Homeland Security Chief Admits New Disinformation Board Already Did a Bad Job of Informing Public
Alejandro Mayorkas fails to inspire much confidence in the new group run by Nina Jankowicz.

Last week we learned that the Department of Homeland Security is creating a Disinformation Governance Board to discuss strategies for reducing the spread of so-called misinformation, specifically with respect to foreign policy.
The announcement came as both a surprise and also a source of concern, as Reason's Joe Lancaster reported.
After all, it is not the U.S. government's responsibility to decide what is and is not misinformation: People decide that for themselves. Moreover, the federal government has not shown itself to be particularly adept at identifying misinformation. Government-supported efforts to suppress the COVID-19 lab leak theory and the Hunter Biden laptop story have proven to be disastrously misguided. In both of those cases, social media sites censored those stories because supposed experts in the mainstream media and in the government gave them bad recommendations.
Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas tried to put the public at ease on Sunday, saying this to CNN:
At no point did Mayorkas explain how the board will avoid making committing the serious errors that have characterized most previous attempts to prohibit or regulate misinformation. The most comforting thing he said was that the board won't have much actual power, since it's only acting in an advisory role.
Indeed, Mayorkas conceded that the announcement about the disinformation board was badly handled. "I think we probably could have done a better job in communicating what it does and does not do," he said.
That a government entity charged with improving the government's capacity for generating good information failed this first and most basic task is not particularly encouraging.
The head of the board will be Nina Jankowicz, who was previously a fellow at the Wilson Center, a foreign policy focused think tank. She was also a Fulbright fellow and worked for the Ukrainian foreign ministry in Kiev. Mayorkas expressed full confidence in her.
Jankowicz appears to have suspected that the Hunter Biden story was Russian-backed misinformation; she has many old tweets to that effect.
It's worth recalling that when candidate Joe Biden was asked about the Hunter Biden laptop story, he confidently deemed it misinformation, citing 50 former government intelligence officials who had suggested the story was fake and planted by Russia. We have an acute problem of so-called intelligence experts employed at one time or another by the government making confident, wildly inaccurate pronouncements about highly political subjects. Jankowicz did not avoid this pitfall.
Jankowicz is also the author of a recent book, How To be a Woman Online: Surviving Abuse and Harassment, and How to Fight Back. In a section published in Wired, she essentially argues that online harassment—a real problem, to be sure—is something endured almost exclusively by women. This is a false framing, as Cathy Young wrote in a 2020 feature for Reason:
Studies consistently show fewer women than men saying they experience internet harassment of every kind, except for sexual harassment. Counterintuitively, even so-called revenge porn—nonconsensual exposure of intimate images—may happen to men more often, according to the 2017 Pew survey. And while women in the survey were considerably more likely than men to rate their online harassment experiences as extremely or very upsetting, they were no more likely to report negative consequences ranging from mental and emotional stress to problems at work or school.
Here again, Jankowicz seems to subscribe to a progressive-media view of online speech that is somewhat at odds with reality. Given that the very purpose of the disinformation board deserves skepticism, the fact that it will be chaired by a figure with a dubious record on some of these issues does not inspire tremendous confidence.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"It's worth recalling that when candidate Joe Biden was asked about the Hunter Biden laptop story, he confidently deemed it misinformation, citing 50 former government intelligence officials who had suggested the story was fake and planted by Russia."
OK. Let's assume the American intelligence community basically lied to help Joe Biden because he was their preferred candidate.
As a Koch / Reason libertarian I have to ask: Is that necessarily a bad thing?
After all, Koch-funded libertarians wanted Biden to win. Isn't it comforting to know we have the national security state — in addition to progressives, neocons, and most corporations — on our side?
#LibertariansForTrustingTheIntelligenceCommunity
Actually, neither Biden or his family ever denied the authenticity of the laptop. They merely claimed it was not a worthy story. Others claimed the laptop and the facts contained therein were fake on behalf of team Biden.
Actually, neither Biden or his family ever denied the authenticity of the laptop.
^
And, as far as I know, where ever even actually asked about it.
And why should they have to? Answering questions about corruption is not for the elite and those in their good graces.
