The Escalating Battle Against Disinformation in a Digitally-Driven World

 Privacy Plus+

Privacy, Technology and Perspective

The Escalating Battle Against Disinformation in a Digitally-Driven World. This week, as society grapples with the pernicious rise of disinformation, we'll dissect the rebirth of debates surrounding this issue, poised to become more prevalent and vicious than ever before.

Background: It's important to understand the distinction between misinformation and disinformation. “Misinformation” refers to the unintentional dissemination of false information due to lack of knowledge or misunderstanding. Anyone can make a mistake and pass on misinformation without realizing it. What’s more, anyone can enjoy a shocking horror story or teaser (“clickbait”) with no real harm done. On the other hand, “disinformation” involves the deliberate creation and circulation of false information with an intention to deceive or mislead, often driven by malicious motives. While misinformation can be an innocent mistake, disinformation, a practice as old as propaganda itself, reached unprecedented levels during recent elections and the pandemic.

Today, as people struggle to find common ground on basic facts, differentiating between lies, distortions, and free-speech opinions has become harder than ever. Considering the First Amendment was established to safeguard unpopular speech from governmental censorship, any opposition, regardless of how ludicrous, offensive, or irrational it may be, is often labelled as 'censorship.' Consequently, the First Amendment has become a barrier to those combating disinformation.

Once More, with Feeling:  Disinformation was widely discussed through the last election and the pandemic.  However, the topic seemed to be receding from public view until recently as technological advancements, particularly in artificial intelligence (AI), coupled with increasing partisan and geopolitical pressures, have set the stage for a resurgence of disinformation.  AI's ability to cheaply and effectively fabricate convincing counterfeit images, videos, and audio create a new and dangerous dimension.

Here in the U.S., censorship debates are flaring up, accompanied by an assault on the study of disinformation.  The  House Judiciary Committee is launching investigations into independent think tanks, foundations, and universities who are researching the transmission and effect of disinformation.  This has resulted in subpoenas and investigative demands directed at these institutions, causing undue strain and disruption. You can read more about this here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/19/technology/gop-disinformation-researchers-2024-election.html?searchResultPosition=1

In addition, Judge Terry Doughty of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, which the Times calls “a favored venue for legal challenges against the Biden Administration,” has preliminarily enjoined numerous federal agencies from contacting social media companies for the purpose of “encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal…of content containing protected speech.”  You can read his opinion here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/75e9f7a3-da4e-45af-8430-6eeba37eaf9f.pdf?itid=lk_interstitial_manual_30

Internationally, political motives continue to stoke the fire of disinformation. Scott Galloway, a professor at NYU, surmises that Russia, in its desperation to win the war in Ukraine, may resort to large-scale disinformation campaigns aimed at swaying U.S. public opinion in favor of U.S. withdrawal from Ukraine.

Our view:  Truth is a cornerstone to civil society.  Historically, the remedy for false speech was more speech—that is, the propagation of more accurate information. However, with the advent of disruptive technology and the apparent abdication of responsibility by major social media platforms, the efficacy of this approach is in question as you can read in the following article:  

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/24/you-think-the-internet-is-a-clown-show-now-social-media-trust-safety-meta-instagram

 

As we think about effective countermeasures, we propose exploring the potential of utilizing existing legislation against disinformation propagators who engage in fraudulent commercial practices. Although laws like Section 43(a) do not apply to political speech, they do extend to commercial advertising. Could it be possible to combat disinformation at its source by invoking these laws and similar ones like RICO (wire fraud is a predicate act)?

--- 

Hosch & Morris, PLLC is a boutique law firm dedicated to data privacy and protection, cybersecurity, the Internet and technology. Open the Future℠.

 

 

Previous
Previous

Top 5 Questions Every CISO Should Ask

Next
Next

SolarWinds Executives May Face Personal Liability as SEC Issues Wells Notices