DOCSLIB.ORG

Trends for 2021 and Beyond

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Trends for 2021 and Beyond Hybrid CoE Working Paper 11 JULY 2021 Disinformation 2.0: Trends for 2021 COI HYBRID INFLUENCE COI and beyond ISABELLA GARCIA-CAMARGO AND SAMANTHA BRADSHAW Hybrid CoE Hybrid CoE Working Paper 11 Disinformation 2.0: Trends for 2021 and beyond ISABELLA GARCIA-CAMARGO AND SAMANTHA BRADSHAW Hybrid CoE Working Papers cover work in progress: they develop and share ideas on Hybrid CoE’s ongoing research/ workstrand themes or analyze actors, events or concepts that are relevant from the point of view of hybrid threats. They cover a wide range of topics related to the constantly evolving security environment. COI Hybrid Influence looks at how state and non-state actors conduct influence activities targeted at Participating States and institutions, as part of a hybrid campaign, and how hostile state actors use their influence tools in ways that attempt to sow instability, or curtail the sovereignty of other nations and the independence of institutions. The focus is on the behaviours, activities, and tools that a hostile actor can use. The goal is to equip practitioners with the tools they need to respond to and deter hybrid threats. COI HI is led by the UK. The European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats tel. +358 400 253800 www.hybridcoe.fi ISBN (web) 978-952-7282-88-5 ISBN (print) 978-952-7282-89-2 ISSN 2670-160X July 2021 Hybrid CoE is an international hub for practitioners and experts, building Participating States’ and institutions’ capabilities and enhancing EU-NATO cooperation in countering hybrid threats, located in Helsinki, Finland. The responsibility for the views expressed ultimately rests with the authors. Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 THE EVOLVING THREAT LANDSCAPE: NEW TRENDS IN DIGITAL DISINFORMATION 10 Hard-to-verify content 10 Top-down disinformation 11 Groups and online communities 12 Cross-platform coordination 15 Algorithmic amplification 15 Images and ephemeral content 15 Live streams 16 Extremist platforms 16 Encrypted platforms 17 FUTURE TECHNOLOGIES: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, DEEP FAKES AND THE NEXT GENERATION OF DISINFORMATION 18 EVALUATING PLATFORM RESPONSES 19 Facing coordinated authentic behaviour 20 Policy-evading content 20 Networked disinformation 21 Incentivized disinformation 21 AI on the horizon 22 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 23 AUTHORS 25 REFERENCES 26 Executive summary Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential Center for an Informed Public, the Digital Forensic election drew attention to the many ways that Research lab, Graphika and the Stanford Internet social media can be leveraged for widescale infor- Observatory. Here, we identified ten key trends mation operations by nation-state actors. Since about 2020 disinformation campaigns: then, however, these campaigns have evolved: Rather than a large foreign effort to undermine 1) Disinformation actors made use of hard-to- the integrity of the election, the new digital threats verify content, which is content that is not to the 2020 US presidential election came from falsifiable through fact-checking. Hard-to-verify domestic users who co-opted social media plat- content can evade takedowns because it blurs forms to spread disinformation about a “stolen the line between truth and fiction, with users election”. Groups like #StopTheSteal – coordi- framing disinformation as stories they heard nated by many authentic American users – seeded from friends or asking questions about known false claims about illegal voting on Facebook and conspiracies or disinformation. Twitter.1 Conservative and far-right livestreams 2) Rather than bots or fake accounts amplifying on YouTube amplified conspiracies about rigged disinformation, most viral disinformation was voting machines to audiences that rival television top-down and was amplified by influencer or broadcast shows.2 Users on TikTok and Insta- accounts with millions of followers. As platforms gram posted stories about missing, destroyed, or consider speech from influencers – like politi- uncounted ballots on election day – many of which cians – newsworthy, content produced and would disappear after 24 hours.3 And on fringe or shared by influencer accounts is considered alternative platforms like Parler, Gab, and 4chan, a public good and has not been moderated users left comments inciting the “rape, torture, as strictly as that from other non-newsworthy and the assassination of named public officials and accounts. private citizens”, rhetoric that ultimately led to an 3) Disinformation narratives were not spread on insurrection at the US Capitol on 6 January 2021. a single platform but often appeared across In this Hybrid CoE Working Paper, we evaluate multiple platforms. This made it difficult to how disinformation has evolved from 2016 to remove conspiracy theories or disinformation as 2020. We define “disinformation” as the purposeful they emerged online, since information opera- spread of false, misleading, or exaggerated con- tions often extended beyond the remit of a tent online, or the use of fake accounts or pages single platform to respond. designed to purposefully manipulate or mislead 4) Social media platforms did not take action users. Using the 2020 election in the United States quickly enough against groups and online as our case study, we examine how the actors, communities that encouraged and coordinated strategies, and tactics for spreading disinformation the authentic bottom-up spread of disinforma- have evolved over the past four years, and discuss tion. These entities were the primary drivers of the direction that future policymaking should take key disinformation campaigns, which spilled into to address contemporary trends in information offline action, including #StopTheSteal. operations. Our data and examples are drawn from 5) While recommendation algorithms are founda- the research and analysis we conducted as part of tional to the business models of social media the Election Integrity Partnership, facilitated by the platforms, algorithms can also amplify 1 Silverman, Mac, and Lytvynenko, ‘Facebook Knows It Was Used To Help Incite The Capitol Insurrection’. 