Understanding and Identifying News Bias, Misinformation and Disinformation.
By Susan Safi for a community group. Dec,1,2024
Introduction:
Professional global news agencies have editorial guidelines and extensive resources for fact-checking, but most serve an agenda and the news most people call “the news” is really someone else’s “news” designed to keep a particular agenda or worldview going with the masses feeling informed and included.
Before we do that, be aware, or at least consider, that the same media manipulation and nefarious tactics used to harm or threaten us have also been employed within our “Freedom movement” in a stealthy, aggressive, hidden, deceptive and controlling manner, using tactics straight out of the playbook of “Hybrid Warfare”.
When you understand the tactics of this you may pick up on things previously missed.
I mention often the term “Hybrid Warfare”. A broad definition from Wikipedia:
” Hybrid warfare is a theory of military strategy, first proposed by Frank Hoffman, which employs political warfare and blends conventional warfare, irregular warfare, and cyberwarfare with other influencing methods, such as fake news, diplomacy, lawfare, regime change, and foreign electoral intervention.”
This strategy can just as well be used by a government to deal with potential threats from its own population such as dissidents and “freedom” movements.
We all witnessed, first-hand, media playing a key role in serving an agenda we oppose, producing propaganda and lies aimed at manipulating and twisting the truth. Either the media outlet is owned by people with an interest in a particular agenda or, as we saw in Australia regarding the “pandemic”, many received government or other funding to publish in line with the Covid-19 narrative and population management.
We will look at how to determine the origin and key agenda of where “news” is coming from to understand the nature, level of reliability and veracity of that “news” outlet.
Years ago, I came across a NATO document on this strategy by the title of, “Social Media as a Tool of Hybrid Warfare” https://stratcomcoe.org/publications/social-media-as-a-tool-of-hybrid-warfare/177. Tactics written therein involve infiltrating movements, knocking out/controlling the leaders, taking over/hijacking the narrative, usually subtly where most won’t realise something is amiss, re-directing all away from the important messages that inform effective activism, replacing it by flooding/overwhelming the space with “red-herrings”, to steer all off-course, rendering them largely ineffective.
I experienced this on an international level. It was dangerous as it involved the war mongers rolling out their so-called “soft” tactics towards achieving the ultimate objective of overthrowing a government by inserting people posing as pro-government “activists”, in some cases killing the local activists that realised what was happening.
NATO’s Hybrid Warfare’s Social Media strategy likely expanded
to include “the enemy’s” anticipation of a movement being established by “the people” and promptly going in there, unbeknown to the people, and establishing it first, hence controlling the entire movement, its messages and direction from the very outset.
Psychological tactics would focus on wearing down people’s resolve, energy and mental well-being via fomenting fear, hysteria, ignorance, confusion, promoting an exhausting tsunami of disturbing subjects, mostly inaccurate or outright false, that re-direct the movement’s key mission, muddying the ability to adhere to the key issues and actions needed, rendering impossible unity and discipline in the movement. Almost all of this is done through social media. A trained eye can discern who is who.
Let’s look at some ways to become savvy in spotting the lies and deception.
*Disinformation–is wrong information deliberately fabricated to deceive.
*Misinformation is incorrect or misleading stories, not deliberately created to deceive.
(1) Your Gut Feeling:
*Does it sound unlikely, sensational, wishful or like “clickbait” i.e., articles with attention grabbing, half true or totally false headings to increase website traffic to raise revenue and/or spread a rumour rapidly?
*Is it meant to be a satirical article? Does it come from a satirical website?*Is it presented (including sound) to provoke strong emotional reactions, fear, anger?
*Is it an imposter site of a real person?
*Is it an old story with a new date on it posing as something new?
*Is the photograph presented as an image of the actual news or issue being presented? Did it come from another source? If so, that could sound the “fake alarm”.
*If it gives data, statistics and quotes from experts but no source, does it check out?
(2) Always Look for the Source.
*A news outlet/author known for unreliable news? Find the source of the report.
*Clue; a report went viral but all roads lead to just one source. Why? Example: a scientific conclusion promoted sensationally and as fact but investigations show incomplete, improperly conducted scientific enquiry and still quoted by scientists and medical people is a red flag. What’s the agenda? Could it be disinformation and misinformation?
*Did other reputable media report on a story with only one source? Sloppy work?
*Seek Website details on unreliable news https://www.whois.com/whois/
(3) Censorship.
*Is there attempted censorship of/around the topic? If there isn’t censorship of something you’d think would be censored, then that may be a red flag of a topic “allowed” for perhaps disinformation or distraction. Investigate!
(4) Seeking News Outlets and Analysis in the “Alternative” Media.
*Credible journalism is based on fact-gathering, is integrity based, with an analytical and objective mindset. A lack of these qualities has no place in the “alternative’ media and is suspicious at the least.
*Does the author supply references for information given and people quoted?
*Do the references stack up as reliable? If not, be vigilant.
*Is there a lack of quotes and contributing sources, particularly on a complex issue?
*Ask yourself why this article has been written?
*If you want to dig deeper, ask who benefits from what’s presented as “truth”.
*What school of thought or agenda drives the writer or news outlet?
*Are they consistently on a mission to demonise/promote a country, political movement/party, religion, culture etc.? Are intelligence agencies/religious organisations/corporations etc., behind the writer/or media outlet? If so, how is that reflected in their articles and reliability of their news? It may still be useful but keep in mind where it’s coming from.
*Comments under news, videos etc., can give insights or clues about any unanswered questions or issues in your mind.
