Tag Archives: fake news

The cult of conspiracy

Leave a reply

I read this quote in Tim Ferriss’ 5-Bullet Friday email newsletter:

“I sometimes wonder whether conspiracy theories are an attempt to re-enchant the world in a distorted way. It’s like religion knocking on the door and trying to come back in a strange and distorted form. A sense of mystery beyond our own understanding of the world. If you ever talk to conspiracy theorists, that’s the sense you get from them. A sort of almost romantic sense of awe that there is this dark mysterious thing that a rational thing could never penetrate.” ~ Adam Curtis

Having a dad who was constantly making connections across seemingly unrelated topics, all for which he found resounding ‘evidence’ of conspiracies, this quote resonated with me. With an inclination towards conspiracy came a blind willingness to accept wild, unreliable sources of any information or claims that supported the conspiratorial narrative. Crazy, unsubstantiated theories were treated as fact.

Whenever I brought up counter arguments, and shared anything to suggest inaccuracies in a conspiracy I would get the same retort: “Who is fact checking the fact checkers, David?” Then Dad would send me an article, I’d click a link to some ‘fact’ that it mentions and it would lead to a warning page that I was going to a known Russian propaganda website. In all my years on the internet, I’d never been redirected to a page like this, except from the ‘reliable’ sources my dad followed.

“Dad, did you know the source of this information is a Russian propaganda website?”

“Even bad sources get the information right sometimes David.” This from a scientist, a man dedicated to research and detailed documentation. But the grasp of the conspiracy came from deep within, like a core faith, a religious grip that broke common sense,

“A sort of almost romantic sense of awe that there is this dark mysterious thing that a rational thing could never penetrate.”

It’s not about rational thought, nor common sense. It’s a new, distorted form of religion. Faith does not require reason, it does not follow logic. But it holds on to people and steers them in directions they are unaware that they are going. 100 pieces of counter-evidence can go blindly by, and then a crumb of evidence in support will be enough to fuel the conspiracy and shield it against the next 100 counterpoints.

Conspiracies are mysterious, even romantic. The people who follow them bear witness, they see the light, they are the believers, the keepers of the faith, the chosen ones. Logic and reason do not alter the faith of the devout… and so the cult of conspiracy continues.

Top Risks 2024

1 Reply

I’d never heard of Eurasia Group before a good friend of mine, an investor, shared the infographic below with me yesterday. According to their website,

In 1998, Ian Bremmer founded Eurasia Group, the first firm devoted exclusively to helping investors and business decision-makers understand the impact of politics on the risks and opportunities in foreign markets. Ian’s idea—to bring political science to the investment community and to corporate decision-makers—launched an industry and positioned Eurasia Group to become the world leader in political risk analysis and consulting.

According to their ‘Top Risks 2024‘ report:

2024. Politically it’s the Voldemort of years. The annus horribilis. The year that must not be named.

Three wars will dominate world affairs: Russia vs. Ukraine, now in its third year; Israel vs. Hamas, now in its third month; and the United States vs. itself, ready to kick off at any moment.

Russia-Ukraine … is getting worse. Ukraine now stands to lose significant international interest and support. For the United States in particular, it’s become a distant second (and increasingly third or lower) policy priority. Despite hundreds of thousands of casualties, millions of displaced people, and a murderous hatred for the Russian regime shared by nearly every Ukrainian that will define the national identity of tens of millions for decades. Which is leading to more desperation on the part of the Ukrainian government, while Vladimir Putin’s Russia remains fully isolated from the West. The conflict is more likely to escalate, and Ukraine is on a path to being partitioned.

Israel-Hamas … is getting worse. There’s no obvious way to end the fighting, and whatever the military outcome, a dramatic increase in radicalization is guaranteed. Of Israeli Jews, feeling themselves globally isolated and even hated after facing the worst violence against them since the Holocaust. Of Palestinians, facing what they consider a genocide, with no opportunities for peace and no prospects of escape. Deep political divisions over the conflict run throughout the Middle East and across over one billion people in the broader Muslim world, not to mention in the United States and Europe.

