Category Archives: Fake News

HOUSTON, TX When people use the term nuclear option this tends to involve the most extreme, the most desperate measure available for use. The modern lexicon has multiple uses for the nuclear option. Should one go to that sage source of all knowledge, Wikipedia, you will receive a brief overview about the nuclear option as a procedure in the US Senate. There are also other various references to using the nuclear option. Most of this stems from the fact that nuclear weapons are considered the ultimate in firepower and for those countries who have them, there is always that option.

However, lest we dwell on the ramifications of thousands of nuclear warheads detonating across the globe, bringing about such charming concepts as nuclear fallout/winter, mass extinction and the end of life on the planet, lets move on to other, more important topics. By this, we mean the trench-warfare stand-off between Deshaun Watson and the Houston Texans. You remember Watson, right? The fourth string quarterback and back-up non-contact safety who has only suited up in pads once at Training Camp. Oh, yeah, he was a starting QB for the team, allegedly.

There was quite the to-do when people at the Texans training camp on Monday saw the fourth stringer (or second-string non-contact safety if we want to be a little more charitable) have a discussion with the most powerful velociraptor in the NFL, Nick Caserio. While official sources did not report on what was said, we at Totally Not Fake News, using our own special and possibly, somewhat, kinda-sorta-but-maybe-not-entirely-but-well-say-they-are legal listening devices means were able to gleam what the two entities discussed:

Watson: Hey, Nick, did you trade me yet?

Caserio: No

Watson: You gonna trade me today?

Caserio: No

Watson: You gonna trade me tomorrow?

Caserio: No

Watson: You gonna trade me at some point soon?

Caserio: No

Watson: Youre funnybut no, seriously, when are you gonna trade

Caserio: No.

Watson: Ok[inaudible]well, when you come around, give me call at the following. Got a great massag[CENSORED SO THAT WE DONT GET SUED VIOLATE HIPAA ISSUES]

To recap, since the early stages of the off-season, #4 as declared that he wanted out of Houston, requesting, nay, demanding a trade. Thus far, the team has not traded the back-up non-contact safety, as apparently, other teams are realizing the Texans do not have the previous GM on the team.

Non-contact, back-up safeties who can also play fourth string quarterbacks dont just grow on trees ya know. If you think we are trading that valuable camp asset for anything less than a franchise-altering level of draft picks, well, we cant help you on that one observed a spokesperson for Nick Caserio.

However, the long stalemate is apparently wearing on all parties. Coach Culley, in an effort to save his voice, is taking to placing a laminated card on his podium for press conferences that reads as follows:

For All Questions About the 4th string QB/2nd string non-contact safety, please refer to one of the following responses:

A) Nothing has changed

B) No comment

Saw that [Easterby] card at least 25 times in the last press conference observed a lesser press entity that was clearly not the great and glorious Totally Not Fake News.

As for the multiple-faceted camp asset, there is growing frustration in his camp. [Easterby], I thought the team was for sure gonna free him by now observed an anonymous consultant to #4. First, we made the public pronouncementshe even removed all references on SOCIAL MEDIA.in 2021, that is like a living death, man! Then, after what we saw the Stafford and Wentz deals, we thought for sure that we was gonna be gone, hopefully to a great city/organization. Hey, they might have gotten some decent picks, dont know. Couldve been the big win/win they always talk aboutah well.

When asked about the various allegations, the consultant went into conniptions You mean the FALSE allegations. They didnt happen, they cant prove it, my employer/bill-payer is completely and totally innocent. FAKE NEWS!!!

After he calmed down for a bitWell, to be honest, we felt that this could still have worked to our advantage. The team, which is so big on character and morality wouldve been thrilled, or so we thought, to get rid of a so-called predator. Ship him out, get him off the books and move onbut Oh nothey want this whole fair value thing. Either that, or they are still holding to that pronouncement that Watson is The Chosen One. Ordained by the one true prophet of the Texans that will lead the blessed Texans to the Promised Landor some bull[Easterby] like that.

The consultant appeared deflated. Yet, here we are. The team aint lettin him go, and #4 gotta go clock ingotta pay the bills. I mean, we may, not that we want to, but we may have to look at thethenuclear option.

Thus, the following exchange occurred:

TNFN Reporter: You want to end the filibuster for the Texans?Anonymous Consultant: What? No! This team is a theocracy. There aint no filibusters in the Bible.

TNFN Reporter: You have actual nukes?Anonymous Consultant: No! [Easterby] no! Besides, radioactive fallout could really hinder my clients [CENSORED]

TNFN Reporter: So, what exactly is this nuclear option that you speak of?

The consultant was not at liberty to say, but he did reveal that they think they figured out the critical node for targeting.

The teams center of gravity is its spiritual advisor and his message. Disrupt that, or shock the [Easterby] out of that and #4 will be as free as a jaybirdmoney and all.

How could #4 employ the nuclear option to maximum effect? We have unconfirmed reports that the following transcribed soundtrack was playing at his residence around midnight. The transcript was a little incomplete, as there were sounds of what seemed like dying animals, but we could get the following:

ALL HAIL SATAN!!!! All HAIL THE FALLEN ANGEL!!! ALL HAIL THE MORNING STAR!!! ALL HAIL

[Editors note: The rest was drowned out by indiscriminate noise of some sort of life form(s)we arent sure.]

[Editors 2nd note: Our sound technician has suddenly taken to a habit of eating raw hamburger meatwe arent sure why].

Whatever option, if any are deployed, we at Totally Not Fake News will relay that information, provided our staff are located at a minimum safe distance.

Read this article:

Totally Not Fake News: The Nuclear Option - Battle Red Blog

Political misinformation whether "fake news," conspiracy theories or outright lying has often been attributed to widespread ignorance, even though there are numerous examples of 20th-century propaganda aimed at those most attentive to politics. Books like Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent" began to challenge that notion, as did the 1991 study of media coverage of the first Gulf War with the memorable bottom line, "the more you watch, the less you know."In the age of social media, scholarlyexplanations have shifted to discussions of "motivated reasoning," which could be defined byPaul Simon's line from "The Boxer": "A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."