2 Bradshaw et al., ‘Election Delegitimization’. 3 Paul, ‘TikTok: False Posts about US Election Reach Hundreds of Thousands’. 7 disinformation and reinforce viewpoints within look realistic – the use of AI remained largely certain groups of users. Some election delegit- untapped during the 2020 US presidential imization narratives were picked up and election. Sometimes, AI would be used for recommended by platform algorithms. deception – to create fake profile photos of a 6) Many disinformation actors leveraged images, person who does not exist to make inauthentic videos and ephemeral content to create accounts appear real. However, no large-scale highly engaging posts, and elicit strong emo- disinformation campaigns or viral content relied tional responses in stories that often disap- primarily on the use of these technologies. peared after 24 hours. Researchers, fact- checkers, and even social media platforms Given growing concerns over the misuse of social themselves found it difficult to moderate or media platforms, the companies themselves have track the origin, spread and impact of this adopted a series of measures designed to limit the specific disinformation tactic. harms of disinformation. These strategies have 7) Video streaming platforms which were used to ranged from improving both human and auto- livestream content blended disinformation and mated content moderation capabilities to investing conspiracy into online talk shows, often broad- in fact-checking initiatives, or labelling information casting to millions of people in real time. The sources to help users distinguish trustworthy real-time nature of this content combined with entities from dubious ones. 4 In the lead-up to the the fact that shows could be an hour-long 2020 US presidential election, social media plat- segment with only a brief mention of a con- forms also introduced election-specific policies spiracy theory introduced a range of moderation that addressed content meant to stagnate the challenges that platforms were not prepared spread of election-related mis- and disinformation, to address. such as claims delegitimizing election results or 8) Narratives moderated by mainstream platforms calls to interfere with voting operations through would reappear in extremist communities violence.5 However, despite these initiatives, the online, which drew a large number of followers spread of disinformation continues to disrupt dem- who were similarly removed from mainstream ocratic deliberation online. We identify four areas platforms. Extremist communities, like Parler, in which policies were inadequate to address the Gab, 4chan or 8chan, take a laissez-faire realized dynamics: approach to content moderation, which allowed for disinformation and conspiracy to continue 1) The most salient disinformation narratives were to find a home online. coordinated by authentic users, rather than 9) Certain communities of users – like diaspora fake, inauthentic accounts. While platforms have communities – communicated through developed and implemented policies designed encrypted platforms, where harmful disinfor- to target inauthentic behaviour, decisions were mation about the legitimacy of the election much slower and more difficult when real users spread. The encrypted nature of the platforms were involved. made this content much harder to track. Addi- 2) While platforms have policies targeting tionally, the organic trust engendered within election
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Disinformation in the Cyber Domain: Detection, Impact, and Counter-Strategies1
    24th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium ‘Managing Cyber Risk to Mission’ Disinformation in the Cyber Domain: Detection, Impact, and Counter-Strategies1 Ritu Gill, PhD Judith van de Kuijt, MA Defence R&D Canada Netherlands Organization-Applied Scientific Research [email protected] [email protected] Magnus Rosell, PhD Ronnie Johannson, PhD Swedish Defence Research Agency Swedish Defence Research Agency [email protected] [email protected] Abstract The authors examined disinformation via social media and its impact on target audiences by conducting interviews with Canadian Armed Forces and Royal Netherlands Army subject matter experts. Given the pervasiveness and effectiveness of disinformation employed by adversaries, particularly during major national events such as elections, the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, and the Malaysian Airlines Flight 17, this study assessed several aspects of disinformation including i) how target audiences are vulnerable to disinformation, ii) which activities are affected by disinformation, iii) what are the indicators of disinformation, and iv) how to foster resilience to disinformation in the military and society. Qualitative analyses of results indicated that in order to effectively counter disinformation the focus needs to be on identifying the military’s core strategic narrative and reinforcing the larger narrative in all communications rather than continuously allocating valuable resources to actively refute all disinformation. Tactical messages that are disseminated should be focused on supporting the larger strategic narrative. In order to foster resilience to disinformation for target audiences, inoculation is key; inoculation can be attained through education as part of pre-deployment training for military, as well as public service announcements via traditional formats and through social media for the public, particularly during critical events such as national elections.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Brand Disinformation Impact Study January 2019