Biden had to do nothing but ignore it because the entire media and big tech apparatus did a splendid job of burying this thing and making it radioactive before any normies could give it a second thought. It was just like what they did with lab leak, making it radioactive, and accusing anyone uttering a word about it of conspiracy theory crackpot Russian disinformation swallowing rubes.
But hey, any means necessary. They already saw that actual coverage of Hillary might have cost her enough votes to swing the election, couldn't have that happening again when theres a POTUS in the WH that isnt 100% in their pocket. Fortunately they fixed that problem
When did they ever claim anything? Answer: Never. Obviously the left wing media failed to ask and ask again, a direct question. until they got a direct answer. in the debate Biden referenced the letter by the 50 idiots who said it 'smelled' like a Russian op but in the next sentence said, '...but we have no proof of what we just said....'. Try that in a court room and a lawyer will find themselves being hauled off to jail for treating the Court with utter contempt.
Biden did directly & repeatedly deny the authenticity of the laptop.
https://youtu.be/XpAgjrUTB8A?t=446
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Orrdt8qUH3Q
You're still a retard. The Unz Review is calling you.
OBL has a degree in the Humanities. That's just a fact.
Feel embarrassed about calling OBL a retard now? You should.
That’s basically proof of retardation.
Maybe if you poasted quality satire instead of your usual sad-sack efforts and cheese pizza, shriek, you wouldn't lash out so impotently like this.
He’s a failing faggot.
Did a Bad Job of Informing Public
Is that a nice way of saying that they lied to the public?
fails to inspire much confidence
How much confidence should we have in a ministry of truth?
As much confidence we should have in Saint Fauci
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10774981/Fauci-cozies-CNN-friend-Don-Lemon-crowded-WHCWs-pre-party.html
So much for 'personal risk!' Anthony Fauci cozies up to CNN friend Don Lemon at crowded White House Correspondents' Dinner pre-parties (despite turning down the actual event because of COVID fears)
Sean Spicer took to Twitter on Sunday to share a snap of Biden's top medical advisor posing with Lemon and his partner, real estate agent Tim Malone
'Fauci bailed on attending the [WHCD] because of 'individual assessment of my personal risk.' …..so he just went to the [crowded] pre-parties,' Spicer wrote
The snap was taken at the 27th Annual White House Correspondents' Weekend Garden Brunch Saturday, which TV and political figures attended
Fauci's attendance at the indoor-outdoor pre-party took many by surprise after the 81-year-old said he would not attend the 2,600-people event
"...Is that a nice way of saying that they lied to the public?..."
Sort of. More like 'our lies weren't crafted well enough to fool an idiot like, oh sarcasmic'.
Meh. When something is this distasteful, you don't have to comment on it. Res Ipse Dixit. The thing speaks for itself. Understatement is better in this situation because people can see just how bad this is.
Why are we pretending for even 30 seconds that anything they are now claiming about this board is true? All of the democrat leadership has been damaging political censorship for years. They have all proclaimed their desire for federal power to block things they disagree with. They all have demanded that social media companies comply with their program and enact censorship for them.
Then, Elon Musk buys Twitter and says he wants free speech for all.
5 minutes later the feds make a board for misinformation control and claim that it is designed to tackle Russian misinformation about immigration to the US.
Why? Why are you pretending that this is a serious statement?
They pick a woman to head their little board who literally sings about Biden's laptop being disinformation and a lie.
But now we are going to pretend that there is anything other than political censorship at play? Why would you do that? Why would you even give it 12 seconds of consideration? Even there sham of a reason is laughable. Biden personally invited everyone South of the border to come up and join us here. But we are supposed to believe that he set up a task force to battle a wave of Russian disinformation encouraging illegal immigration? Why would you believe that? You are alive when the last 2 years happened. Why would you believe a made up version of history when you live through it?
None of this makes even a little bit of sense. It is comical, but it is also The government of the United States. Literally tearing pages out of Orwell and Huxley. And we are gonna meet them 90% of the way to where they are, taking all of that window dressing at face value?
I just can't even understand what people are thinking these days. Thank told you what they were going to do, they've been doing it for years, and now they make an official government ordered to do it, and you pretend like they're not actually doing it? Or it's arguable somehow whether or not they're doing it?
