The Internet is a powerful medium for thousands of commercial groups and private-sector organizations whose members share common positions on public policy. But I see a disturbing growth in the number of Websites set up by front groups that pretend to independently promote the efforts of special interest groups.
For influencing public opinion, front groups offer dramatic advantages in spreading “disinformation” on the Internet in order to manage and manipulate public perception and policy. Typically, such groups appeal to the better instincts or idealism of people, which makes them particularly pernicious in a democracy.
The groups pretend to be grassroots organizations, but since they are bogus, they’re often referred to as "Astroturf." The last presidential election offered us a prime example of political influence by a front group known as the "Swiftboaters," which has become a synonym for this kind of disinformation.
There are lots of problems in our lives we can shrug off, like petty scams, but not this one. The front groups support efforts that threaten democratic values and result in a lot of damage to our country. Something has to be done to stop the spread of disinformation on the Web. I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I remember a quote that says, “The sole requirement for the bad guys to win is for people of good will to do nothing.”
While the Internet enables the scams run by front groups, the good news is that it also introduces a major new factor into mass communications. High cost used to be the barrier to entry for mass communications. And it was difficult for ordinary people with opposing views to organize. The Internet eliminates these barriers by making it possible to publish a wider discourse of public opinion.
Observe, however, that there are far more people of good will than there are people trying to deceive them. The Internet makes it increasingly easy for the good guys to locate each other, and for investigative reporters to expose the deceptive organizations.
One advocacy organization that does a lot of investigative reporting is Common Cause. Recently, the nonpartisan nonprofit exposed the activities of groups that are masquerading as think tanks and public interest organizations, but are really controlled by telephone and cable companies.
Common Cause has gotten the dirt on several telecom industry front groups. For example, in recent months, a front group called Hands Off the Internet has been effectively injecting the telephone industry's arguments on net neutrality into the public debate. Another front group, NetCompetition.org, touts a membership that brings people together to debate the merits of various telecom reform proposals. In reality, it represents cable and telephone companies, both of which oppose net neutrality.
A collection of investigative groups, working together, gives one hope for the future of democracy. One of the biggest collaborative efforts is led by the Center for Media and Democracy, a wiki-based investigative journalism site focused on the public relations industry and whistle-blowing manipulative or misleading practices.
The Center for Media is best known for Congresspedia.org, and works with Sunlight Foundation and the emerging Consumers Union’s Webwatch, with more sites to come. (Disclaimer: Since they do such important work, I've joined the board of Sunlight and Consumers Union.)
Personally, I'm very optimistic about the role of the Internet in preserving our democracy. There’s hope in the fight against the spreading of disinformation, especially given the way the preceding investigative groups are working together to expose those who seek to deceive us. We all just need to get the word out better.
— Craig Newmark, Customer service rep and founder of craigslist.org
I find your comment that those responsible for 'disinformation' should be indicted for war crimes as preposterous and to say that it has bar human progress is simply blowing matters off the mark. As one other post pointed, 'disinformation' has been since time immemorial and would certainly be with us and future civilizations. What you may brand as 'disinformation' is simply what another group may call information being sent out to the public. We are now living in a world where it's becoming apparent that there is no universal definition of what is right or wrong. So what yardstick would you use to indict someone for 'disinformation'?
I think the point Craig is making is to stir people of 'goodwill' to use the internet to engage other minds who may be on the other side of the spectrum. It's true that the internet is proving to be a formidable platform to propagate every sort of information. And with some 'bad guys' using the popularity of the internet to lure gullible minds to some ill-conceived and deceptive ploys, it's high time the faithful majority engage the masses on a genuine information drive on the internet.
So rather than calling for a war crime's tribunal on 'disinformation', let's lend our wholehearted support to those groups who are out their sending the 'right' message and to compliment their efforts by a variety of ways.
It is true that disinformation is an intentional attempt to deceive people, therefore it should be considered as a crime and really fight against accordingly.
Professor Anthony J. Hall, at University of Lethbridge who educates on disinformation, put it within a framework:
“Disinformation originates in the deliberate and systemic effort to break down social cohesion and to deprive humanity of perceptive consciousness of our conditions. Disinformation seeks to isolate and divide human beings; to alienate us from our ability to use our senses, our intellect, and our communicative powers in order to identity truth and act on this knowledge. Disinformation is deeply implicated in the history of imperialism, Eurocentric racism, American Manifest Destiny, Nazi propaganda, the psychological warfare of the Cold War, and capitalist globalization. Disinformation seeks to erode and destroy the basis of individual and collective memory, the basis of those inheritances from history which give humanity our richness of diverse languages, cultures, nationalities, peoplehoods, and means of self-determination. The reach and intensity of disinformation tends to increase with the concentration of ownership and control of the media of mass communications"
1. A deliberate instrument to attack the consciousness, conscience, rights and well-being of the world’s peoples;
2. Is a major block to the aspirations of humanity to establish a world of peace and justice and the ecology of sustainable and healthy life of the planet; and
3. Is a flagrant violent of fundamental international law and norms.
As defined we can clearly notice that disinformation put the entire concept of human progress in serious jeopardy. Those responsible for the creation, propagation, and orchestration of disinformation campaigns should therefore be indicted for crimes against humanity and peace.
