Robert J Morton’s Post

Not receiving nearly enough attention is the new report from the Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponisation of the Federal Government of the US House of Representatives. Running to nearly 1,000 pages including documentation, we have here an overwhelming amount of evidence of a systematic, aggressive and deeply entrenched effort on the part of the federal government, including the Biden White House and many agencies including the World Health Organisation, to tear out the guts of the Internet and social media culture and replace them with propaganda. Keep in mind that we only know what we know, and that is severely truncated by the force of the machinery. We can safely assume that the truth actually is far worse than we know. And further consider that this censorship is keeping us from knowing the full story about the suppression of dissidents, whether medical, scientific, political or otherwise. 

Research from the NYU Stern Center for Business and Human Rights is highlighted in the The Atlantic Article: “I Asked 13 Tech Companies About Their Plans for Election Violence.” The article cites the Center’s latest report, which argues that “the leading tech-related threat to this year’s elections stems not from the creation of content with artificial intelligence but from a more familiar source: the distribution of false, hateful, and violent content via social media platforms.” 🔗 https://lnkd.in/eZ6PiXTz 📑 Read the full report here: https://lnkd.in/ezW2yY4i

What's interesting about this, is that it is not about large groups or interfering foreign powers misleading people, it is about individual or small group supporters. It is early in the electoral campaign so I guess there will be a lot more of this kind of thing. Where does it lead to? Not so much as in who gets elected but in how people treat online 'news' or social media 'information'. Will people start to go back to more using of (and trusting) traditional news sites (BBC, WSJ, etc.) because of not knowing what social media information they can trust? Or will they go down the path of believing what fits with their own opinions and hence further splitting people down left/liberal/right wing divides? https://lnkd.in/eP64Q4h2

“Five ‘Extreme Hypotheticals’” by GPT-4o 9:58 am PDT, Tuesday, July 2, 2024 Please list five “extreme hypotheticals” about a present or future president who, under the guise of an “official act,” violates the previously-sacrosanct rights of people. Here are five "extreme hypotheticals" regarding a present or future president who, under the guise of an “official act,” violates previously sacrosanct rights of individuals: Suppression of Free Speech: A president could direct the Department of Justice (DOJ) to investigate and prosecute journalists and media outlets critical of their administration, labeling their reporting as threats to national security or acts of sedition. Targeting Political Opponents: The president might order the DOJ to pursue criminal charges against political opponents and activists, using fabricated evidence or exaggerated charges to neutralize dissent and intimidate opposition. Manipulation of Elections: By declaring election oversight as an "official act," a president could manipulate election outcomes by directing federal agencies to harass or disenfranchise voters in regions likely to support opposition candidates, under the pretext of combating voter fraud. Criminalizing Protest: The president could classify protests against their administration as threats to public order, using the DOJ to arrest and prosecute protesters and organizers under anti-terrorism laws or other severe statutes. Using National Security for Personal Vendettas: By deeming it an official act, a president could misuse national security apparatuses to spy on, detain, or otherwise harass individuals or groups deemed personally threatening, labeling them as domestic terrorists or subversive elements. These scenarios highlight potential abuses of power that could undermine fundamental rights and democratic principles if presidential immunity were expanded to cover such actions.

Biden Administration's Defense of Social Media Communications in High-Stakes Court Battle . 🗳️ Defending Online Communications: Biden Administration's Stance in High-Stakes Court Battle 🗳️ The Biden administration is standing up for its interactions with social media giants in court, asserting the need to protect the public from election security threats, Covid-19 misinformation, and more. This legal skirmish showcases how social media is now a battleground for crucial information, highlighting the challenges faced by these platforms in managing vast amounts of data. The case underscores warnings from researchers and officials about malicious actors disrupting democracy ahead of the 2024 elections. The outcome will decide the fate of federal agencies' coordination with tech companies and civil society groups. Central to the debate is whether the government coerced platforms to censor users, especially posts flagged for violating terms. Stay tuned for updates on this critical court battle. #thesocialtalks #Biden #SocialMedia #Administration #Socialmedia #contacts #Tech

For those of you I am fortunate enough to know personally you likely understand the import placed on the tremendous influence hermeneutic and meaning making has on American democracy, rights and freedoms. At the intersection of cyber-security and political polarization, this article demands personal consideration of two questions. I am curious what your initial responses might be... In "Social-Media", who should be the authority in determining what is "misinformation" and what is "truth?" Should this be considered by the Supreme Court? CISA barred from coordinating with social media sites to police misinformation https://lnkd.in/gjnx67qe.