Not everybody is so naive.
https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/the-bidenization-of-america
With the pending sale of Twitter to Elon Musk, the link between the federal government and social media companies is threatening to be exposed. Musk can show the public exactly how deep the rot goes, and the left’s freakout about the issue can’t be understated. They know they’ve had their thumbs on the scale, and they ALSO know that without that advantage, they’ll get destroyed in free and fair elections.
That’s why Biden is willing to take the MASSIVE PR hit and create the Ministry of Truth Disinformation Governance Board. One of the jobs (if not the only job) of this agency will be scrubbing the internet of anything that goes against the current narrative. If Musk won’t do this censorship himself, I’m sure the thinking goes, then we’ll FORCE him to do it via court orders or official proclamations!
They are not naive. They are in on it.
Not all of Soapy Smith's shills were playing as winners. Some were the ones skeptically "asking questions."
Fair.
The rot goes deep.
""Twitter has tapped former FBI general counsel James Baker, a central player in the Russia collusion investigation, to serve as counsel to the tech giant.""
https://nypost.com/2020/06/16/twitter-hires-former-fbi-chief-counsel-as-deputy-lawyer/
The board was conceived under the Trump administration to investigate claims of Russian interference in the election.
Well, since you're so adamantly anti-Trump, I'm sure you'll agree with me that the Board ought to be immediately dissolved and anyone participating on it refused a role in government going forward.
I can't put my finger on the part of the Constitution that gives the federal government that power.
Also, ten troll points for inserting the premise that I'm adamantly anti-Trump. Sorry for not falling for the troll bait and explaining my actual position on the guy. I'm sure the other trolls felt a tingle in their jeans when they read your comment. Good job. You made men tingle.
Please stop talking about men tingling. I miss Crusty enough as it is.
You're one of the biggest fucking trolls here, sarc.
It's time to stop pretending that you're some kind of facts-first noble commenter, when you spend 99% of your time here shitposting and trolling.
Also your TDS is fucking legendary. You insinuating Dalasio is trolling for pointing out the obvious is incredibly ballsy.
Tu quoque! Tu quoque!
Is that your mating call or something?
The discussion is on how you are a troll. Of course his comments are going to be about you. That is the only way that argument works.
Can you please learn how to properly use fallacies instead of blinding stating them while not understanding their use.
Thanks.
I will keep pointing out when you and your gagging fallacy brigade fellates fallacies, fuck you very much.
Speaking of fallacies, isn't it about time your retarded ass learns what "tu quoque" is and when it applies?
Why don't you enlighten me. Explain what I am doing wrong and how to do it correctly. Or shove it up your ass.
I just told you how you were wrong. You can read that.
Here you go, sarc: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
Read the first sentence. It's not tu quoque when your trolling is the subject rather than the response.
And even in situations which may actually be "tu quoque" (unlike this), you more often than not use it as a weaselly method to attempt to evade credible charges of hypocrisy.
Sad, you’ve been told over and over again, in detail. From many of us, including me. So just stop with your bullshit. If you were honest about what you are at least that would be worth a little respect.
SARCASMIC, name one real positive you’ve ever given about Trump. Yes your TDS paint you in a bad light but denying that you have it makes it worse.
Now you’re just making yourself look like a liar, instead of just misguided/deluded. If you’re going to be a liberal troll at least make interesting points. And don’t deny where you stand, it weakens your point.
"...Now you’re just making yourself look like a liar,.."
"Looking like"? You misspelled "proving yourself to be".
The best he will come up with is something like Ty Cobb’s observation about Babe Ruth.
Is this the new party line?
Fuck if I know. Ask someone who is a member of a political party.
Is this the new party line?
"Is this the new party line?"
Translation: Stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself!
No, I'm saying you're a Democrat, and you joined Jeff in trying to run cover for Minitru this morning by parroting the DNC's phony allegation that the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Act was a precursor when it was actually completely unrelated.
Non-Democrats don't spam obviously false party propaganda.
Then you're a retard. I'm just trying to spread cognitive dissonance amongst the "Biden bad Trump good grunt grunt" crowd. And judging by the level of hostility I'm getting, I believe I succeeded.