And then there’s the biggest challenge in 2024 … the United States versus itself. Fully one-third of the global population will go to the polls this year, but an unprecedentedly dysfunctional US election will be by far the most consequential for the world’s security, stability, and economic outlook. The outcome will affect the fate of 8 billion people, and only 160 million Americans will have a say in it, with the winner to be decided by just tens of thousands of voters in a handful of swing states. The losing side—whether Democrats or Republicans—will consider the outcome illegitimate and be unprepared to accept it. The world’s most powerful country faces critical challenges to its core political institutions: free and fair elections, the peaceful transfer of power, and the checks and balances provided by the separation of powers. The political state of the union … is troubled indeed.

None of these three conflicts have adequate guardrails preventing them from getting worse. None have responsible leaders willing and able to fix, or at least clean up, the mess. Indeed, these leaders see their opponents (and their opponents’ supporters) as principal adversaries—“enemies of the people”—and are willing to use extralegal measures to ensure victory. Most problematically, none of the belligerents agree on what they’re fighting over.

Think about this, the Russia-Ukraine and the Israel-Hamas wars both take a back seat to the US election as the top risk of 2024. Both have no positive outcome in sight and they still don’t pose the same threat as a tight election result in the United States. I wish I could disagree, but I too see this as a genuine concern. What makes it worse is Risk #4 – Ungoverned AI, and specifically disinformation:

In a year when four billion people head to the polls, generative AI will be used by domestic and foreign actors—notably Russia—to influence electoral campaigns, stoke division, undermine trust in democracy, and sow political chaos on an unprecedented scale. Sharply divided Western societies, where voters increasingly access information from social media echo chambers, will be particularly vulnerable to manipulation. A crisis in global democracy is today more likely to be precipitated by AI-created and algorithm-driven disinformation than any other factor.

I want to explore the other risks as well, but by far my biggest concern for 2024 is the US election. My greatest fear is a close and contested election. The by-product of this would not just be tragic for the US, but for the entire world. I wish this was just hyperbole, but it’s not, and reading a report like this just magnifies concerns I already had. Buckle up, we are in for quite a ride in 2024.

You can get the full Top Risks 2024 white paper on their website, (or click the image below).

High versus low trust societies

2 Replies

I love when someone adds to my perspective on social media. That’s exactly what happened after I posted Basic assumptions a couple days ago. The post reflected that, “people no longer give each other the benefit of the doubt that intentions are good. This used to be a basic assumption we operated on, the premise that we can start with the belief that everyone is acting in good faith.”

I shared the post on Twitter and Chris Kalaboukis and I had the following conversation thread:

Chris: Reading your post: could we be transitioning from a high-trust to a low-trust society?

Dave: Yes, that seems like an appropriate conclusion. Is there an author that speaks of this idea?

Chris: Not that I can recall, however, if you look at the attributes of low-trust societies you see a lot of what is happening now.

Dave: So true! The circle of high trust seems to be shrinking and it really seems like a step backwards… tribalism trumps the collective of a greater community.

Chris: It is. It seems that even our institutions are driving us towards more tribalism and division.

Dave: And how do you suppose we correct this course? I honestly don’t have a clue, and see things getting worse before they get better.

Chris: I think that in reality, most people prefer to live in a high-trust society. We need leaders and media who support that vision.

Dave: I think the biggest problem right now is that most leaders do not want to step into a limelight where both social media and news outlets are only interested in focussing on the dirt. It seems everyone is measured by their worst transgressions, regardless of many positive deeds.

Chris: If it bleeds it leads. we’ve never been able to communicate with more people at the same time but the only communication which seems to get through is negative. It’s all about keeping your attention to sell more ads.