    2019 Brand Disinformation Impact Study January 2019 New Knowledge’s annual consumer study draws the connection between disinformation and the impact it has on brand reputation through the eyes of the everyday consumer. 2019 Brand Disinformation Impact Study What is the cost of trust in the digital age? This is the question that many brand executives ask themselves today as the way we consume and retain information evolves to keep up with technology. New Knowledge 2 2019 Brand Disinformation Impact Study But as more ways to access information arise, so too do the external forces that work to manipulate our information ecosystem, and make us question what is real and what is fake. New Knowledge 3 Introduction The threat of disinformation has New Knowledge recently partnered come front and center, as politics, with Survata to conduct an online institutions and brands face the consumer survey. The goal was to consequences of having few processes obtain a better understanding of what in place to defend information integrity consumers think about disinformation against false narratives and and its potential impact on highly- coordinated amplification. And the visible brand names. It was conducted impact is critical for brands, including in early January, 2019 with 1,500 brand reputation damage, and lost American consumers between the customers. Beyond the risk of ages of 18 and 65. The following is an in damaged brand reputation, is the depth look at the results. larger risk: loss of public trust. Trust cannot be bought or won. Brands know it takes transparency, and years of known, reputable work in the market to generate brand affinity.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Communication CHALLENGES
    30YEARS OF PUBLIC COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES Club of Venice 1986-2016 30YEARS OF PUBLIC COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES Club of Venice 1986-2016 TABLE OF CONTENT YEARS OF 30PUBLIC COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES This book was published in November 2016 on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the Club of Venice. The contributions in this book reflect only the views of their respective authors. This publication has no commercial intent and cannot be used for any commercial purpose without prior agreement from its publishers. Published with the financial support of the Belgian State (Chancellery of the Prime Minister), the Government Offices of Sweden (Communications Division), the Government of the Italian Republic (Presidency of the Council of Ministers – Department for European Policies), the Ministry of General Affairs of the Netherlands (Public Information and Communication Office) and the European Parliament. Coordination: Philippe Caroyez, Hans Brunmayr, Vincenzo Le Voci Responsible editor: Belgian State – Chancellery of the Prime Minister Legal deposit: D/2016/9737/10 November 2016 Graphic design: Fabienne Bonnoron TABLE OF CONTENT FOREWORD Sandro Gozi 7 INTrodUCTION 8 Thirty years dedicated to a certain idea of Europe Stefano Rolando 8 The cardinal virtues of the Club of Venice... Philippe Caroyez 11 Fighting against fear and winning back confidence in Europe Aurelio Sahagún Pool 18 Sharing best practices in communicating on Europe for the sake of all its citizens Zvonimir Frka-Petešić 20 “Opening the space” and developing together Heike Thiele
    [Show full text]
  • Eeas Special Report Update: Short Assessment of Narratives and Disinformation Around the Covid-19 Pandemic (Update 23 April – 18 May)
    EEAS SPECIAL REPORT UPDATE: SHORT ASSESSMENT OF NARRATIVES AND DISINFORMATION AROUND THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC (UPDATE 23 APRIL – 18 MAY) Note: The objective of this report is to provide a snapshot overview of the current trends and insights into disinformation activities related to COVID-19. It does not provide a comprehensive or complete overview and focusses primarily on the external dimension, in line with the European External Action Service (EEAS) mandate. The report was authored by the EEAS Strategic Communications and Information Analysis Division, which contributes to the EU’s efforts to counter disinformation, including through detection, analysis and exposure of disinformation campaigns. In addressing disinformation and identifying and analyzing disinformation surrounding the COVID -19 outbreak, the EEAS is working closely with the European Commission, European Parliament services and EU Member States. The EEAS also cooperates on this issue with international partners (G7, NATO and non-state actors). The results are regularly published on the website of EEAS, EUvsDisinfo.eu and social media channels. Insights are shared with EU institutions and EU Member States in real time, including through the Rapid Alert System on Disinformation. SUMMARY In line with the previous EEAS Special Reports and based on publicly available information, this edition gives an overview of recent developments around COVID-19 related disinformation. The report focusses on foreign state and non-state actors trying to exploit the uncertainty in societies as well as people’s fears and insecurities to advance their own agenda. While misinformation and disinformation1 relating to issues surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic have continued to spread across the globe, the volume has – according to our findings – shown at least a temporary decrease during the period observed, alongside a general downward trend on COVID-19 related web searches2.