No you're not. You're shilling DNC agitprop like the good little Democratic footsoldier you are.
And yet you never seem to try to spread your 'cognitive dissonance' amongst the "Orangemanbad" crowd. By dint of such unidirectional posting, you have placed your self to the far left of even most liberal Democrats (but not as far as AOC or the social media fact checkers, so keep trying). The level of hostility you are getting is because you are neither original nor cognisant of failing at your copy and paste reasoning.
Hahaha! You’re going with one of your “I’m saying this as a public service” bullshit explanations again? You are so prosaic.
The CISA Act is what gave DHS the authority to look into 'disinformation' in the first place.
This new Disinformation Governance Board isn't part of the DHS's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, nor does the act cover it's creation.
I know you're regurgatating the hasty new party narrative, but it's not true and you know it.
Time to stop lying.
Also the CISA Act isn't the first time an agency has been tasked with investigating foreign propaganda and disinformation.
Hey, our resident morbidly obese child grooming, pedophile enthusiast has chimed in.
If that were true, would it make it better or worse for liberty?
Why did you push the uncited information that I've only heard 3 democrats push if you aren't a member of that party. You seem to have no problem pushing their change of narrative from the weekend.
Why did you push the uncited information that I've only heard 3 democrats push if you aren't a member of that party.
Because I figured your brain would break under the strain of cognitive dissonance if you found that it started under Trump.
Must hate because Biden must defend because Trump must hate must defend hate defend hate defend......
You're not tricking anyone.
Everyone here knows that you're a TDS addled Democratic party acolyte.
Not the great impartial libertarian, free of tribalism and dripping with neutrality like you claim. You're not tricking anyone.
Yeah. You got me. I'm like super consistent impartial libertarian in my posts, but it's really just an act. What you guys say about me is the real truth. Ignore what I say. Everyone should listen to what you say about me instead. You're so wise. Ignore me. Listen to him and his buddies. I will genuflect now.
You're never consistent, lol.
You are so delusional.
You're consistently Democrat in your rare moments of sobriety, but that's about it.
You're using another term you apparently don't understand, that being cognitive dissonance.
The only one here pushing or showing that is you for blindly repeating uncited information pushed by something they already believed, ie Trump is always in the wrong.
You initially blamed Trump for this a few days ago, and since Psaki stated Trump created it you simply started pushing it.
Showing me the law, regulation, or statement of Trump or his WH pushing this committee.
You're projecting pretty badly here.
You see, this is where your inability to recognize your copy and paste reasoning has been dispelled. Yet you persist in it. That is a big reason you receive so much hostility. That and you are a lying waste of a bowel movement.
"The board was conceived under the Trump administration to investigate claims of Russian interference in the election."
No it wasn't and this is why I am so fed up with the Left's shenanigans and certain others' attempts to carry water for them.
The Cyber Security Department was setup by the Trump administration. Its main job was to harden our infrastructure against cyber attacks. One work-stream, among many, was to a) Study misinformation campaigns abroad, b) generate awareness in the public on how these campaigns work, and c) create a hub for reporting foreign attempts to interfere with misinformation.
None of that included setting up a Ministry of Truth.
And again, so what. Even if it were a Trump era plan, Cyto's points are not invalidated. If it WERE a plan from Trump, then the appropriate Biden response should have been, "Well fuck that, it's authoritarian nonsense." Instead, the Biden administration decided to do it 1.5 years into its administration just one week after a major platform for spreading information was bought purportedly to make information more free.
Go look at Nina Jankowicz today. She is straight up admitting her first task as part of this board is to go after online sex based harassment and disinformation.
If that doesn't scream started by Trump I don't know what does.
Nina Jankowicz ????????????????
@wiczipedia
Replying to @wiczipedia
Common disinfo narratives were racist, transphobic, or sexual. Women of color faced compounded abuse. Here you can see how users who pushed sexual narratives about @KamalaHarris also posted other abusive content. (Network by @APavliuc of @oiioxford)
Trump!!!
And they will surely do that without monitoring Americans, like the other weasel said over the weekend.
I don’t call him Lying Jeffy for nothing.