Dave: I sound like quite the pessimist, that’s not usually my stance on things, but I do struggle to see a way forward from here.

—–

The idea Chris shared that we could be ‘transitioning from a high-trust to a low-trust society’ seems insightful and really intrigues me. It isn’t happening at just one level, but many!

• Scam phone calls and emails are perfect examples. We used to operate from a position of trust, but now unknown calls and unsolicited emails are all necessarily met with skepticism.

• Sensationalized news leads with misleading headlines that are more about getting attention and clicks than about providing truthful news. And if the news slant doesn’t match your beliefs, it’s ‘fake news’.

• Sales pitches and advertising promises almost everything under the sun, you aren’t buying a product with a basic function, you are buying a product that is going to change your life or transform how you do ‘X’, or use ‘Y’… your results will surprise you and you’ll be amazed!

• If you are even slightly left wing you are ‘woke’ or ‘Antifa’ in the most derogatory way you can use these words. If you are even slightly right wing you are ‘Alt-right’ and racist. No one gets to sit on a spectrum, you are either viewed as an extreme on one or the other side. And even agreeing on one topic on the other side makes you less trustworthy on your side.

These are but a few ways we’ve become a lower-trust society. Ad hominem and straw man attacks get more attention than sound arguments. A well said lie is easily shared while complex truths are not. Saying a situation is complex and sharing nuance does not make for catchy sound bites, and aren’t going to go viral on TikTok, or Instagram Reels. No, but the snarky personal attack will, as will a one-sided, extreme view that packs a powerful punch.

What’s worse is that moderate voices get shut out. And in general many people feel silenced or would rather not share a view that is even slightly controversial. So the extreme voices get even more airtime and attention.

I feel this often. Writing every day, and sometimes picking controversial topics to discuss, I find myself tiptoeing and treading very carefully. I said in my Twitter conversation with Chris above, “It seems everyone is measured by their worst transgressions, regardless of many positive deeds.” I sometimes wonder what one thing I’m going to say is going to get blown out of proportion? If I write one single inappropriate or strongly biased phrase, will it define me? Will it undermine the 1,500+ posts that I’ve written, and make me out to be something or someone I’m not?

This sounds paranoid, but I wrote one post a few years ago that a friend private messaged me about, then called me and said I’d gone too far with my opinion on a specific point. I totally saw his point, went back and adjusted my post to tone it down… but I feel like that one issue, that one strong and overly biased opinion shared publicly put a rift in our friendship. And that’s someone I respect, not some stranger coming at me, not someone that doesn’t know my true character. My opinion in his eyes is now less trustworthy, and holds less value. That said, I appreciated the feedback, and respect that he took the time to share it privately. That’s rare these days.

The path forward is not easy. We aren’t just swaying slightly towards a less trustworthy society, we are on a full pendulum swing away from a more trustworthy society. Tribalism, nationalism, and extremism are pulling our world apart. Who do you trust? What institutions? Which governments? Who do you consider a neighbour? Who will you break bread with? Who do you believe?

The circles of trust are getting smaller, and the mechanisms to share bias and misinformation are growing. We are devolving into a less trusting society or rather societies, and it’s undermining our sense of community. We need messages of kindness, love, and peace to prevail. We need tolerance, acceptance, and more than anything trustworthy institutions and leaders. We need moderates and centrists to voice compromise and minimize extremist views. We need to rebuild a high trust society… together.

The enemy of knowledge

2 Replies

“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.” ~ Stephen Hawking

The illusion of knowledge is more ignorant that just being ignorant. This idea is more relevant today than any time in history. Examples:

1. Every religion starts with the premise that their religion shares true knowledge and all the other religions share illusions. So every devout religious person loves their own illusions, or at the very least believes anyone of a different faith lives in an illusion of ignorance.

2. Anyone who believes in a flat earth, or thinks no one ever landed on the moon lives in an illusion of knowledge. They perceive themselves as more knowledgeable than scientists, experts, and even general employees in the flight and space industry.

