Carl Rogers: an American psychologist once said
“When I look the world, I’m pessimistic, but when I look at people, I am optimistic”
Obviously when news articles and social media stories don’t offer a true look at what’s going on in the world and around us”, one can easily become pessimistic.
The question is, why some people keep busy in creating and promoting fake news?
The psychology behind this phenomenon is very complicated. Taking trip down the history will reveal that i., it is remarkably interesting, ii., provocative, iii., intolerable and iv., out rightly horrific.
Achieving ulterior motives and business interests through fake news are true to type examples of the first case. Second dimension can be exemplified either by the hidden quest of self-elevation through: taking seat of power, proving others inferior or incompetent, undermining each other’s social and governess system, tarnish the image and creation of instability to see the reaction of vulnerable countries, manifestation of wickedness in political arena, fooling people and/or impacting election results, inventing falls stories for propaganda against winning candidate, lamenting political hostility or through “Kakorrhaphio-phobia” (Greek phrase which means abnormal fear of defeat or being taken over). Targeting the specific religion, eliminating an ethnic community and ethnic violence could be the manifestation of intolerable, while using fake news by foreign power to blame other countries for spying and official patronage of fake news for war mongering could be the manifestation of horror.
In all its dimensions, creation and usage of fake news is condemnable and warrant legal action to control its further spread and the ancillary devastation especially when it plays with your trust.
What is and is not fake news?
European Union’s East StartCom during 2018 (Link-1), compiled a list dubbed as “hall of shame” which contained articles with suspected Kremlin attempts to influence political decisions. The controversy arose latter, when three Dutch media outlets claimed they had been wrongfully singled out because of quotes attributed to the people with non-mainstream views. These news outlets included Post Online, GeenStijl, and De Glederlander Post: all the three were flagged for publishing articles critical of Ukrainian policies and never received any forewarning or opportunity to appeal beforehand.
This incident exposed the issue of what defines some news as fake? and how freedoms of press and speech can be protected from this menace?
Defining some news as “fake” is a complicated process because deferent countries have different definitions. In UK for example, definition of “fake news” have been controversial because political satire is an integral part of British Humor. Members Parliament have been advised against using the term “fake news” especially when witnessing the complexity of “information disorder”. According to Claire Wardle, (Link-2)
“Agents of disinformation have learned that using genuine content reframed in new and misleading ways is less likely to get picked up by AI systems”
Thus, the term “fake news” is woefully inadequate. Neither the words “fake” nor “news” effectively capture this polluted information ecosystem because most of the content used in debates on this topic are not fake. They are genuine but used “out of context”. To understand this ecosystem, we need to consider content that mimics news”.
This can be understood and practiced in UK and some other developed/civilized country but imagine the country(s) where literacy rate is between 40-50%, whose one fourth population comprised baggers, whose so called elite are half educated, uneducated or fake degree holders, who cheat, deceit, fool and lie to the people and forced others to practice the same, who tarnish the image of others and where perception matters more than reality and portraying the narration matters more than the narrative itself, how and who can force people to follow ethics of exchanging information? and how one can prosecute people in such societies that are full of misinformed people? and where realities are densely masked behind distorted perceptions?
To me, this is one of the biggest challenges we are facing in 21st century:
Are we prepared for this? Certainly not.
What to do?
Officials from 11 countries met in Helsinki (UUTISET news, 2016), Finland and planned the formation of a center with combined efforts from 10 countries, including Sweden, Germany, Finland, EU members, Spain, the UK, Poland, the Baltic States, and the United States to combat cyber-warfare of disinformation and spread of fake news on social media.
Deputy secretary of state responsible for EU affairs opined that cyber warfare and/or hybrid warfare threats have been escalating as exemplified by dissemination of disinformation or fake news via social media and cyber-attacks on IT systems.
Thus, the aim of the Helsinki hybrid center will, be to:
- increase EU member’s awareness of and resistance to hybrid threats and their ability to combat, and to identify the players behind them,
- enhance cooperation with NATO organs that specialize in countering hybrid warfare threats.
The outcome
The progress of the center on achieving the key goals has remained slow may be due to inherent complexities in the end goals. It is not only cybercrime, fake news, mis, and disinformation but cyber warfare and cyber terrorism? Cyber terrorism is usually mixed up with “information warfare” and “cybercrime”, but there is a major difference between cyber terrorism and information warfare. Information warfare has “certain targets”, but cyber terrorism causes fear and harm anyone in the targeted vicinity. Both facets worked collectively, simultaneously, or individually with many entities involved on one or more than one targets. These entities may comprise state actor, non-state actors and proxies. They all act or attack through different ways and means. Some attack through diplomacy, bureaucracy, media, information, and legislation; others attack on economy, infrastructure, and technology, yet some other attack on defense forces, intelligence, and communities.