The Cyber Security Department was setup by the Trump administration. Its main job was to harden our infrastructure against cyber attacks. One work-stream, among many, was to a) Study misinformation campaigns abroad, b) generate awareness in the public on how these campaigns work, and c) create a hub for reporting foreign attempts to interfere with misinformation.
None of that included setting up a Ministry of Truth.
You got that from the strategic plan for the CISA that I posted earlier. So, then, what is the strategic plan for the Disinformation Governance Board? Hmm? Oh wait we don't know what it is, we don't know precisely what it will do, in fact we know very little concrete information about it at all. So then what is the basis for calling it a MINISTRY OF TRUTH? I'll tell you what: all of the paranoid hysteria that has been generated surrounding its creation. That's it.
We know exactly what it's going to do, you enormous fraud.
"Its aim is protecting national security by combatting foreign misinformation and disinformation. Specific problem areas mentioned include false information propagated by human smugglers encouraging migrants to surge to the Mexico–United States border, as well as Russian-state disinformation on election interference, the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, and COVID-19 vaccines."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disinformation_Governance_Board
also
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-immigration-media-europe-misinformation-4e873389889bb1d9e2ad8659d9975e9d
Oh my, that sounds nefarious. Totally a MINISTRY OF TRUTH.
Now, let's compare this to what happened in 2019:
https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/current-activity/2019/07/22/building-resilience-foreign-interference-misinformation-activities
As part of the effort to #Protect2020, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) is working with national partners to build resilience to foreign interferences, particularly information activities (e.g., disinformation, misinformation). The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) views foreign interference as malign actions taken by foreign governments or actors designed to sow discord, manipulate public discourse, discredit the electoral system, bias the development of policy, or disrupt markets for the purpose of undermining the interests of the United States and its allies.
So the Disinformation Governance Board is not a new idea. And actually the CISA was built upon even previous efforts.
None of these ideas led to a MINISTRY OF TRUTH. None of these ideas led to citizens being dragged out of their house at 3am and thrown in a cage for posting a shitty meme on social media. None of these things led us down the dark path of fascism into utter tyranny.
It doesn't mean it's a good idea, but it also doesn't mean it will be the end of free speech as we know it.
So again we come back to Biden made MiniTru, actually going down the dark path of tyranny.
But TOTALLY Trump's fault.
The DGB is going to determine what's "truth" and then plans to censor those who object to it. Do you support censorship?
You are another poster using copy and paste reasoning. Also, for the same reason, it is why people accurately refer to you as a leftist regurgitating monkey with less intelligence than AOC when discussing anything. Also your dishonesty in dealing with people makes you less liked than a shart in a hot tub.
Pedo Jeffy is white knighting for totalitarian democrats totalitarian machinations again. But he’s totally libertarian!
We don’t need to know. What part of that is so hard for you to understand? There is no legitimate function of a government agency policing Americans free speech. Fuck, there’s not even a compelling interest in surveilling foreign people spreading “misinformation” online (or in any other fashion).
There is no legitimate function of a government agency policing Americans free speech.
I agree, and if that's what it was going to do, I'd be really concerned.
That's not what the stated objective is. Read above.
I know you’re not that naive.
Jeff, you sound like an abused spouse. Sure, he hit you, but he promised he wouldn't anymore and you believe him.
The government is not trustworthy. They cannot be taken at their word on anything, because they abuse their authority every fucking time, either overtly or through "mission creep," where the initially limited scope just keeps expanding more and more. This goes double for executive agencies, which are staffed with unelected bureaucrats whose rulemaking powers have the force of law, and yet who have almost no accountability.
It's pathetic. Even with the long and ever-growing list of rampant corruption and abuse by government agencies just in the past couple of years, you still believe that they totally mean it this time, and this time will be different.
Then, are you an anarchist?
You know, I've seen multiple democrats claim this, Jen Psaki for example, yet have not seen any actual evidence for those claims.
You wouldn't blindly be repeating talking points would you?
Cause I have seen no actual evidence or statement from Trump or his administration regarding using DHS in this manner. But apparently you have the evidence somewhere.
Here again, Jankowicz seems to subscribe to a progressive-media view of
online speechreality that is somewhat at odds with reality.Fixed.
more of an Advisory board. As in when the government gives you advise you better do it or else. Or else want to lose your license, want to be fined more, want etc...