But the ignorance perspective has a deep hold on us because it appeals to the Enlightenment notion that we aremotivated to pursue truth. We are"the thinking animal," right? The important part of that expression may be "animal." Human beingshave an evolutionary history, and deception is commonplace in the animal world because it confers evolutionary advantage. There's good reason to believe we're not so different, other than thefact that humans are ultra-social creatures. In ancestral and evolutionary terms, being part of a successfulsocial group was every bitas essential as food and water. So deception among humans evolved from group conflicts. That's the thesis of a recent paper called "The Evolutionary Psychology of Conflict and the Functions of Falsehood" by the Danish political scientists Michael Bang Petersen and Mathias Osmundsen and American anthropologist John Tooby.

While the paper alignswith the "motivated reasoning" perspective, its focus goes deeper than the psychological mechanisms that produce and reproduce false information. These researchers are tryingto elucidate the functions of those mechanisms, that is, to answer the question of why they evolved in the first place. I interviewed Petersen three years ago, about a previous paper, "A 'Need for Chaos' and the Sharing of Hostile Political Rumors in Advanced Democracies," which wassummarized on Twitter thusly: "Many status-obsessed, yet marginalized individuals experience a 'Need for Chaos' and want to 'watch the world burn.'" That paperprovided crucial insight intoprolific spreaders of misinformation and why they do what they do. But that individualist account was only part of the story. Thisnew paper seeks to illuminatesthe evolutionary foundations and social processes involved in the spread of outright falsehoods. So I had another long conversationwith Petersen,edited as usual for clarity and length.

Over the past decade or so, it's become more common to regard the spread of political misinformation, or "political rumors," as they're sometimes called, as theresult of "motivated reasoning" rather than ignorance. But your new paperproposesa broad evolutionary account of the social functions behind that motivated reasoning. Tell meabout what led you to writing it, and what you set out to do?

One of our major goals with this research is to try to understand why it is that people believe things that other people believe are completely bizarre. I think it's clear for everyone that that problem has gained more prominence within the last few decades, especially with the advent of social media. It seems that thosekind of belief systems belief in information and content thatother people would say isblatantly false is becoming more widespread. It can havesome pretty dire consequences, as we could seefor examplewith the storming of the Capitol on Jan.6.

Sowhat we're trying to understand is, why people believe things that must be false.The traditional narrative is, 'Well if you believe false things, then you must be stupid. It must be because you haven't really made an effort to actually figure out what is going on." But over the last few decades, more and more research has accumulated that suggests that's not the case. Infact the people who are responsible for spreading misinformation are not those who know the least about politics. They actually know quite a lot about politics. In that sense, knowledge doesn't guard against believing things that are false.

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

What we're trying to do is to say, "Well, if it's not because people are ignorant, then what is it?" Inorder to understand that, we utilize the framework of evolutionary psychology, basically trying to understand: Could there be anything adaptive about believing false information?Could this in some way be functional?Is it actually sort of on purpose that false information is believed andspread, rather than being an accident?

Before you discuss human evolution, you have a section of nonhuman animals. What can we learn from deception and conflict in the animal world?

I think that's an important stepping stone, to look at the animal world, because most people would say that what animals do isthe products of biological evolution, and has some sort of evolutionary advantage. And what we can see in animals is that they spread false information all the time when they are engaged in conflict.

One sort of obvious exampleis that animals try to appear larger than they are when they are engaged in conflict with other animals. That's, of course, tosend a signal to the other animals that you shouldn't mess with me and if we actually get into a real fight I will win. So animals are trying to get an upper hand in conflict situations by making false signals.

Sohow does thatchange, ornot change, when we look athumans?

First, that is also what we should expect that humans do, that if they cansendfalse signals that are advantageous to them, then they should do it. What we then discussis that there are certain constraints on the degree of falsehood in animal communication. That constraint is that communication systems evolved in the first place because they are a helpful for both individuals or both organisms involved in the exchange. So before a communication system can evolve it should beadaptive for the sender andfor the receiver. That means that even in conflict situations you cannot set up blatant falsehoods. There are some kinds of reality constraints.

We are then sayingthatactually, in some situations, with regards to humans andhuman evolution, these constraints doesn't operate. That's because if we look at nonhuman animals, then the conflict is often between two individuals, but in human conflict it's often between two groups, and the members of one group, are cooperating with each other against the other group. That meansthere might be certain advantages, within one group, to spread misinformation and spread falsehoods, if that can give them an upper hand in the conflict with the other group. Then we go on to discuss a number of ways in which that might be true.

You identify three functions of information sharing: group mobilization for conflict, coordination of attention, and signaling commitment. You argue that accomplishing these goals efficiently is what gets selected, in evolutionary terms, not truth or veracity. Canyou give an example of each, starting with mobilization?

When you want to mobilize your group, what you need to do isfind out that we are facing a problem, and your way of describing that problem needs to be as attention-grabbing as possiblebefore you can get the group to focus on the same thing. In that context, reality is seldom as juicy as fiction. By enhancing the threat for example, by saying things that are not necessarily true then you are in a better situation to mobilize and coordinate the attention of your own group. The key thing is that itmay actually be toyour group's advantage that if everyone isin agreement that we don't like these other guys, then we make sure that everyone is paying attention to this other group. Soby exaggerating the actual threat posed by the other group, you can gain more effective mobilization.