1. Read this piece: https://lnkd.in/gVQA-yn7 2. I would re-write the headline (and expand the content) to: “How Authoritarians and our Adversaries, foreign & domestic, are winning the war over Disinformation, while poisoning kids and destroying Democracy”. Our Democracies and our Capital environments both depend upon high integrity, quality, and transparent #IQT information. In fact, every supply chain —food, drugs, financial, energy, digital— depends upon our ability to understand the integrity & quality of the materials. Roughly 100 years ago, “snake oil” being peddled as magical cures to ailments, were quite literally killing people; newly created electrical appliances were burning down buildings; and charlatans were making up financial information to their own benefit while weakening trust in our financial environments. We sought to ensure we could enable trusted supply chains and oversight. Fast forward to our digital environments and we have done nothing. In fact, the reverse is being done by foreign and domestic adversaries who are actively seeking to peddle digital snake oil, at great cost to our societies. In recent days, much has been reported on in relation to the potential divestiture of TikTok from ByteDance, and while I support that, it is window dressing at the end of the day without us putting in place comprehensive policies, oversight, and corporate responsibilities for data privacy, ownership, algorithmic accountability, security, KYC, transparency, etc…and penalties. In fact, in relation to TikTok from this piece, domestic political charlatans (AND foreign adversaries) will continue to use whatever they can to fuel their agendas: “WE have to use TIKTOK!!” read a memo prepared for Mr. Trump’s lead lawyer…referring to a strategy to use social media to promote false messages about dead voters and vote-stealing software. “Content goes VIRAL here like no other platform!!!!! And there are MILLIONS of Trump supporters!”” We are faced with domestic actors who are actively limiting our ability to create trusted information environments; who attack researchers working, at great costs to themselves, as to how we might create healthy & responsible information environments and preserve & protect our Constitution; who want unfettered access to digital assault weapons & drugs. (PSA: A “good guy with” a high quality information gun doesn’t stand a chance in todays digital environment without us being responsible and putting in place the requirements for individuals, corporations, and governments). In 2002, to help ensure trusted financial information, Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) was enacted requiring reporting, 3rd party audits, whistleblower protections, public company oversight, and criminal+civil penalties for false or misleading information. Ask why hasn’t this been done across all information domains? HINT: it’s not because of the 1st Amendment. Steven Lee Myers

In an era where technology evolves faster than people, voters would benefit from knowing how to protect themselves from manipulation and to ensure their votes are based on accurate info. Here's how government outreach can combat election disinformation. Psychological manipulation from bad actors has infiltrated our social media, business information and most unfortunately, personal communications. Find out how you can protect yourself so you are not caught off guard.

KEY POINT: (1) Republicans and right-wing media promulgate the falsehood that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) orchestrated the pro-Trump Jan. 6 Capitol attack; (2) Twenty-five percent of Americans say it is “probably” or “definitely” true that the FBI #fbi instigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, a false concept promoted by right-wing media and repeatedly denied by federal law enforcement; (3) Trump #trump and his supporters use lies, smears, fake news and conspiracy theories to sway people based on their fears, greed, ignorance and bigotries. KEY EXCERPT: …misinformation about #jan6 Jan. 6 is widespread as the United States heads into a presidential election year, during a campaign in which the former president and leading 2024 Republican candidate Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed support for those who participated in the insurrection. Despite a detailed congressional investigation and more than 725 completed federal prosecutions of Jan. 6 participants that did not yield evidence of FBI involvement, a substantial minority of Americans still embrace conspiracy theories not unlike the ones that drove many rioters to storm the Capitol three years ago. The Washington Post