    [Show full text]
  • How Weaponizing Disinformation Can Bring Down a City's Power Grid
    How weaponizing disinformation can bring down a city's power grid Gururaghav Ramana, Bedoor AlSheblib,y, Marcin Waniekb,y, Talal Rahwanb,*, and Jimmy Chih-Hsien Penga,* aDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore bComputer Science, New York University, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates * Joint corresponding authors. E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] yEqually contributing authors Abstract Social technologies have made it possible to propagate disinformation and manipulate the masses at an unprecedented scale. This is particularly alarming from a security perspective, as humans have proven to be the weakest link when protecting critical infrastructure in general, and the power grid in particular. Here, we consider an attack in which an adver- sary attempts to manipulate the behavior of energy consumers by sending fake discount notifications encouraging them to shift their consumption into the peak-demand period. We conduct surveys to assess the propen- sity of people to follow-through on such notifications and forward them to their friends. This allows us to model how the disinformation propagates through social networks. Finally, using Greater London as a case study, we show that disinformation can indeed be used to orchestrate an attack wherein unwitting consumers synchronize their energy-usage patterns, re- sulting in blackouts on a city-scale. These findings demonstrate that in an era when disinformation can be weaponized, system vulnerabilities arise arXiv:1908.02589v1 [cs.SI] 1 Aug 2019 not only from the hardware and software of critical infrastructure, but also from the behavior of the consumers. Introduction Social technologies have dramatically altered the ways in which conflicts are fought.
    [Show full text]
  • Disinformation Attack: How to Respond
    DISINFORMATION ATTACK: HOW TO RESPOND ANNELI AHONEN JANIS RUNGULIS EEAS EAST STRATCOM TASK FORCE EAST STRATCOM TASK FORCE MANDATE Communicating Strengthening Forecasting & OBJECTIVES EU policies media responding to effectively environment disinformation Go to EUvsDisinfo UNDERSTAND Disrupt public debate Undermine the Western order Exploit Project vulnerabilities worldview The information confrontation is part of Russian military doctrine and accepted by the top hierarchy of the leading Russian state-owned media "Word, camera, photo, internet: another type of weapon, another type of armed forces" Sergey Shoygu, Russian Minister of Defence RESOURCES Russia spends 1.3 billion EUR annually on official outlets 325 million EUR annually are given to Rossiya segodnya and RT RT operates in 100 countries Sputnik is available in more than 30 languages NARRATIVES The Elites vs. the People Threatened values ("Elites manipulate elections") ("Gays and lesbians issue dictates") Lost sovereignty Imminent collapse ("EU is occupied by the US") ("EU MS on the verge of civil war") HAHAGANDA HAHAGANDA HAHAGANDA HAHAGANDA HAHAGANDA MESSAGES IDENTIFY Hints HINTS Emotions Grammar URL Other articles Authors Activity CHECK European Commission: Euromyths European Parliament Think Tank: Disinformation Bellingcat DFR Lab IFCN The Insider Stopfake Polygraph EUvsDisinfo RESPOND SCENARIO You work for a local office of an international organization in a country of "strategic interest" to Russia. Your organization deals with healthcare issues. Recently your organization has been outspoken about the importance of vaccinations despite the growing resistance among local people. Monday. 9:30 Your local colleagues inform you that your organization has been mentioned in an article on a local fringe website 10:00 You check the website.