The key to understand why thismakes sense, why this is functional, is that one needs to distinguish between interests and attention.A group can have a joint set of interests, such as, "Well, we don't like this other group, wethink we should deal with this other group in in some way." But on top of that interest or set of interests, there is the whole coordination problem. You need to get everyone to agree that this is the time to deal with that problem. It's now, and we need to deal with it in this way. It's in thatsort of negotiation process whereit can be in everyone's interest to exaggerate the threat beyond reality, to make sure that everyone gets the message.

You've more or lessanswered my next question about coordination. So what about signaling commitment? How does falsehood play a role there?

I think these are the two major problems, the mobilization on the one part and then the signaling on the other part. When you're a member of the group, then you need other group members to help you. In order for that to take place, you need to signal that, "Well, I'm a loyal member of this group. I would help you guys if you were in trouble, so now you need to help me."

Humans are constantly focused on signals of loyalty: "Are they loyal members of the group?" and "How can I signal that I'm a loyal member?" There are al sorts of ways in which we do that. We take on particular clothes, we have gang tattoosand all sorts of physical ways of expressing loyalty with the group.

But because we humans are exceptionally complex, another way to signal our loyalty is throughthe beliefs that we hold. We can signal loyalty to a group by having a certain set of beliefs, and then the question is, "Well, what is the type of belief through which we can signal that we belong?" First of all, it should be a belief that other people are not likely to have, because if everyone has this belief, then it's not a very good signal of group loyalty. It needs to be something that other people in other groups do not have. The basic logic at work here is that anyone can believe the truth, but only loyal members of the group can believe something that is blatantly false.

There is a selection pressure to develop beliefs or develop a psychology thatscansfor beliefs that are so bizarre and extraordinary that no one would come up with them by themselves. This would signal, "Well, I belong to this group. I know what this group is about. I have been with this group for a long time," because you would not be able to hold this beliefwithout that prehistory.

I believe we can see this in a lot of the conspiracy theories that are going around, like the QAnon conspiracy theory. I think we can see it in religious beliefs too, becausea lot of religious beliefs are really bizarre when you look at them. One example that we give in the text is the notion of the divine Trinity in Christianity, which has this notion that God is both one and three at the same time. You would never come up with this notion on your own.You would only come up with that if you were actually socialized into a Christian religious group. So that's a very good signal:"Well, that's a proper Christian."

Right. I was raised Unitarian. As a secular Jew in Northern California at that time, the only place we could have a home was a Unitarian fellowship. It was filled with secular Jews,definitely not "proper Christians."

Yes, I went to a private Catholic school myself, so I've been exposed to my portion of religious beliefs as well. But there's another aspect that's very important when it comes to group conflict, because another very good signal that you are a loyal member is beliefs that the other group would find offensive. A good way to signal that I'm loyal to this groupandnot that groupis to take on a belief that is the exact opposite of what theother group believes. So that createspressure not only to developbizarre beliefs, but also bizarre beliefs that this other group is bad, is evil, or something really opposed to the particular values that they have.

This suggests that there arefunctional reasons for both spreading falsehoods, and alsosignaling these falsehoods. I think one of the key insights is that we need to think about beliefs in another way than we often do. Quite often we think about the beliefs that we have as representations of reality, so the reason why we have the beliefis to navigate the world. Because of that, there needs to be a pretty good fit or match between the content of our beliefs and the features of reality.

But what we are arguing is that a lot of beliefs don't really exist for navigating the world. They exist for social reasons, because they allow us to accomplish certain socially important phenomena, such as mobilizing our group or signaling that we're loyal members of the group. This means that becausethe function of the beliefs is not to represent reality, their veracity or truth value is not really an important feature.

In the section "Falsehoods as Tools for Coordination" you discuss Donald Horowitz's book, "The Deadly Ethnic Riot."What does that tell usabout the role offalsehood in setting up the preconditions for ethnic violence?

"The Deadly Ethnic Riot"is an extremely disturbing book. It's this systematic review of what we know about what happens before, duringand after ethnic massacres. I read this book when I became interested in fake news and misinformation circulating on social media, and this was recommended to me by my friend and collaborator Pascal Boyer, who is also an evolutionary psychologist. Horowitz arguesthat you cannot and do not have an ethnic massacre without a preceding period of rumor-sharing. His argument is exactly what I was trying to argue before, that the function of suchrumors isactually not to represent reality. The total function of the rumors isto organize your group and get it ready for attack. You do so by pointing out that the enemy is powerful, that it's eviland that it's ready to attack, so you need to do something now.

One of the really interesting things aboutthe analysis of rumors in this book is that, if you look at the content of the rumors, that'snot so much predicted by what the other group has done to you or to your group. It'sreally predicted bywhat you are planning to do tothe other group. So the brutality of the content of these rumors is,in a sense, part of the coordination about what we're going to do to them when we get the action going which also suggests that the function of these rumors isnot to represent reality, but to serve social functions.

What I was struck by when I read Horowitz's book was how similar the content of the rumors that he's describingin these ethnic massacres all over the world, how similar thatis to the kind of misinformation that is being circulated on social media. Thissuggests that a lot of what is going on in social media is also not driven byignorance, but by these social functions.

One point you make is that to avoid being easily contradicted or discredited, these kinds of"mobilization motivations should gravitate towards unverifiable information: Events occurring in secret, far away in time or space, behind closed doors, etc." This helps explain the appeal of conspiracy theories. How dothey fit into thispicture?

When we look at falsehoods there is a tension. Onone level, there is amotivationto make it as bizarre as possible, for all the reasons we have been talking about. Onthe other hand,if you are trying to create this situation of mobilization, you want the information to flow as unhindered as possible through the network. You want it to spread as far as possible.If you're in a situation whereeveryone is looking at a chair and you say, "Well, that chair is a rock," that's something that will hinder the flow of information, because people will say, "Well, we know that's really a chair."