3. AI is already generating incredibly persuasive deep fakes and while we used to use a discerning eye to catch a lie, soon we will need to be more discerning to catch the truth. The illusion of knowledge will be more rampant than actual, factual knowledge.

We are moving from an era of knowledge seekers to an era of illusions and ignorance.

The truth is out there… it’s just a lot harder to find, and even harder to defend.

Untruth and Truth Bombs

1 Reply

Here it comes. It didn’t take long. The unrest in the Middle East has already led to a flood of fake news, videos, and photos. Video of past battles are showing up as if they are current. Clips from video games are being passed off as current battles. And AI generated or modified videos and photos are being passed off as real.

Waves of untruths, fake news, and misinformation are being spewed out and shared virally. There isn’t a video clip, news heading, or photograph you can take for face value as being a truthful account of events that actually happened.

Except that some of it is real. Some of it is too real. Before it can be edited or censored, there will be some very graphic videos and images that will be spread across social media. Even respectable media sources will over-share overly violent clips, but on these sights there will be a pre-warning of what’s to come and some of the video will be blurred out to protect the audience or the victims, or both.

Warning or not, truth or untruth, we’ve entered an era where we, and our kids, are likely going to see things that never would have been shown just a few short years ago. No matter what social media you use, you’ll likely be exposed to graphic images too real to stomach, even if they are actually fake.

I don’t know what to worry about more, graphic images or fake images? What’s the worst bomb dropped, the truth bomb or the untruth bomb? Neither are good, and both are headed to a social media platform near you. In fact, they are already there.

—–

Update: Great article from Forbes on the topic of deepfakes spreading virally, “In A New Era Of Deepfakes, AI Makes Real News Anchors Report Fake Stories“.

Faulty pattern detection

Leave a reply

Think about all the superstitions people have. Dating back as far as we have written records we have stories of people sacrificing animals, and even people, for Gods to ensure bountiful crops, or safe journeys, or successes in battle. When these things didn’t work it was for other reasons, and when things went as they should it was evidence that these rituals did indeed work.

But we need not look back thousands of years. We can look at modern day sports rituals, and lucky charms including religious paraphernalia, that people believe bring them luck. Fortunately over millennia things like sacrifices have fallen out of favour, but many rituals of luck and good blessings continue. Often with the person doing the ritual, or having the charm, believing that these things make a difference in their luck or success. Why? Because it ‘worked’ once? Twice?

In the grand scheme of things this doesn’t harm people, and I’m not against the idea that positive thinking can take you further than more negative thoughts. If a lucky charm helps you feel lucky, that is likely a far better state to be in than feeling unlucky.

Where this goes awry is in conspiracy theories. I know this first hand from watching my father go down some dark rabbit holes of doom and gloom. He saw connections that were at best coincidences. He found patterns where there were none. He searched for, and found, meaning in unrelated or tangent events that simply had no connection or no meaningful connections worth being put together.

Russia not supplying oil to Europe was the first step in a complete global collapse. Minor earthquakes off of Haida Gwaii were proof that the west coast around Vancouver was going to have a massive earthquake in a matter of days. Nuclear war, economic collapse, aliens, cabals, polar shifts, you name an end-of-the-world calamity and my dad saw the evidence that it was “coming down the pike”. I just searched that very phrase in my email and found a 2012 message from my dad,

“…What is coming down the pike will be a massive off the scale event and will impact the Pacific tectonic plate – I am referring to the entire Pacific Rim’s 40,000 km circumference. You may consider this to be more of ‘the sky is falling’ alarmist warning, but I have an ominous feeling it is imminent…”

He gave up on sending those emails to me a few years later, not because the ‘evidence’ wasn’t there, but because I wasn’t taking his warnings seriously enough.