As the problem is complex and multifaceted it required multifaceted but holistic approach. The situation was thus, worrisome for Finland. They were worried about cyber warfare in shadow of Russia (Link-3). Helsinki thus wanted the creation of an international alliance to combat the growing threat. Consequently, and without going into limelight, Helsinki established the base for a major cyber-defense program for the west with the establishment of the NATO-backed ‘European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threat” which has received funding and resources from the US, Britain, France, and Nordic states. On a visit to London in 2018, Justice Minister of Finland, warned that,
“the problem of cyber warfare is growing and required a new international alliance to combat it. New horizons have opened for those who want to misuse the freedom provided under the new media environment. I am afraid we are only beginning to learn how to cope with these new challenges. The risk is “we are constantly one step behind,” he said.”
He further added that, “there is a need for a broad coalition among countries which share the same values as the US, the European Union states and the Britain to stand together when we have other countries like Russia, China and Iran which do not have the same values
(a clear and defined line has been drawn with US, EU, and Britain in one block? and Russia China and Iran in other).
When asked about the practicalities of getting the US to join such a coalition when the current president (the then President Donald Trump) is alleged to have benefited from election interference? the Justice Minister said,
“In my recent visit to Washington, I found that although they may not be prepared to cooperate on trade or some matters of defense, which is worrying, they are prepared to cooperate in the cyber sector. Mr. Trump has routinely dismissed reports of Russian interference in US election as “fake news”.
“They know the Russians have been operating in their country, and it may not be good having the world’s best intelligence service, or second-best intelligence service, if they have those kinds of attacks.”
The Finland government independently carried out studies into the systematic international interference in voting system to take steps for protection of their electoral system. One decision was to abandon plans for electronic voting at the polls, (an option that is being desperately considered by sitting Pakistani Government) because risks of hacking and other types of interference outweighs potential benefits, and the more cumbersome, but safer manual system should continue.
Russian hackers have been accused of targeting election machines in 21 states during the last presidential polls in America (link-4) but just weeks before the crucial midterm elections, a new report (link-5) revealed that,
“Cybersecurity flaws in hardware in one of the machines used in 23 states, have not been addressed for over a decade. Other machines, used in 18 states, include a smart card reader which analysts believe can be disconnected to disrupt the election process”
“This is exactly what opposition in Pakistan is afraid of when they fierce fully opposed the use of electronic voting machine (EVM) in the next elections”.
Justice Minister believed that
“Electronic voting could lead to people, including young voters, being manipulated rather than enfranchised or empowered. It increases the vulnerability of the system. It would make it possible to spread false rumors even when the system is not compromised and thus decrease the trust people have in the integrity of elections” he said, “we are facing a new phenomenon”.
A study made recently (link 6) revealed that, “Millennials used to like democracy thinking that democracy is the best system and that it should continue”. The most don’t trust it now in the US. Thus, the big problem for the next two decades would not be the economy but protecting democracy” because of the three main challenges (link 7) that democracy faces across the world.
First, the extension of the internet and social media exposes growing inequalities within and between countries,
Second, governments are looking increasingly powerless in the face of imperatives and the international commitments they signed up, and
Finally, there is a crisis of efficiency that erodes the legitimacy of democratic institutions even further.
The current situation
In Finland, companies prefer to have their own safeguard, like Ministry of Transport and Communications launched a new cyber security program to prevent data breaches as exemplified by therapy center Vastaamo, which exposed the company’s patient database to the “dark web”. (Link-8).
Europe wants to crack down on fake news but, one person’s fake news is another’s democratic dissent” Link-9.
So, what Carl Rogers said as a second thought that is, “When I look at people, I am optimistic indicating thereby that,
“he believes (and rightly so) in optimism which is omnipresent and keep pushing people to think and do good for humanity”
Conclusion
So dear readers till the good things takes shape, it will be business as usual. Hence, take care and be watchful what’s happening around you because
“Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood. Now is the time to understand more, so that we may fear less”. Marie Curie
See you next week. Please do comment on the article because they are very precious to me. Bye
Further reading
Link-1. European Union’s East StartCom during 2018.
Link-2.https://firstdraftnews.org/wp content/uploads/2019/10/Information_Disorder_Digital_AW.pdf?x76701).
Link-3. Independent” on October 1st, 2018).
Link-4. US official: Russia ‘hacked’ 21 US states in election BBC news, 21st, June 2017.
Link-5. An Update of March 8, 2018, from BRENNAN Center for Justice.
Link-6. USA today, October 20th, 2020
Link-7 Deliberative Democracy in the EU. Countering Populism with Participation and Debate. Rowman & Littlefield International, London, 2020.
Link-8. https://yle.fi/news/3-11979173
Link-9. Washington post, 25th, April 2018.