So while there is this motivation or incentive to create content as bizarre as possible, there is also another pressure or another incentive toavoid thesituationwhere you're being called out by people who are not motivated to engage in the collective action. That suggests it's better to develop content about situations whereother people have a difficult time saying, "That's blatantly false." So that's why unverifiable information is the optimal kind of information, because there you can really create as bizarre content as you want, and you don't have the risk of being called out.

We see a similar kind of tactic when conspiracy theorists argue, "Well, we are only raising questions," where you are writing or spreading the informationbut you have this plausible deniability,which is also a way to avoid being called out. Conspiracy theories are notorious exactly for looking for situations that are unverifiable and where it's very difficult to verify what's up and what's down. They createthese narratives that we also seein ethnic massacres, where we have an enemy who is powerful, who is eviland who is ready to do something that's very bad. Again, that completely fits the structure of mobilizing rumors that Horowitz is focusing on. Sowhat we've been arguing, here and elsewhere, is that a lot of conspiracy theories are really attempts to mobilizeagainst the political order.

In the section "Falsehoods as Signals of Dominance" you write that "dominance can essentially be asserted by challenging others," and argue that when a given statement "contradicts a larger number of people's beliefs, it serves as a better dominance signal." I immediatelythought of Donald Trump in those terms. For example, he didn't invent birtherism, and when he latched onto it he didn't even go intothe details there were all these different versions of birther conspiracy theories, and he didn't know jack-shit about any of them. He just made these broad claims, drawing on his reputation and hisvisibility, andestablished himself as a national politicalfigure. I wonder if you can talk about that not just about Trump, but about how thatworks more generally.

Yes, I can confess that I too was thinking about Donald Trump when writing that particular section of the paper.SoI will talk a little bit about Donald Trump, but I will get to the general case. I think one of the first examples for me of that tactic was during the presidential inauguration in 2017, where the claim was that there were more people at Trump's inauguration than Obama's inauguration, and everyone could clearly seethat wasfalse.

So there are two explanations. Either Trump is ignorant and I don't believe he's ignorant, I think he is an extremely skilled or intuitive psychologist who knows how to mobilize his followers or it suggests he's thinking, "I can say whatever I want, and I care so little about the other group's opinions that I can say things that are blatantly false, wherethey know that I know it's false, and it's precisely because they know that I know that it's false that it serves as a dominancesignal."

That's why, in order to get that kind of dominance signal through, you need to find these cases where it's clear that it's not just because you're getting it wrong it's exactly because you know and you just don't care. That's the kind of signal you want to go for when you are trying to assert dominance through holding those kinds of beliefs.

You point out that for group members preparing for conflict, "signals of falsehoods are cooperative rather than conflictual." It seems to me that one of the ways your paper could be built on is tolookat other ways falsehoods enterinto the picture. For example, there are times when people deny or undercut the false claims they've made. Withthe recent spread of racist voter-suppression laws, the underlying racism helps build group solidarity and prepare for conflict, but you also constantly hear Republicansdeny any racist intention. I wonder if you have thoughts about how further work canbe done in that direction.

Just to start with that particular observation,I think with that sort of denial for example, "This is not racism, this is not sexism," orwhatever part of the function is again to have plausible deniability, whereby you can make sure that the information spreads, that everyone who needs to hear itwill hear itand it's not really being blocked. Because you could say that outright racism or outright sexism would be something that would stop the spread of the information.So people who are in a mobilization context are always caught in this cross-pressure between making sure that the signal is as loud as possible, and that it is disseminated as widely as possible. Often there is this tension between the two that you need to navigate. I think looking at and understanding that conflict and that tensionis an important theoretical next next step.

As we saynumerous times in the chapter, this is a theoretical piece where we are building a lot of hypotheses which are in need of empirical evidence. So I think one important next step is to gain and develop the empirical evidence or empirical tests of these hypotheses, to see what actually seems to hold up, and what may be misguided.

One thingI'm very interested in personally is to to look into who usesthese tactics more than others who ismost motivated to engage in these kinds of tactics to win conflict. This is a line of work that we havebeen studying,and onethingwe arefinding is that people who are seekingstatus are themost motivated touse these kinds of tactics to gain that status.

I always like to end by asking: What's the most important question I didn't ask? And what's the answer?

I think the most important questionthat you may not have asked is this: We started outtalking about motivated reasoning, so what isthe difference between what we are bringing to the table, compared to the traditional theories of motivated reasoning?Those argue that you hold certain beliefs because they feel good. You like to believe certain things about your group because it gives you self-esteem. You like to believe the other group isevil because that also helps you feel good about your group. When social scientistshave abandoned theignorance argument for those kinds of beliefs and looked into social function, then they say, "Well, the social functionof these beliefs is to make you feel good about yourself."

What we are saying is that whileit is probably true that these beliefs make you feel good about yourself,that's not really their function, that's not their real purpose. We're saying that evolution doesn't really carewhether you feel good or bad about yourself. Evolution cares about material benefits and, in the end, reproductive benefits. Sothe beliefs that you have should in some way shape real-world outcomes.

We are arguingthat these false beliefs don't just exist to make you feel good about yourself, but exist in order to enable you to make changes in the world, tomobilize your group and get help from other group members. I think that's an important pointtothink more about: What it is that certain kinds of beliefs enable people to accomplish, andnot just howit makes them feel.

See the original post here:

A terrifying new theory: Fake news and conspiracy theories as an evolutionary strategy - Salon

Just ahead of the 2016 election, former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani told the nation in a Fox News interview that the Trump campaign had a "big surprise" regarding the ginned-up Hillary Clinton email controversy. The former New York City mayor even went so far as to suggest that the FBI had been leaking info about the agency's probedirectly to Giuliani for Trump's political gain.

But according to a newly released 2018 transcript ofGiuliani's interview with Justice Department investigators probing a potential leak, it all appears to have been a complete lie.

Giuliani explained tofederal officials that it's OK to "throw a fake" while campaigning.