    [Show full text]
  • Disinformation in the Cyber Domain: Detection, Impact, and Counter-Strategies
    EasyChair Preprint № 1809 Disinformation in the Cyber Domain: Detection, Impact, and Counter-Strategies Ritu Gill, Judith van de Kuijt, Magnus Rossell and Ronnie Johansson EasyChair preprints are intended for rapid dissemination of research results and are integrated with the rest of EasyChair. October 31, 2019 24th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium ‘Managing Cyber Risk to Mission’ Disinformation in the Cyber Domain: Detection, Impact, and Counter-Strategies1 Ritu Gill, PhD Judith van de Kuijt, MA Defence R&D Canada Netherlands Organization-Applied Scientific Research [email protected] [email protected] Magnus Rosell, PhD Ronnie Johannson, PhD Swedish Defence Research Agency Swedish Defence Research Agency [email protected] [email protected] Abstract The authors examined disinformation via social media and its impact on target audiences by conducting interviews with Canadian Armed Forces and Royal Netherlands Army subject matter experts. Given the pervasiveness and effectiveness of disinformation employed by adversaries, particularly during major national events such as elections, the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, and the Malaysian Airlines Flight 17, this study assessed several aspects of disinformation including i) how target audiences are vulnerable to disinformation, ii) which activities are affected by disinformation, iii) what are the indicators of disinformation, and iv) how to foster resilience to disinformation in the military and society. Qualitative analyses of results indicated that in order to effectively counter disinformation the focus needs to be on identifying the military’s core strategic narrative and reinforcing the larger narrative in all communications rather than continuously allocating valuable resources to actively refute all disinformation.
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic Networks Are Vulnerable to Disinformation Attacks
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Trafc networks are vulnerable to disinformation attacks Marcin Waniek1, Gururaghav Raman2, Bedoor AlShebli1,3, Jimmy Chih‑Hsien Peng2* & Talal Rahwan1* Disinformation continues to raise concerns due to its increasing threat to society. Nevertheless, a threat of a disinformation‑based attack on critical infrastructure is often overlooked. Here, we consider urban trafc networks and focus on fake information that manipulates drivers’ decisions to create congestion at a city scale. Specifcally, we consider two complementary scenarios, one where drivers are persuaded to move towards a given location, and another where they are persuaded to move away from it. We study the optimization problem faced by the adversary when choosing which streets to target to maximize disruption. We prove that fnding an optimal solution is computationally intractable, implying that the adversary has no choice but to settle for suboptimal heuristics. We analyze one such heuristic, and compare the cases when targets are spread across the city of Chicago vs. concentrated in its business district. Surprisingly, the latter results in more far‑reaching disruption, with its impact felt as far as 2 km from the closest target. Our fndings demonstrate that vulnerabilities in critical infrastructure may arise not only from hardware and software, but also from behavioral manipulation. Te ubiquity of social media and the internet has made it easier than ever to spread disinformation 1–4. Exacer- bating this phenomenon are the recent advances in machine learning and the rise of social bots, allowing (dis) information to be delivered to a target audience at an unprecedented scale 1,5,6.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Media Weaponization the Biohazard of Russian Disinformation Campaigns
    Senior Airman Marcel Williams, 27th Special Operations Wing public affairs broadcaster, speaks at “Gathering for Unity” event at Cannon Air Force Base, New Mexico, June 5, 2020, and shares experiencing racism in his own community (U.S. Air Force/Lane T. Plummer) Social Media Weaponization The Biohazard of Russian Disinformation Campaigns By Sarah Jacobs Gamberini n a renewed era of Great Power com- competitors are regularly operating allowed for nearly ubiquitous access to petition, the United States is faced below the threshold that would warrant its targets and a prolific capability for I with adversaries engaging across mul- a military response, including on the controlling a narrative and manipu- tiple domains without the traditional information battlefield. The blurred red lating the hearts and minds of a pop- distinctions of war and peace. America’s lines that result from covert informa- ulation on a range of sensitive societal tion operations waged by foreign actors issues, including public health. on the Internet will force a change in Russia has a long history of seeking how the United States operates and to project power and influence while Sarah Jacobs Gamberini is a Policy Fellow in how its society consumes information. playing with a technological and geopo- the Center for the Study of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Institute for National Strategic Russia used tactics of influence and litical handicap. Given its history and a Studies, at the National Defense University. coercion long before social media geographic location with many bordering 4 Forum / Social Media Weaponization JFQ 99, 4th Quarter 2020 nations, it sees itself as constantly be- encroachment from the United States region.9 Since the end of the Cold War, sieged from all sides, but particularly by and the North Atlantic Treaty Orga- Russia has had to be calculating and the West.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Disinformation Attacks on Elections: Lessons from Europe
    RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION ATTACKS ON ELECTIONS: LESSONS FROM EUROPE HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE, EURASIA, ENERGY, AND THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION July 16, 2019 Serial No. 116–55 Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs ( Available: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/, http://docs.house.gov, or http://www.govinfo.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 37–051PDF WASHINGTON : 2019 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York, Chairman BRAD SHERMAN, California MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas, Ranking GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York Member ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia STEVE CHABOT, Ohio THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida JOE WILSON, South Carolina KAREN BASS, California SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts TED S. YOHO, Florida DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois AMI BERA, California LEE ZELDIN, New York JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas JIM SENSENBRENNER, Wisconsin DINA TITUS, Nevada ANN WAGNER, Missouri ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York BRIAN MAST, Florida TED LIEU, California FRANCIS ROONEY, Florida SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania BRIAN FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania DEAN PHILLIPS, Minnesota JOHN CURTIS, Utah ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota KEN BUCK, Colorado COLIN ALLRED, Texas RON WRIGHT, Texas ANDY LEVIN, Michigan GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania ABIGAIL SPANBERGER, Virginia TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania GREG PENCE, Indiana TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey
    [Show full text]
  • Democratic Defense Against Disinformation 2.0
    Democratic Defense Against Disinformation 2.0 Alina Polyakova and Daniel Fried ISBN-13: 978-1-61977-592-3 This report is written and published in accordance with the Atlantic Council Policy on Intellectual Independence. The author is solely responsible for its analysis and recommendations. The Atlantic Council and its donors do not determine, nor do they necessarily endorse or advocate for, any of this report’s conclusions. June 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 Framing Solutions (Against a Moving Target) 1 PROGRESS REPORT 4 Europe Seeks Solutions 4 The G7 in the Game 6 The United States Tries to Get a Grip 7 Social Media Companies on the Spot 12 Civil Society Stays the Course 15 NEXT STEPS 16 The US Executive Should Get Serious 16 The US Congress Should Fill the Gap 20 Europe Should Make it Real 22 Social Media Companies Should Step Up 23 ABOUT THE AUTHORS 24 Democratic Defense Against Disinformation 2.0 INTRODUCTION his second edition of the paper, Democratic media companies, and civil-society groups invest in Defense Against Disinformation, seeks to cap- long-term resilience against disinformation, including ture the rapid development of policy responses raising social awareness of disinformation and encour- to the challenge—especially by governments aging digital literacy education, including how to dis- Tand social media companies—since initial publication cern fabricated or deceptive content and sources. in February 2018. The authors stand by the fundamen- tals of the earlier analysis and recommendations: that Democratic Defense Against Disinformation 2.0 will re- democratic societies can combat and mitigate the view developments over the past year, assess their ef- challenge of foreign disinformation while working with- fectiveness thus far, and offer suggestions for next steps.
    [Show full text]
  • Download the Report
    Ai in the Age of Cyber-Disorder Actors, Trends, and Prospects edited by Fabio Rugge © 2020 Ledizioni LediPublishing Via Antonio Boselli, 10 – 20136 Milan – Italy www.ledizioni.it [email protected] Ai In The Age Of Cyber-Disorder: Actors, Trends, And Prospects Edited by Fabio Rugge First edition: November 2020 Print ISBN 9788855263832 ePub ISBN 9788855263849 Pdf ISBN 9788855263856 DOI 10.14672/55263832 ISPI. Via Clerici, 5 20121, Milan www.ispionline.it Catalogue and reprints information: www.ledizioni.it This Report is realized with the support of the Policy Planning Unit of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation pursuant to art. 23-bis of Presidential Decree 18/1967. The opinions contained in this Report are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, ISPI, and The Brookings Institution. The Report is produced within the framework of the activities of the Centre on Cybersecurity, jointly promoted by ISPI and Leonardo. The Brookings Institution is a nonprofit organization devoted to independent research and policy solutions. Its mission is to conduct high-quality, independent research and, based on that research, to provide innovative, practical recommendations for policymakers and the public. Table of Contents Introduction John R. Allen, Giampiero Massolo............................................ 8 1. AI in a Contested Cyberspace Fabio Rugge................................................................................... 12 Cybersecurity in AI National Strategies Thomas A. Campbell..................................................................56 2. Panopticon 2.0? AI Enabled Surveillance Practices in Authoritarian Regimes Samuele Dominioni.................................................................. 63 3. How AI Bots and Voice Assistants Reinforce Gender Bias Caitlin Chin, Mishaela Robison.......................................... 82 4.
    [Show full text]