Melanie- Thank you so much for this series of posts on disinformation. I first subscribed during your amazing writing/reporting on Kenya, and have been learning about and enjoying your take on the natural and digital worlds ever since. Thanks!
"People have been faking photos for as long as there have been cameras." In warfare, sometimes actual photos and actual things may be fake. Among the many examples of fakery an example is the fake tanks used to trick the German military about where the (ultimately) Normandy invasion would take place.
Thanks very much for the informative article. I guess we should be wary of not only the actual words used in a particular language but also the tendency to morph meanings to fit one's purpose. Some serve a noble purpose - the subtle name shift used by the environmental movement that renamed "jungles" as "rainforests"; preferred energy sources as "green" (green means 'go', green is 'good'). Other changes could be more nefarious -- changing "riots" (property destruction, arson, etc.) to "protests" makes riots more acceptable. It seems beyond the money, propaganda can hold important agenda. Depending on your point of view, it can be used for good or evil, quoting Dylan "And you never ask questions when God's on your side." (Bob Dylan, With God on Our Side, circa 1963).
That's fascinating about the fake tanks - I looked it up and it's an amazing story.
There's definitely a lot in how things are worded, and different sides have their preferred ways of describing things to try and push their perspective. We're all more inclined to tolerate it if we agree with the purpose, as Dylan said. However, I also think that we need to keep an eye out for clear dishonesty in those we agree with.
Did you read Dylan's lyrics? The reason I ask is because I have always taken his poem to be a criticism of "false" justification for action. When listening to that song -- well, Dylan was very talented but more a poet than a vocalist -- my thought is that he is saying something about decision-making. The inherent moral judgement of each decision we make could be with virtuous, egoist, consequentialist, ... ethical support. In my opinion although most of us would like to think we are virtuous in fact the decisions we make are almost inevitably egotistical. I am way out over my skis here, but my take on Dylan's the poem is that asserting God is justifying the (egotistical) decision those decisions they believe they become virtuous (in the sense of Aristotle). Well, just curious what your thoughts are around this?
I guess my current thinking regarding something like dishonest discourse is that making your own decisions based on what others advocate requires understanding their decision making background. One of the most challenging questions once asked of me after making an assertion was "What makes you say that?" That question drills right down to the reasoning (or even the ethical basis) for making an assertion.
My current thinking is that no assertion should be taken at face value because there is inevitably an egoist in it somewhere. In my opinion, our own actions and decisions should be understood as the moral judgements they are -- once made we own them as ours. If one cannot find the one "pulling the strings" as in AI or other information sources to ask "What makes you say (or do) that?", we should be very wary of using such information as a basis in personal decision making. Probably I have a lot to learn in this domain.
I'll get back to you on this - I'm really interested because think a lot about decision-making. Researching it is currently my day job. But I've got a couple of deadlines to get to first.
Melanie- Thank you so much for this series of posts on disinformation. I first subscribed during your amazing writing/reporting on Kenya, and have been learning about and enjoying your take on the natural and digital worlds ever since. Thanks!
Thank you so much. I'm so glad you have been enjoying my writing.
"People have been faking photos for as long as there have been cameras." In warfare, sometimes actual photos and actual things may be fake. Among the many examples of fakery an example is the fake tanks used to trick the German military about where the (ultimately) Normandy invasion would take place.
Thanks very much for the informative article. I guess we should be wary of not only the actual words used in a particular language but also the tendency to morph meanings to fit one's purpose. Some serve a noble purpose - the subtle name shift used by the environmental movement that renamed "jungles" as "rainforests"; preferred energy sources as "green" (green means 'go', green is 'good'). Other changes could be more nefarious -- changing "riots" (property destruction, arson, etc.) to "protests" makes riots more acceptable. It seems beyond the money, propaganda can hold important agenda. Depending on your point of view, it can be used for good or evil, quoting Dylan "And you never ask questions when God's on your side." (Bob Dylan, With God on Our Side, circa 1963).
That's fascinating about the fake tanks - I looked it up and it's an amazing story.
There's definitely a lot in how things are worded, and different sides have their preferred ways of describing things to try and push their perspective. We're all more inclined to tolerate it if we agree with the purpose, as Dylan said. However, I also think that we need to keep an eye out for clear dishonesty in those we agree with.
Did you read Dylan's lyrics? The reason I ask is because I have always taken his poem to be a criticism of "false" justification for action. When listening to that song -- well, Dylan was very talented but more a poet than a vocalist -- my thought is that he is saying something about decision-making. The inherent moral judgement of each decision we make could be with virtuous, egoist, consequentialist, ... ethical support. In my opinion although most of us would like to think we are virtuous in fact the decisions we make are almost inevitably egotistical. I am way out over my skis here, but my take on Dylan's the poem is that asserting God is justifying the (egotistical) decision those decisions they believe they become virtuous (in the sense of Aristotle). Well, just curious what your thoughts are around this?
I guess my current thinking regarding something like dishonest discourse is that making your own decisions based on what others advocate requires understanding their decision making background. One of the most challenging questions once asked of me after making an assertion was "What makes you say that?" That question drills right down to the reasoning (or even the ethical basis) for making an assertion.
My current thinking is that no assertion should be taken at face value because there is inevitably an egoist in it somewhere. In my opinion, our own actions and decisions should be understood as the moral judgements they are -- once made we own them as ours. If one cannot find the one "pulling the strings" as in AI or other information sources to ask "What makes you say (or do) that?", we should be very wary of using such information as a basis in personal decision making. Probably I have a lot to learn in this domain.
I'll get back to you on this - I'm really interested because think a lot about decision-making. Researching it is currently my day job. But I've got a couple of deadlines to get to first.
Thanks, Melanie, for this great series.
Thanks John, I'm glad you are enjoying it.