The revelation, first reported by The Washington Post, stems from a transcript obtained by the Project on Government Oversight of Giuliani's 2018 interview with federal officials in Trump's D.C. hotel. During the interview, FBI agents working on behalf of the Justice Department inspector general questioned the now-disbarred attorney on whether agency officials had leaked him sensitive info about Clinton's email fiasco back in 2016.

In response, Giuliani's legal counselor Marc Mukasey said that the threshold for truth-telling is much lower in campaigns than it is for typical legal affairs.

"In the heat of a political campaign, on television, I'm not saying Rudy necessarily, but everybody embellishes everything," Mukasey explained. "You're under no obligation to tell the truth."

Giuliani, a former federal prosecutor for New York City, even added: "You could throw a fake."

"Fake news, right?" a federal official asked.

"Right," Mukasey replied.

Earlier this month, the Justice Department inspector general concluded that he could not find any evidence that FBI agents leaked info about the Clinton email investigation to Giuliani, putting to rest longstanding concerns that the agency had actively undermined her candidacy.

But back in 2016, two days before then-FBI Director James B. Comey reopened a probe into Clinton's email affair, Giuliani had gone on Fox News to tell viewers that he had "a surprise or two that you're going to hear about in the next few days. I mean, I'm talking about some pretty big surprises."

Many took this claim to be indicative of a clandestine back channel between the former New York Mayor and the FBI, even though Giuliani later walked his rhetoric back as the weeks dragged on.

In 2018, during his formal interview with the FBI, Giuliani struck a different tone, claiming that Comey's probe was in fact "a shock" to him. He suggested that, at most, he may have heard control room gossip about the investigation.

The revelation is just the latest in Giuliani's string of alleged and proven improprieties before, during, and after Trump's presidency.

Back in June, the former prosecutor's law license was suspended by the state of New York over his promotion of Trump's baseless allegations of fraud in the 2020 election. Giuliani is currently facing a federal investigation into his relationship with various Ukrainian officials leading up to the 2020 election.

The former New York mayor is also said to be on the brink of bankruptcy amid a multibillion dollar defamation lawsuit leveled against him by voting technology company Dominion for pushing the erroneous notion that the firm tampered with its own vote-counting machines to sabotage Trump's political prospects.

Original post:

"Throw a fake": Rudy Giuliani reveals to FBI how he used Fox News to push lies about Hillary Clinton - Salon

In Malaysia, a game that can be played by children as young as eight has taught basic fact-checking skills on fake news about Covid-19. In Myanmar, a news outlet has produced over 400 articles in Shan, Burmese, and English to educate people on the health crisis and vaccination all while evading the states crackdown on media. In Cambodia, data visualisation has been made available to reporters and citizen journalists alike to help them make sense of Covid-19 numbers.

These are some of the quick-response projects IWPR Southeast Asia has supported as part of its work combating disinformation amid the pandemic.

There are no geographical boundaries, not even language boundaries, to misinformation and disinformation. It is a common issue of public concern, said Johanna Son of Reporting Asean: Voice and Views from Within. The project surveyed nine countries in the region, fidning that 57 per cent of respondents relied on news outlets for information about the virus, despite often finding it hard to distinguish between factual content and misinformation.

Many of the projects supported by IWPR thus focused on making accurate information more accessible.

Factual, a project launched from the Philippines, made use of a chatbot that users could interact with to ask questions related to Covid-19.

Making critical information more accessible through Facebook messenger allowed more Filipinos access to reliable and up-to-date data, said Factual's Anthony Esguerra. Our project was the first fact-checking programme to concentrate on the Filipino language by engaging using a more conversational tone, we create more allies in fighting disinformation.

The Thibi project promoted data visualisation templates, or what they described as easy-to-cook recipes for charts and scroll maps to help journalists produce effective and attractive data-driven reports without stressing about the technicalities.

We want to make data look nice, said Thibis Yang Naung Oak. We don't want people to shun data because of the number of rows and columns.

In Cambodia, two organisations the Cambodian Centre for Independent Media (CCIM) and the Womens Media Centre (WMC) produced radio shows on the pandemic.

We did three live radio shows as well as fact-checked articles on Covid-19, said WMCs Chanthol Oung, adding that the broadcasts reached 17 of Cambodias 25 provinces.

Through our radio program, True or Not, we provided reliable information on Covid-19. It also became a platform for citizens to check the information they received whether it is true or fake, added CCIMs Sothoeuth Ith.

Meanwhile, Open Development Cambodia (ODC) trained 39 citizen journalists through its Covid-19 digital hub.

We compiled and disseminated data and resources and equipped relevant stakeholders and citizens with reliable, up-to-date and complete data and information, said ODCs Julia Puig.

In Vietnam, a Facebook page on pandemic-related disinformation was set up by a department of the Ho Chi Minh National Academy of Politics. The page had 1,000 posts that included safety tips for journalists and hosted seven webinars with stakeholders such as leading medical experts, media owner, and journalists, which led to the production of a guide for best practice in both Vietnamese and English.

Fortify Rights, an advocacy group based in Thailand, documented and countered Covid-19 related attacks on refugees and migrants. As a result of its campaigning, Facebook removed 12 xenophobic pages fanning anti-migrant sentiment on its platform.

In Malaysia, the online game Choices I Make -- available in English, Malay, Tamil, and Chinese educated people on the potential consequences of disinformation on individuals and on society as a whole.

The characters and storylines were crafted to cover various ethnic groups, age groups and scenarios relevant to Malaysias handling of the pandemic, said Hazwany Jamaluddin of Malaysia Information Literacy Education. We want to enable them to navigate the infodemic by better evaluating information, especially prior to sharing it.

In Myanmar, a small group of journalists and social media specialists banded together to create True News, a Facebook group linked to three pages with the aim of fighting back against misinformation and disinformation about Covid-19.