In many ways my dad was brilliant, but he had faulty pattern detection that took over where logic usually prevails. But this doesn’t just happen to my dad. Maybe because of him I’m more attuned to this, but there has been a significant growth in delusional pattern detection in the past 5-10 years. It shows up in many places. I’ve written a few times about Flat Earthers as an example. I struggle to comprehend how this is a more popular belief in 2023 that it was in 1998, 25 years ago!

Have people gotten dumber? Maybe. Or maybe it isn’t just an intelligence thing. Maybe it’s faulty pattern detection combined with easy to access misinformation. Maybe there is something inherent in the human brain that seeks out patterns, that doesn’t know how to survive in a world without real threats, so we just pattern detect and find them anyway.

Back in the caveman days we needed to know the difference between the sound of predators versus the sound of prey when we heard the bushes rustling. It was a matter of life and death. Now we don’t need this skill. So maybe this pattern detection error is due to a lack of real threats and the need to seek these threats out to survive. Maybe.

The question is, how do we pivot? How do we move people away from false pattern detection, and still maintain enough scepticism to notice when there really is a harmful pattern to be concerned about? If you see that pattern, please share it, because I just see it getting worse from here.

Digital vomit

Leave a reply

In his recent ‘Making Sense’ podcast, Sam Harris said this:

“Every part of culture: Science, public health, war, economics, the lives of famous people, conspiracy theories about everything and nothing… All information is in the process of being macerated by billions of tiny mouths and then spit back again, and lapped up by others. So what is in fact actually digital vomit, at this point, is being spread everywhere. And celebrated as some form of nutrition.”

Unfortunately this is going to get a lot worse before it gets better. It’s not just ‘billions of tiny mouths’ that are going to be spewing digital vomit, it’s going to be a massive machine of propaganda networks spewing AI created disinformation, vitriol, fake news, and falsified ‘evidence’ to back up the vomit it produces.

And while you would hope mainstream media would be the balancing force to combat this digital vomit, this is not the case. Mainstream media does not have a foothold in truth-telling. Don’t believe me? Watch MSNBC and Fox News side-by-side and you’ll see completely different coverage of the same event. You’ll see minor threats described as crises. If it’s not an emergency it’s not news… so it’s an emergency.

So prepare for a lot more digital vomit. Start trying to figure out how to mop up the mess, to make sense of the mess, because it’s going to get very messy!

From the horses mouth

I’ve already seen some really good deep fakes of famous people that both look and sound real. That was over a year ago and the technology is far better now. I just watched this NBC Nightly News clip on TikTok:

The whole video is cautionary and a little scary, looking at Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a possible threat to Humanity. At the 2:17 minute mark this was said,

“AI tools can already mimic voices, ace exams, create art, and diagnose diseases. And they are getting smarter every day.

In two years by the time of the election, human beings will not be able to tell the difference between what is real and what is fake.”

It occurred to me that the lead up to the next US election is going to include countless deep fakes that will be virally shared and reposted and re-shared, which will be far more convincing than anything we’ve seen so far. The clever ones won’t be far fetched in content, they will be convincing because they will subtly send people down a specific narrative without being outrageous or egregious and easy to spot. For example: Biden supporting and endorsing some ultra-left wing, ‘woke’ group the makes the right outraged. Or Trump speaking to a friend about how he hates guns and the NRA. Each of these can be completely fabricated and completely convincing.

This is really scary because where you get your news will be vitally important. Hopefully major news outlets would vet the videos and verify authenticity before sharing, but digital newspapers are always worried about missing the scoop and letting other networks go viral. Many less reputable sites will share the fake videos just because it fits their narrative. Other sites will knowingly share the fake videos because their intent is to mislead, and to feed anger and vitriol to their naive followers.

Conspiracies will be magnified and any mention of the videos being fake will be counter argued that reports of the video being faked are just the way the government is trying to keep the truth from you. The message being, the fakes are real and the reports of them being fake is the fake news. People already believe fake articles with no fact-checking, they are going to be completely fooled by extremely convincing fake videos.