(5) Manufacturing the News
*Social media bots can mass produce and rapidly spread articles, giving the impression the news is correct, gaining a large following and even instilling a sense of credibility.
*Well-known Organisations/Charities, often respected for their original mission, can be co-opted to spread false narrative/s, especially “atrocity propaganda”, increasing passions, violence, keeping the accused side busy defending itself. Years back I relied on Cory Morningstar's blog for her amazing research on NGO's.
*The "Covid Narrative" experienced this from NGO's, professionals we were suppose to trust and much more. Big NGO's like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Avaaz and others have been involved in manufacturing news/videos that support political agendas of powerful governments/players. Amnesty’s founder, Peter Benenson, soon realised governments and intelligence agencies and other big players were infiltrating and using the organisation. His claims were denied.
*The “babies taken out of incubators” debacle in Kuwait had Amnesty International initially corroborating the story “Nurse Nayirah” gave in “evidence” against Iraq, influencing Congress to go to war, but was later revealed as false testimony created by a big public relations firm in the US. https://youtu.be/LmfVs3WaE9Y?si=wzhjzRHQ8TzfCDTH.
*US Author/Activist Connor Boyack commented; “Ever wondered how a single lie could deceive Americans and drag the country into war?” Why would this be any different regarding our issues?
*Fake videos maybe be created using digital software, machine learning, face-swapping, images combined to create new footage purporting events to have taken place which never did. The results can be convincing and difficult to identify as false.
*The trained/experienced eye may spot “fake’ quickly. Below is one likely "manufactured" Israeli military video that went viral, “IDF Elite Unit Rescues Around 250 Hostages Alive”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taZB-dvsg9c. The video, to those who know such environments, is clearly not in a refugee camp or anywhere in Gaza, but likely a stage set. It went viral and unquestioned.
*Fake or wrongly attributed photos: The ‘Houla Massacre” photograph was taken from another country and promoted by the BBC as an atrocity in Syria. BBC made a statement detracting the photo being from Syria. It was a serious "mistake' as these kind of images and reports were likely to influence a 'no-fly-zone" request to the UNSC. In the last dot point of Section 4, I advise looking at reader or viewer comments as they can be enlightening and the BBC detraction provides plenty of reader comments. One reader said "If the picture was wrong, what else might be wrong about the reporting of the Syrian massacre and who perpetrated it?"
*A dramatic and instructional investigation by a former local journalist in the UK, Robert Stuart, eventuated in a court case with BBC. Robert's years of laborious and detailed work to uncover the lies is perhaps the best model for anyone doing investigations of media mischief, one in that case, designed to influence Parliament to involve itself in yet another war. His blog on his investigation is inspiring. The video produced years later tells the story in detail. Before the "Covid Narrative' and its employment of the media, the use of it to push agendas of the worst kind were well practised as you can see.
*Images from an earthquake in Tibetan China in April 2010 was presented at the time by various media as China massacring its Tibetan population but was quickly called out as false. The images showed monks walking through the dead looking for earthquake survivors but was, by some with an agenda, captioned as a massacre. Remember, it can be quite easy to do searches on some "news" items by looking for images and, in that case, it was clear that lies had been spread and that is when one asks "who benefits".
*Check images when you suspect those presenting them might have a nefarious agenda. Look at the photo for inconsistencies, “warping” where straight lines in the background now appear wavy, strange shadows, jagged edges, or skin tone that looks too perfect. You may use Google’s Reverse Image Search or just search the subject in images to check where an image originates from and if it has been altered.
(6) Creating Your Own “go to” List.
*Instead of having to investigate the tsunami of material on topics, it’s useful to take time to identify (rigorously) authors and media outlets with a solid history of credible and reliable information and good analysis, noting where they come from philosophically or politically and then make your own “go-to” list. You could have sections noting the orientation or particular special knowledge or strengths of each site/writer.
Some of my favourite links of “old hands” in investigation and analysis. I can add more later.
For “World News & Geopolitics” to get the basic story I go first to https://sputnikglobe.com/ & https://www.rt.com/news/
Ekaterina Blinova. Geopolitics. Superior work. Some of her articles are here https://sputnikglobe.com/author_ekaterina_blinova/
Cory Morningstar. Info on NGO’s and who funds them https://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/
Whitney Webb. Superior investigator. Google her or go here https://x.com/_whitneywebb
Moon of Alabama. Geopolitics https://www.moonofalabama.org/
Greanville Post. Geopolitics, anti-imperialist https://www.greanvillepost.com/
Covert Action Magazine. Geopolitics mostly https://covertactionmagazine.com/
Global Research. Anti-Imperialist, Geopolitics https://www.globalresearch.ca
Consortium News. Anti-Imperialist https://consortiumnews.com/
John Pilger(late). Investigative, analysis. Important work of his https://johnpilger.com/
USA & Geopolitics. Scott Ritter no fixed address & Colonel Douglas Macgregor https://www.youtube.com/user/douglasmacgregorTV
Judge Napolitano, Judging Freedom. Interviews re USA & Geopolitics https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDkEYb-TXJVWLvOokshtlsw/videos
The Cradle. Geopolitics and often presenting Iran's take. https://thecradle.co/
Off Guardian. A huge mix of issues covered. I haven’t checked them thoroughly for a while though https://off-guardian.org/
Glenn Greenwald. Founded “The Intercept”. Known for reporting on NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. There was one issue of his omission in an important matter that troubled me, and it might have been one of the reasons he parted ways with “The Intercept” but have a look at him. https://greenwald.substack.com/p/my-resignation-from-the-intercept
No comments:
Post a Comment