They'll be jailed right next to all those restauranteurs who ignore dietary advice from the FDA.
Note this post folks for when sarc invariably insists he never downplayed Minitru at its inception.
You could link it word for word and he’ll still deny it.
Sarc, do you look forward to being torn apart over and over again here? You come off as some kind of social media masochist. Do you set yourself up for failure because it gets you off? Or are you really this broken, drunk and stupid?
Thank you for your interest in DGB!
I'd like to take a moment to reassure you that our agency will go nothing so obnoxiously heavy-handed as that, thank goodness!
If something questionable begins to proliferate on social media, we will simply be there as a source for our journalist friends to refer to, as they can indicate in articles that an "unnamed source in DGB" states the troublesome uninformation is "under investigation".
As we take our work very seriously, such nvestigations will of COURSE take a very long time, but meanwhile we feel that even knowing an
official body is looking into the matter will cast enough doubt on its veracity that the American People will be able to ignore it in their decision-making processes. Thus Democracy will be protected!
We hope this has clarified our operational model for you.
Have a pleasant day!
Will you be providing a list of all the disinformation that will be grandfathered into legitimate information?
Revisionist History? (1619 Project)
Systemic Racism?
Covid Alarmism?
Climate Alarmism?
Alphabet Soup? (LGBTQ!@#$)
Mr. Thompson,
Thank you for your inquiry into DGB!
We are assembling lists of "approved" disinformation right now, but feel it would generate confusion to release those to Board non-members. As part of DHS, of course, our policy will be to consider such documentation to be critical to national security and therefore not available to the general public except in heavily redacted form via FOIA request.
Have a pleasant day!
The Disinformation Board will have no actual power.
It will just help make sure all the private companies are on the same page.
Or else.
Nothing less powerful than an official branch of Homeland Security.
You know who else doesn't have any actual power by themselves?
Private citizens.
I'm interpreting the "advice" from this "advisory board" as them telling social media companies what they need to do to not get shut down by the government. Kind of like how a mob enforcer gives you advice about how it would be good to hire some protection for your business because it would be a shame if someone were to smash up your shop or for you to make up to someone busting your kneecaps with a baseball bat.
The DGB will tell you what disinformation is, you don't get to ask.
TOP MEN
That’s very exclusionary! What about bottom men? Like Tony.
And just why are "we" putting a foreign policy related "truth"
board in the Department of HOMELAND Security?
Because concepts like liberty and an informed populace are foreign threats to the marxist progressive worldview. Just be thankful they didn't put it in the justice department.
They’ll just make referrals to DOJ.
Precisely why Tar, Feathers, Torches, and Pitchforks R Us opened its online emporium. Visit us while supplies last!
We're going to need bigger / more lamp posts.
Jankowicz is also the author of a recent book, How To be a Woman Online: Surviving Abuse and Harassment, and How to Fight Back.
This is the kind of D-list activism we like to see heading up our most Orwellian agencies.
From the title I thought it was going to be a guide to online sex roleplay, but was disgusted to find it was much sadder.
Apparently you didn't visit Tar, Feathers, Torches, and Pitchforks R Us for your pleasure.
Didn’t she write some Harry Potter erotic fiction where she fantasizes about being a ghost who kills 14 year old Harry and then fucks his ghost? She’s one fucked up progtard slut. Probably a total freak.
Janckowicz was going to invite Taylor Lorenz to write an Epilogue to the book. Alas, Taylor was not available because she was too busy abusing and harassing an Orthodox Jewish woman who runs LibsofTikTok on Twitted
Homeland Security Chief Admits New Disinformation Board Already Did a Bad Job of Informing Public
The Russians got to him.
Homeland Security Chief Admits New Disinformation Board Already
Did a Bad Job of Informing PublicInforming the Public!Fixed it.
That a government entity charged with improving the government's capacity for generating good information failed this first and most basic task is not particularly encouraging.
If they had been more successful would it be more encouraging?
That's the dream, isn't it? We're all strict materialists at Reason. Thus, the dream is to have agencies so efficient we're dead before we hit the ground and feel the dirt in our mouths.