The military coup that happened in Myanmar targeted journalists and some of our members were detained by the military and some are still in hiding for safety reasons. But we tried as much as we can to contribute reliable and correct information, said Phone Myint Min, adding that they had to shift to an SMS platform when the junta started restricting internet access.

IWPR Asia programme coordinator Rorie Fajardo-Jarilla said that the outpouring of information around Covid-19 had been unprecedented and demanded an urgent, concerted response.

We are getting more and more of our audiences involved, she said. By understanding better how our Southeast Asian audiences consume information, and by equipping them against disinformation and misinformation, I can also say that our work has also been unprecedented.

Read more from the original source:

Fighting Fake News in Southeast Asia - Institute for War and Peace Reporting

Trade Secretary Ramon Lopez on Saturday said the possibility of extending the enhanced community quarantine (ECQ) in Metro Manila for another three weeks is not yet on the table.

Interviewed on Dobol B TV, Lopez said the speculations of a five-week ECQ are mere rumors and fake news since the Inter-Agency Task Force for the Management of Emerging Infectious Diseases (IATF) has not discussed any possible extension of the hard lockdown yet.

Wala pang ganoong usapan. In fact, hanggang August 20 lang yung napag-agreehan, he said.

(It hasnt been discussed. In fact, what has been agreed upon is until August 20 only.)

The National Capital Region (NCR) is under ECQ the strictest quarantine level from August 6 to 20.

In a statement, Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry acting president Edgardo Lacson said, Mere mention of lockdown stokes greater fear than the infection from COVID-19. Another five-week lockdown could be the proverbial last straw on the camels back. It will wipe out the temporary economic gains we earned in between lockdowns and could stop the momentum of business from moving forward.

Lacson hopes that the planned five-week lockdown is just an overreaction to the rising cases of the Delta variant.

The Financial Executives Institute of the Philippines, likewise, said that an extended lockdown will aggravate theundue hardship and suffering of our people who have yet to recover from the ill effects of the pandemic.

Health Secretary Francisco Duque III said it is still "too early" to discuss whether or not the ECQ in Metro Manila will be extended.

Lopez said the Department of Health (DOH) only presented scenarios of possible rise in COVID-19 cases during varying weeks of community quarantines.

The DOH, last Saturday, presented how many active cases will be in Metro Manila in relation to the varying durations and levels of community quarantine by the end of September.

Nonetheless, the Trade chief assured that the government will balance health and economy in its decisions.

Lopez earlier proposed to place NCR under modified ECQ and granular lockdowns after August 20 to balance the economy and livelihoods to health risks arising from the surge in COVID-19 cases due to the threat of the more contagious Delta variant.

The economic loss per week due to varying levels of strict quarantine modes is estimated at P150 billion, according to the National Economic and Development Authority.KG, GMA News

See the rest here:

Five weeks ECQ in Metro Manila? DTI chief says its fake news - GMA News Online

Greek Government spokesperson Aristotelia Peloni demanded the immediate cessation of fake news circulating on the internet about the fires and the suggestion that she has been holidaying in Cuba during this period.

Stop the fake news at last! We are all here and I categorically deny anything else. At this critical time, it is the choice of the government for the information to be operational and to be done by Mr. Hardalias twice a day she said, hoping to clarify why her perceived absence might have been exploited by anti-government circles.

In another post, Peloni adds: Please stop spreading false news about Cuba and other nonsense. Now is the time for battle. Well deal with the rest another time.

According to reports, 23 people were evacuated from various beaches, and were transported to Pefki, the northernmost part of the island away from the fires.

As Greek news agency ANA reported, three PA ships, two ships and two vessels of the Hellenic Navy, ferries, private and fishing vessels are on standby on the western shore of Evia.

Visit link:

"STOP THE FAKE NEWS" Demands Greek Government Spokesperson Accused Of Holidaying In Cuba During - GreekCityTimes.com

As we prepared for another lockdown and everyone worried about what the next few weeks would hold, what we needed most of all was reliable news sources to help us understand the restrictions, what to expect, and what to prepare for.

Unfortunately getting reliable news in an age of social media and misinformation isnt always the easiest thing to do. We see examples of this more and more every day.

Sadly, this is something that we are going to have to deal with moving forward, and something we need to mitigate. Its harder for the masses to wade through conflicting news sources and discern which is real and which is fake. If they read something online, more often than not they are going to believe it to be true.

We saw this last week because fake news proliferated on social media that was linking vaccinations toayuda. Because of this highly circulated rumor, people rushed to vaccine drive locations in droves, tossing social distancing caution to the wind just to be able to get their shots. These mass super spreader events are going to be a problem moving forward when it comes to containing the virus and the deadly new Delta variant.

After all, coming into close contact with hundreds of unvaccinated people outside of your home is the opposite of what the lockdown is trying to achieve. And the worst part is that we wont even see the impact of these events for another few weeks. The Delta variant takes around five days to manifest. A lot of people wont even notice immediately because the symptoms arent as stark and recognizable as the original COVID strain.

So all of those people who went to get vaccinated could potentially head home and infect their whole household and all the people they work with. This will cause a mass spread of the virus, which is what the quarantine was implemented to avoid. I guess we are going to have to wait and see what happens in the next few weeks.

Fake news has been an ongoing problem on social media, especially in the Philippines, where rumors spread like wildfire. Especially now coming into an election year. We are going to see more malicious fake news cropping up alongside rumors and honest mistakes that netizens share because they believe them to be true. Now, more than ever, we have to be careful when it comes to believing and ultimately sharing what we read online.

Its understandably really tiring at this point. Alongside worrying about the new Delta variant, rising cases, and overflowing hospitals and COVID-19 wards, we also have to be careful about the news we receive and everything shared with us on social media. The best bet for people is to consume news from trusted sources and take everything else with a grain of salt until confirmed.

