topics, including “the origins of the covid-19 pandemic and the efficacy of medical procedures, racial injustice, US withdrawal from Afghanistan and the nature of US support to Ukraine.”

The authors point out that how the government defines disinformation needs to be clearly articulated, and the inherently subjective nature of what constitutes disinformation provides a broad opening for DHS officials to make politically motivated determinations about what constitutes dangerous speech. Whoever defines hate speech will have the power to censor whoever they want. This seems fine with the EU, which will police hate speech as part of the Digital Services Act mentioned above. Oddly enough, the DHS justifies its new quest by claiming that terrorism is “exacerbated by misinformation and disinformation spread online.”

The authors accurately point out that this is just an excuse for political propaganda and point to half a dozen previous examples as proof. They admit that the extent to which the DHS affects the social media feeds of the average American is unclear; however, intelligence agencies flagged over 4,800 social media posts during the 2020 election, and 35% of them were subsequently suppressed or censored by social media.

This statistic comes from the Cyber Security and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which along with the FBI, met with social media platforms every month before the 2020 election. The list includes Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Discord, LinkedIn, and even Wikipedia. It revealed that these monthly meetings between social media platforms and intelligence agencies are still ongoing.

Image source: Industrial Cyber

These monthly meetings of the private-public partnership between social media platforms and intelligence agencies were cemented in 2018, creating a new wing of the DHS, including the CISA. This new wing focused on social media election-related disinformation and was highly active in policing disinformation during the 2020 election.

Last year, under the Biden administration, the new wing, formally known as the Countering Foreign Influence Task Force and established for election-related disinformation, was replaced with the Misinformation Disinformation and Malinformation team or MDM. This broadens their scope from disinformation produced by foreign governments to include domestic versions and focus on general MDM.

The MDM’s job is to “counter all types of disinformation.” In other words, a task force intended to combat election disinformation expanded its scope to include whatever information the government deems to be disinformation, regardless of whether it's related to an election.

Jen easterly, the director of CISA, appointed by President Biden, sent a text to Microsoft Representative Matthew Masterson, saying she is “trying to get us in a place where Fed can work with platforms to better understand mis/dis trends so relevant agencies can try to prebunk/debunk as useful.”

The term “pre-bunk” is disturbing when you consider it means preventing information from getting out in the first place. In other words, pre-bunk means proactive censorship, so they’ll try to silence us before we say anything!

The authors revealed that the DHS advisory committee of CISA was concerned about information that undermines “key democratic institutions” such as the courts or other sectors such as the financial system or public health measures. The CISA advisory committee, which includes Twitter’s head of legal policy, trust, and safety, Vijaya Gadde, assisted in drafting a report to the CISA director calling for an expansive role for the agency in shaping the “information ecosystem.”

The report called on the agency to closely monitor “social media platforms of all sizes, mainstream media, cable news, hyper-partisan media, talk radio, and other online resources.” Notably, Vijaya Gadde was terminated from her position on Twitter immediately following Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter.

Image source: The Intercept

The DHS Censorship Scope Widens

Unfortunately, the authors reveal that the DHS’s censorship efforts have only expanded since the Ministry of Truth was disbanded. They talk about how sub-agencies like Customs and Border Protection are somehow responsible for determining whether information on social media is accurate.

Meanwhile, sub-agencies like the Science and Technology directorate get the final say on whether you're a bot or a human. As expected, the DHS’s online efforts are becoming so significant that they are slowly starting to eclipse the agency's original purpose of fighting terrorism. This was revealed in an internal report.pdf obtained by the authors, which includes “domestic violent extremists” as the DHS’s primary targets.

To accomplish its new goals, the DHS will work closely with NGOs to “build resilience to the impacts of false information." This begs the question of who is funding the NGOs that are getting ever more involved in the affairs of the average person.

The authors also note “intelligence agencies backed new startups designed to monitor the vast flow of information across social networks to better understand emerging narratives and risks.” It makes one wonder how some blockchain analytics companies got their funding. The main takeaway is that the US government's suppression and censorship of information on social media have only continued to increase.

Image source: Markethive.com

The Solution? Decentralization

Regardless of what is being orchestrated by these agencies and NGOs, information is still being disseminated, and nefarious actors and corporations are being exposed for the world to see. Facebook has suffered and arguably is dying because of its involvement which has become more apparent in recent years.

Even if the centralized legacy social media platforms survive, more and more people with a voice are migrating to alternative platforms. Creatives and critical thinkers who refuse to be surveilled and silenced need a decentralized, free-thinking platform to continue their quest without the concern of looming censorship or being de-platformed.

The technology that is available today makes it possible for social media decentralization. For a decentralized social media platform to work, you need a blockchain, a smart contract, and a decentralized, scalable, and secure cryptocurrency. Distributed data centers and cloud systems that do not rely on centralized servers are essential to minimize the risk of being tracked or shut down by centralized agenda-driven entities.

In markethive’s case, this technology is its foundation, and the steps taken to make it impenetrable are being implemented, starting with the Markethive wallet, which houses multiple mechanisms and is the comprehensive center for all your transactions and facilitations in this decentralized ecosystem.

With the wallet on the cusp of being launched, Markethive’s five-channel newsfeed, which includes a general newsfeed, video channel, curation, blogging interface, and conference or live streaming channel, is next to be integrated. It means we don’t have to rely on centralized streaming platforms or upload videos parked on a “woke” video platform.

Markethive, the company, will not police content or censor members. The community will discern what they deem unacceptable content by simply blocking an offending user. Personal configuration of algorithms will also be an effective tool for choosing who and what you want to see on your feeds. This meritocratic culture understands that individuals can think and do for themselves and not be told what is “dis, mis, or mal information.” What the autocratic powers believe to be disinformation and deem illegal is questionable and the very least.

Markethive incorporates all facets of social media marketing, including broadcasting to other platforms, as well as the infamous social media giants. We still need to get our message out to users on these platforms. So, regarding Markethive’s blogging and video channel, any video created on the Markethive video channel is broadcasted with AI-generated summaries to the woke social media platforms. In turn, the viewer is brought back to the Markethive site to view it in its entirety.

With an opaque summary of the topic, their artificial intelligence surveillance can’t track the nature of the content if it happens to be controversial and against their narrative. If the oppressive platforms do delete your video, it will remain on Markethive’s distributed system. It’s important to understand that all feeds or channels will be secure and remain your property. This is the solution to get your message out to people who need the truth about what’s happening worldwide.

Markethive has many members in Russia and other parts of the world that have been seriously impacted by the global elites and governments creating false narratives and particularly sanctioning the Russian Federation, all for their personal gain. Believe it or not, the people trying to enforce these sanctions and censorship standards are the most corrupt of all.

Markethive is the answer for those who have fallen through the cracks in the chaos the powerful few continue to instigate. The direction Markethive is going is to create an ecosystem that does not depend on greedy leaders or the political climate. Its promise and vision of what it's all about are to give access to the platform to everyone worldwide.

Editor and Chief Markethive: Deb Williams. (Australia) I thrive on progress and champion freedom of speech. I embrace "Change" with a passion, and my purpose in life is to enlighten people to accept and move forward with enthusiasm. Find me at my Markethive Profile Page | My Twitter Account | and my LinkedIn Profile.

Also published @ BeforeIt’sNews.com; Steemit.com

#Blockchain #cryptocurrency #markethive

0 notes