Misinformation campaigns are murky mixtures of truth, lies and sincere beliefs - lessons from the epidemic

In this environment, false narratives such as the claim that the virus is engineered, originated as a biological weapon, or that the symptoms of COVID-19 are caused by 5G wireless communication technology – have spread like wildfire across social media and other communication platforms. Some of these false narratives play a role in disinformation campaigns

By Kate Starbird, Associate Professor of Design and Engineering at the Human Center, University of Washington

The COVID-19 pandemic has also spawned an information overload epidemic that includes a vast and complex mix of information, misinformation, and disinformation.

In this environment, false narratives such as the claim that the virus is engineered, originated as a biological weapon, or that the symptoms of COVID-19 are caused by 5G wireless communication technology – have spread like wildfire across social media and other communication platforms. Some of these false narratives play a role in disinformation campaigns.

The idea of ​​disinformation often conjures up an image of propaganda in a totalitarian state, but the reality is much more complex. Although information serves an agenda, it is often masked by facts, promoted by innocent and often well-intentioned people.

As a researcher who examines how communication technologies are used during crises, I have found that this mix of types of information makes it difficult for people, including those who build and operate online platforms, to distinguish between an organic rumor and an organized disinformation campaign. And this challenge is not getting any easier as the efforts to understand and respond to COVID-19 combine in the US with the political processes leading up to the presidential election.

Rumors, misinformation and disinformation

Rumors spread and have always spread during crisis events. Crises are often accompanied by uncertainty about the event and anxiety about its effects, as well as uncertainty about how to respond. People naturally want to resolve this uncertainty and anxiety, and often try to do so through collective sense-making. It is a process of coming together to gather information and theorize about the unfolding event. Rumors are a natural byproduct.

Rumors are not necessarily bad. But the same conditions that produce rumors also make people vulnerable to disinformation, which is worse. Unlike rumors and misinformation, which may or may not be intentional, disinformation is false or misleading information that is disseminated for a specific purpose, usually a political or economic purpose.
The term originated in the Soviet Union, where it was used to try to change the way people understood and interpreted events in the world. It is useful to think of disinformation not as a single piece of information or even a single story, but as a campaign, a set of actions and narratives produced and spread to deceive the public for political purposes.
Lawrence Martin-Bitman, a former Soviet intelligence officer who defected from what was then Czechoslovakia and later became a professor of disinformation, described how disinformation campaigns are often built around a real or perceived core. They take advantage of biases, divisions and inconsistencies that exist in the group or company that is the target audience of the campaign. And they often employ "unwitting agents" to spread their content and promote their goals.

Disinformation can exist on several levels and scales. Although one disinformation campaign can have a specific goal - for example changing public opinion about a political candidate or policy - using dissociative information can undermine democratic societies on a deeper level.

The case of the "Plandemic" video

Distinguishing between unintentional misinformation and intentional misinformation is a critical challenge. It is often difficult to infer intent, especially in online spaces where the original source of information can be obscured. In addition, disinformation can be spread by people who believe it to be true. And unintentional misinformation can be strategically amplified as part of a disinformation campaign. Definitions and distinctions get messy quickly.
Take for example the case of the "Flandemic" video that exploded on social media platforms in May 2020. The video contained a variety of false claims and conspiracy theories about COVID-19. The problematic aspect that came up is that the video recommended not wearing masks on the grounds that they would "activate" the virus, and laid the foundations for the eventual refusal of the vaccine against COVID-19.

Although many of these false stories have appeared elsewhere on the web, the "Flandemic" video brought them together in a single 26-minute video. The video went viral on Facebook and received millions of views on YouTube before it was removed by the platforms for containing harmful medical misinformation.
As it spread, it was actively promoted and reinforced by public Facebook groups and Twitter communities associated with the anti-vaccine movement, the Canon conspiracy theory community, and pro-Trump political activism.

But was this a case of misinformation or misinformation that was deliberately spread? The answer lies in understanding how and why - the video went viral.

The protagonist of the video was Dr. Judy Mikovich, an alleged scientist who previously promoted false theories in the medical field, for example the claim that vaccines cause autism. Before the release of the video, she promoted a new book, in which many of the narratives that appeared in the "Flandemic" video were presented.

One of the narratives was an accusation against Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. At the time, Fauci was the focus of criticism for promoting social distancing measures that some conservatives saw as damaging to the economy. Public comments by Mikovich and her associates show that damaging Fauci's reputation was a specific target of their campaign.

In the weeks leading up to the release of the "Flandmic" video, a concerted effort was made to raise Mikovich's profile, which was formed on several social media platforms. A new Twitter account was set up in her name, quickly gaining thousands of followers. She has appeared in interviews with news outlets affiliated with the Republican Party such as The Epoch Times and True Pundit. On Twitter, Mikovich greeted her new followers with the message: "Soon, Dr. Fauci, everyone will know who you really are."
The Sinclair Network, which owns and operates 191 local TV stations across the US, recently held an interview with Mikovich in which he repeated the main claims in the film "Flandmic". In broadcasting this program, Sinclair used the circulation and reliability of the local news to expose new audiences to false - and potentially dangerous - stories. The network is reconsidering its decision after receiving criticism. However, according to reports, the interview was posted for some time on the network's website and broadcast by one station.
Against this background, it appears that Mikovich and her collaborators had several goals beyond sharing her inaccurate theories about COVID-19. Among other things, these are economic, political and reputational motives. However, it's also possible that Mikovich honestly believes the information she shared, as do the millions of people who have shared and retweeted her content online.
What next?
In the United States, as the COVID-19 pandemic clouds the presidential election, we are likely to continue to see disinformation campaigns that are deployed for political, economic, and reputational gain. Local activist groups will use these techniques to spread false and misleading stories about the disease and the election. Foreign agents will try to join the fray, often by infiltrating existing groups and trying to direct them towards their goals.

For example, there will likely be attempts to use the threat of COVID-19 to scare people away from participating in surveys. Along with these direct attacks on the integrity of the elections, there are probably also indirect effects on the people's perception of the integrity of the elections - both from honest activists and a load of agents of disinformation campaigns.

Efforts to shape attitudes and policies around voting are already underway, for example attempts to suppress voting and attempts to create an image of fraud in voting by mail. Some of this rhetoric stems from honest criticism intended to provoke action to strengthen the electoral systems. Other narratives, for example unsubstantiated claims of "voter fraud", serve the primary purpose of undermining trust in these systems.

History shows that this fusion of activism and active measures, of foreign and domestic actors, and of wise and unwitting agents, is nothing new. It is certain that the difficulty of distinguishing between these and those does not become easier in the connected age. But a better understanding of these intersections can help researchers, journalists, communication platform designers, policy makers and society in general to develop strategies to reduce the effects of disinformation at this challenging moment.

to the article on The Conversation website

More of the topic in Hayadan:

• Unequivocal: the fifth generation radiation (5G) is not the cause of the spread of the corona virus
• Why social networks have become a perfect breeding ground for scams and misinformation
• The state against science