We arent going to make any progress on bringing our numbers down and bolstering our vaccination efforts if we arent on the same page and we cant be on the same page if we all believe different things. Fortunately, the fake news from last week was corrected quickly, but the damage had already been done. By Friday, lines at vaccination sites were more manageable, and hopefully what happened on Thursday doesnt happen again.

At the same time though, we cant let this deter our vaccination efforts. Hopefully, more and more Filipinos understand that vaccination is still our best way forward. We have to carefully and safely keep the vaccination drive aggressive and moving. We all need to do our part and get vaccinated.

For now, we need to be extremely careful and focus on our families and our safety. We are into the first week of our lockdown, and even with these new strict regulations in place, we are still expecting to see case numbers rise. Things will get harder before they get better, but we cant get discouraged because the only way to get through is to go through it. For now, we need to stay home, practice all of our safety protocols, and try our best to keep going.

* * *

Fake news is a big problem, but the issue that the news highlighted last week is also an issue of concern. People flocked to vaccination centers because they believed that vaccines were related to gettingayudaduring the quarantine. While that turned out to be false, the throngs of worried citizens only highlight how many people are in need during these difficult times.

Now is the time to provide help to those who need it most. Our government can implement lockdown after lockdown, but they cant leave people with no help. Especially now with jobs being affected and families finding it difficult to get necessities and put food on the table.

The harsh reality is that many Filipinos cant afford to stay home because they need to find a way to earn to take care of their families. Hopefully, with the vaccine fake news having been sorted, the government can focus on what really matters and thats how they will be providing help andayudato Filipinos during these difficult times.

Go here to see the original:

Living in the time of fake news - Philstar.com

A Cambodian mum and child beam for the camera.

A report this week in the Phnom Penh Post, repeated by some Thai media, that Cambodia is the fourth friendliest country in the world for expats in 2021 was trashed after Expat Insider said that the country did not even appear in their research. Expat Insider, published by InterNations, reviews annually what expats think of their host country in various categories (quality of life, medical services, job satisfaction etc) in countries round the world.Kalena Harris, a communications manager from InterNations, responded to a query from Pattaya Mail, Cambodia wasnt included in this years report as we require at least 50 responses from expats. Cambodia last appeared in 2017 when it was indeed graded very favourably for friendliness.

Thailand did appear in the 2021 survey and was graded 14th for expat living. The country scored well on the quality of medical services and the standard of living. Surprisingly, 82 percent said they were happy with their leisure activities although the research was conducted in January 2021 before the mammoth shutdown on fun really got into its swing.

However, Thailand scored badly on the environment and on political stability with responders apparently moaning about smog and the threat of coups. They also grumbled about limited job opportunities linked to restrictive visa and immigration rules. However, the Expat Insider only processed just under 13,000 expat replies worldwide which means the report was based on a very small sample of people living abroad.

The best regarded country in the world, according to the report, was Taiwan where not a single expat said he or she felt unsafe. This is certainly surprising as the off-shore island is forever being threatened by China with fire and brimstone. The bottom three countries were Kuwait, Italy and South Africa. So best tear up your job application forms to those dark places.

The rest is here:

Cambodia friendliness compared to Thailand shown to be fake news - Pattaya Mail

Kiara Sunder

Kiara Sunder is a clinical psychologist at Netcare Akeso Umhlanga

First published in the Daily Maverick 168 weekly newspaper.

Many individuals sharing misinformation are naively unaware that they are doing so. Then there are those who do it knowingly as a means of satisfying underlying social needs or political agendas. These motives are multilayered, but there is a common factor that leads to fake news doing harm, and that is a strong societal trust in online sources.

Misplaced trust

Historically, news was received in print or broadcast format, which the public trusted as having been researched and verified. Now, obtaining news online on social media and communication apps from various, often unofficial sources, including individuals, has become the norm for many people.

The internet has given a voice to everyone. While beneficial, it means that a great deal of information is shared unchecked. Digital illiteracy is of growing concern, and is particularly prevalent among older generations.

Younger people who have grown up with technology have high levels of digital literacy built into their cognitive framework for organising information. This gives them a certain level of built-in understanding about what is and is not real online. Conversely, older individuals who have had to learn technology later in life tend to be more trusting.

Many internet users believe that anything published online, such as information from a trusted contact, must be true.

Motives behind fake news

A broad spectrum of motives drives people to create and share misinformation. Some are less obvious and there are some clear psychological motivations that can be observed.

Social status seeking

These users may not be aware of the motives but are, in fact, seeking status and self-promotion, indicating that some emotional needs are not being met in real life.

Being relevant: Many individuals feel constantly bombarded by social media posts of friends and influencers who appear to be highly successful. This can lead to feelings of inadequacy. They therefore turn to sharing other types of information, regardless of accuracy, to have something to say.

Being the first: Some feel the pressure to post or share any new piece of information, true or false, first. This can be a type of social gratification to be seen as a protector of ones online community.

Anxiety outlet: Some people suffering from anxiety and mental-health conditions use social media as an escape or to process their feelings.

Escape: Many individuals experience anxiety from daily news. They may choose to switch off and consume social media instead. However, this can lead to engaging in intrusive and factually baseless content without realising it.

Expression: Some individuals feel validated when sharing a post or message that reflects their own feelings or fears, even if the information may not be true.

Group mentality: Needing to feel that you are not alone and connecting via social media and communication apps can be harmful when misinformation, which speaks to the common fears of groups of people who already feel nervous or threatened, is spread thereby fuelling panic and confusion.

Confirmation bias

Validation is a motivating factor among those who spread fake news often, particularly those who buy into alternative views.

Lack of objectivity: When we read, hear or view information that confirms our own beliefs, we feel validated by it and may accept it as being true. People who place their own beliefs above verified, factual information are therefore highly susceptible to spreading, and often even creating, fake news, as their ideologies are not widely reflected in the media, leading them to feel unsupported in their thoughts.