The "sentinels" who are dedicated to fight against disinformation on the web should be promoted and supported.
I agree, misinformation will be a constant issue facing consumers and businesses alike. The best thing that the Internet has given us is a way to research easily when things don't add up. This requires us to be proactive about protecting ourselves from disinformation, but fact-checking has never been this easy ever before.
Misinformation will always exist. It was there before the internet, it is there with the internet, and, it will be there after the internet (if there ever IS an after). I believe that what the internet has done, is not necessarially made more bad information available, it has just brought it out more to the masses, instead of cubbyholing it into a small region, or taking months for it to get out and around. As a result, it seems like there is much more out there than before.
However, that said, as mentioned in the article, the internet has also made it possible for the whistle to be blown on those sites and groups that provide misinformation, or come across as something other than they really are, and get that out into the public faster as well.
While we certainly have been mislead by things we'v seen on line at least a few times, I think we can all say that we've actually gotten more good out of what we find. And like anything, one needs to use caution before one jumps to conclusions.
If something sounds far fetched, then maybe a bit more research needs to be done before we believe it. But then again, that was true before the internet as well.
The whole problem with the Internet is that it is so free and so accessible that anyone can display their "products" online. Can we do something about that?
There si so much disinformation and propanganda on the Web that sometimes you fear about the possible outcome of all of this. You can find websites where products that 'cure ' diseases like Hep B, HIV are sold. You can also visit websites where hatred is behind each word posted on them. Some groups also use the Internet to disinform on critical issues like that of Global Warming. They present themselves as advocaters of cause they really fight. The layman will not notice.
The issue of disinformation on the web is very serious, and, as you have suggested, we have to do something about it, for "All that's necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" (Edmund Burke).
Good things have begun. We can check the content of websites via many reliable evaluation websites such as those on the following link:
The ThinkerNet does not reflect the views of TechWeb. The ThinkerNet is an informal means of communication to members and visitors of the Internet Evolution site. Individual authors are chosen by Internet Evolution to blog. Neither Internet Evolution nor TechWeb assume responsibility for comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and ThinkerNet bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
Nonprofits embracing social change to promote their missions isn’t exactly new, but some groups are using the social Web to recruit, educate, and help people in novel ways. The payoff? Donors get to see the direct results of what they contribute, rather than just collecting another tax writeoff.
A look back in time helps clarify what's happening with the ongoing evolution of the Net. The societal ramifications are far more important than the technology.
Smarter Collaboration: How to Thrive in a Challenging Business Environment Market conditions are changing faster than ever, and organizations need to improve their agility and adaptability in order to provide better service and improve processes. The ability to work with customers, business partners, and employees as effectively as possible - while at the same time holding down costs - is a key to success. READ THIS eBOOK
your weekly update of news, analysis, and
opinion from Internet Evolution - FREE! REGISTER HERE
Wanted! Site Moderators Internet Evolution is looking for a handful of readers to help moderate the message boards on our site – as well as engaging in high-IQ conversation with the industry mavens on our thinkerNet blogosphere. The job comes with various perks, bags of kudos, and GIANT bragging rights. Interested?
To save this item to your list of favorite Internet Evolution content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
Comparing Internet services is tough because service providers price and market their services based on a best-case scenario connection that most consumers will never enjoy.
In the final episode of this series about the death of Internet anonymity, Saunders describes how the Internet of the future will start to attain a level of intelligence that requires no human intervention. Scary.
What can users today do to protect their online privacy? The simplest and most obvious option is to not use the Internet – at all. However, once all digital information is consolidated over the Internet, trying to protect digital identity by simply unplugging from the Internet becomes impossible – a fact that has manifest implications for civil liberties, Saunders says.
By 2011 the number of Internet-connected sensors will exceed 1 trillion, making your chances of doing anything or going anywhere unnoticed pretty much zero. Saunders talks about how the 'sensortization' of the Internet is eliminating the traditional divide between online and offline populations.
The 20th Century Internet was characterized by the ability to interact with other people and information on the Internet largely without anyone knowing who you were. The Internet of this century, conversely, will be defined by identity. Saunders explains how Internet users are unwittingly contributing to the demise of the anonymous Internet.
Broadband providers could provide some remarkable services using intelligent home gateways. But if they wait too long, device makers will offer them anyway, and make broadband even more of a commodity.
New gateways are allowing service providers to sell a set of services (an experience) over any broadband connection – even those outside their physical broadband networks.
The futuristic ideas being expounded on Internet Evolution are quickly becoming part of today’s mass culture, and can help shape the future of the Internet, thinks Doc Solez.
Research shows that the youth of today like Facebook – but not blogging or Twitter. Does that mean Facebook has won, or just that it's not yet out of favor? Will all the services we see today fade into Ovaltine-or-Wheaties status in just a few years?
What kinds of companies are doing the most innovation in the data center? Turns out it's midtier enterprises that are taking the "Just Right" approach.
Ray Kurzweil's Blio and Apple's iPad tablet will make it easier than ever to have books "read" to us, says Dr. Kim, who believes that talking tablets will become interwoven into our consciousness as we "merge" with the increasingly elegant machines we hold in our hands.
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Email This
TWEET THIS