My advice, find websites that you trust and make sure the web url is correct. Follow people you trust and question anything suspicious from them that isn’t from your trusted sites. If it’s not from your trusted site, if it’s not right from the horses mouth and it seems suspicious, consider it fake until you verify.

How serious is this? You don’t have to be famous to be deep faked. Here is a story of a mom thinking she was talking to her kidnapped daughter, convinced it was her voice on the phone with her kidnappers, but it was a fake and her daughter was upstairs in her room. The point of the video is to have a safe word with your family because anyone’s voice can be easily faked.

We are entering a time when people are defining truth differently, when fakes seem more like truth, and when sources of information are going to be as important as the information itself.

Website domains matter

I think in an era of fake news and deepfakes, we are going to see a resurgence and refocus on web page branding. When you can’t even trust a video, much less a news article, the source of your information will become even more important.

I was on Twitter recently, after the tragic earthquake in Turkey and Syria, when I came across a video of what was claimed to be a nuclear reactor explosion in Turkey. The hashtags suggested that it was a video from the recent crisis, but with a little digging I discovered that it was an explosion many years ago and nowhere near Turkey as was suggested. The video had tens of thousands of views, likes, and retweets. I didn’t take the video at face value, but many others did. I reported the tweet, but doubt that it was removed before it was shared many more times.

Although I wasn’t fooled this time, I have been fooled before and I will be fooled again. That said, part of my ‘bullshit detector’ is paying attention to the source. Recently I saw a hard-to-believe article online by a major news station… except that the page was designed to look like the major news station but had a completely different web address. The article was fake. What drew my attention to it being fake was that it seemed more like an advertisement than a news article. Otherwise I probably would have been fooled. As soon as I was suspicious, the first thing I did was ask myself if this really was the news organization I thought it was? I went into my browser history and looked for the website this morning to take a screenshot of the article, and I found this:

The website is down… which is good, but again I wonder how many people it fooled? It was a website surprisingly high up in a google search just a few days ago, and so I clicked thinking it would be legitimate.

When looking for information from controversial people or topics, it’s going to get harder and harder to know if the source of the information is reliable. One sure fire way to be certain is to look at the website. In some cases even if the source is legitimate, you might still have to question the accuracy of the source, and use a tool like MEDIA BIAS/FACT Check to see what kind of bias the site tends to hold. But you will build a repertoire of reliable sites and go to them first.

More and more the web domain will be the ultimate litmus test that will help you determine if a claim or a quote (delivered in written, audio, or even video format) is legitimate. Because fake news and deepfakes will become more convincing, more authentic looking, and more prevalent… and that trend has already started.

The News in Question

I’m already not a fan of the news. My wife will often watch the 6pm news and I usually put headphones on and listen to something else. A few days ago I was cutting some vegetables and the news was on in the background, and after 5 depressing reports one after another I had to stop listening.

Yesterday and today I had a number of news items cross my social media feed. One was a tragic incident in Korea where people were crushed and trampled. This is actual news, and, like above, very depressing. But a few other items were about news being faked or misinformation sharing.

Here is an example: A viral video of a politician being stopped by chanting audience members who were doing a derogatory chant… except in the actual footage the crowd is happily chanting the politician’s name. The fake version is the one going viral, and even making it onto supposed ‘news’ websites.

It’s bad enough that news is so negative to begin with, but it’s hard to weed out what’s real and what’s fake. It’s getting much harder to recognize the difference. And it’s getting even more important to be able to discern the difference. Do most people even try? Or do they just choose their news sources and narratives they want to follow and follow them blindly?

When I read any sensational headlines these days my first instinct isn’t to be shocked or enraged, my instinct is to question: Is this real? What’s the bias? Where should I look to fact check or validate this?

The news used to answer the questions who, what, where, when, how, and why… now it’s me that questions the news.