Technology overlap: Algorithms in search engines and social media platforms track the content we consume and push similar content towards us, which informs much of what we see, again confirming belief or preference rather than fact.

Self-serving intentions

People who create and knowingly spread fake news will often have a political or psychological agenda that they are trying to advance. They may intend to do harm or are so single-minded in their pursuit that they have no regard for any damage they may cause.

Politically motivated: This includes those working for a specific cause that is not receiving the attention they feel it deserves, or who may have intent to do damage to another person or group.

Histrionics: People with histrionic personality traits, who crave attention and drama, may create or share a sensational piece of information, sometimes using capital letters, exclamation marks or emojis to make it appear dramatic. They may relate to it for attention or create some attention toward themselves.

Narcissists: These personalities may share information to appear important and knowledgeable. They may be self-centred, have less empathy and desire admiration. They may share news, fake or true, that puts the spotlight on them regardless of the consequences.

Financial gain

Criminals targeting vulnerable individuals can use fake news to spread the word about sought-after opportunities, for example scams. Unsuspecting individuals are asked to pay some fee with the promise of earnings or other financial rewards in return.

Such fraudulent activity is often disguised as a highly legitimate-looking advert or form of communication. Persons targeted may feel pressured by the ambiguity of the situation. Not knowing how to verify the information, victims may fall prey to the scam, resulting in serious financial loss.

Without healthy coping mechanisms, people are likely to lash out at others or latch on to harmful online trends. Such behaviour can result in online bullying, reputational damage, financial loss, physical violence, and confusion and disruption.

Psycho-social considerations

Understanding the impact of consuming and sharing unverified information is an important part of conversations between parents or guardians and children. As well as online predators and bullies, children need to be made aware of the dangers of fake news.

Communicate and emphasise that you trust your child, but not the online world. Helping children to understand the societal dangers and letting them talk openly, before doing so online, will go a long way towards protecting them now and in the future. DM168

This story first appeared in our weekly Daily Maverick 168 newspaper which is available for R25 at Pick n Pay, Exclusive Books and airport bookstores. For your nearest stockist, please click here.

Read more:

Digital illiteracy: Some of the psychological motives behind the spreading of harmful fake news - Daily Maverick

Qatar has been a target of a number of sinister online manipulation campaigns aimed to spark political instability in the country.

A video of armed men firing machine guns in the sky has sparked widespread controversy on social media after suspicious accounts falsely claimed it was filmed in Qatar during a protest against the upcoming Shura Council election.

The video was posted on Twitter by an account under the name World Council for Youth ( ) which claims to be a non-governmental council that does not belong to any organisation and is personally funded.

The tweet read that the gunmen in the video are from tribes gathering to attack the Amiri Diwan in Doha, accusing Al Jazeera of burying the event by refusing to report the incident. The tweet also claimed that Qatars amir disappeared, in yet another dubious attempt to spread misinformation in the Gulf state.

#Qatar_Revolts #BREAKING: Heavy gunfire as tribes gather to attack the Amiri Diwan and brotherhood channel, Al Jazeera is burying the event. The Amir has disappeared, the tweet read.

The video filmed a night shows a hazy image of a lit building that is considerably smaller than the Amiri Diwan in Doha, while surrounded by heavy gunfire and dozens of cars. Men that appear in the video are clearly wearing T-shirts, not the white robes that is donned by Qatari men. One of the characters seen in the video is also clearly chewing Qat a stimulant that is traditionally used by Yemenis and is banned in Qatar itself.

Shortly after it emerged under the hashtag, an AFP fact-checking service confirmed the video was filmed at a wedding in the Henin Valley area, located in Hadramout in Yemen, which was posted on YouTube in February 2020.

Despite heavy backlash from social media users, the account has yet to delete the fake video, but rather retweeted it hours later in what seemed like an attempt to further spark provocation.

The same account has also been sharing a number of fabricated information using several anti-Qatar hashtags to amplify fake news.

Qatar is no stranger to sinister online manipulation campaigns and propaganda.

In recent months, several anti-Qatar hashtags have trended in Qatar as the Gulf nation edges closer to its first historic Shura Council elections in October.

New data analysis obtained by Doha News revealed how hashtags have involved thousands of dubious accounts and suspected bots designed to disseminate and amplify information critical of the Gulf state.

The data, which examines nearly 100,000 tweets, identified several highly active users that produced thousands of tweets featuring specific hashtags in an unusual period of time, all of which attempt to promote alleged public dissatisfaction towards Qatars government.

Among the most recent of hashtags is #Qatar_Revolts which attempts to exaggerate small-scale demonstrations launched by a tribe protesting against the exclusion of Qataris deemed ineligible to vote, as per current law.

Investigation: The clandestine operation to manipulate Qatars public opinion

The hashtag is carried and amplified by two particular hacked but verified accounts one belonging to ABC News producer Joel Zander and the other Indian linked to entrepreneur Ishita Anand. While both personas are not known to engage in such internal Qatari politics, their tweets were retweeted by hundreds of other fake accounts.

In the same month, #The_People_Boycott_Shura_Elections was a number one trending topic that surfaced on Sunday 1 August, coinciding with the first day that voters in Qatar could register for the October elections.

Read also: Nationality debate sparks ahead of Qatars Shura Council elections

While hashtags trend on Twitter if they are used by thousands of social media users, or if sponsored by a particular company, or if Twitter itself whose MENA office is based in the United Arab Emirates pushes it to the forefront, thisparticular hashtag reached to the top of the list despite only being used in one tweet.

Last year, several accounts had also spread rumours of a military coup in Qatar and fabricated statements from global rights organisations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch (HRW).

Those videos were doctored and incorporated clips and audios from different countries, including China and Saudi Arabia none from Qatar.

Read more:

Fake news: 'Gunshots outside Amiri Diwan' video is actually wedding in Yemen - Doha News