If the New York Times agrees that it's disinformation, will it be considered disinformation from that moment forward, and never brought up in public again?
Official disinformation that turns out to be wrongly classified can be printed in a retraction.
But only after the next election is completed.
Will CEOs be able to speak out on social justice issues without this agency?
Discuss.
Indeed, Mayorkas conceded that the announcement about the disinformation board was badly handled. "I think we probably could have done a better job in communicating what it does and does not do," he said.
I am really pretty comfortable saying that any amount of doing by the government in this area is probably bad. I'd be down with getting rid of the press secretary even. This is a fraught area for government, and this will almost certainly expand in authority.
Mayorkas is yet another example of why I call this presidency the "Peter Principle" adminstration. It's packed to the gills with bureaucrats who did relatively decent in former positions, but are hopelessly bad now that they're sitting in the various Big Kids' chairs.
I'd push back on one thing. The Peter Principle has some built in assumptions about the job being doable, just that the people who end up filling it are underqualified.
I think there is inherent issues with this type of bureaucratic work and that there is no real possibility of managing it. It's a Knowledge Problem type issue.
If government is talking to you it is lying to you.
It's just that simple.
The most comforting thing he said was that the board won't have much actual power, since it's only acting in an advisory role.
Yeah what this board is going to do is write a bunch of reports that no one reads. It's not MINISTRY OF TRUTH, it's just another useless government bureau that shouldn't exist in the first place.
Nothing to see here. Move along.
(And Trump Calling out the press for lying about Russia colluding with him over the 2016 elections is literally fascism in action.. got it.)
No, it's "something". It is just not dystopian MINISTRY OF TRUTH "something".
Yeah, they told us the PATRIOT Act wouldn't be used to spy on Americans, either.
You sure do enjoy giving these guys a lot of leeway when they happen to have a (D) after their name.
The board started under Trump. Biden only finalized it.
No it didn't. Different entities with completely different missions. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency was not the same thing in any way.
No matter how hard Jeff misrepresents it.
Psaki's talking point went out, Sarc is just here to blindly push it without any thought.
Unpossible, he swears he's not a tribal Democrat.
Sarc is going with the same trope the democrats used to claim ‘Fast and Furious’ was started under GWB instead of Obama, when they knew goddamn well they were referring to a completely different operation.
But Sarc is totally not a democrat.
And Bush passed the PATRIOT Act, only for Obama to expand on it. Doesn't invalidate the observation that chemjeff is yet again going to bat for the party of his lefty neighbors.
From what I've read he's not wrong. It's a toothless agency.
For now.
They didn't put a spastic like Janckowicz in charge to be a figurehead.
I don't know what that means. From what I've read the board has an advisory role only. Take it or leave it. Toothless.
That doesn't in any way justify it. I'm not saying that. No. Quite the opposite.
But if you're going to argue about it, may as well stick to the facts as we know them.
You've spent more posts defending it from attacks, calling it advisory, or blaming Trump than you have saying it isn't justified.
Weird.
That is in response to "That doesn't in any way justify it. I'm not saying that. No. Quite the opposite."
Can you read?
"That doesn't in any way justify it. I'm not saying that. No. Quite the opposite."
No, not the opposite. In fact you're being dismissive of it, which, when you're dealing with something so obviously dangerous, is arguably worse.
Sarc do you know what the word "more" means? And how it is used in my comment?
You are really struggling with English today.
That doesn't in any way justify it.
He wants to attack the right while still pretending to oppose the underlying issue. He thinks this is the best way to enhance his credibility thus making his attacks on the right more powerful.
But as he's now admitted this agency isn't toothless, it's one cog in the machine working in concert with others. The fact that it needs those others to achieve its goal does not mean it is powerless. But pretending so is the best defense he can come up with to defend the agency and its propaganda mission.
“I don't know what that means”
Well that’s not surprising.
When Facebook and Google were "advised" by the BIDEN "Whathouse" that was a powerless request too right? Oh wait...
Of course the referrals they give to the FBI and DOJ won’t be ‘toothless’.
It's a toothless agency. For now.
The claim that this is toothless misunderstands pretty much everything about how bureaucracy and activism work. A government agency with this task is set up as one link in the chain. Then supposedly independent (but in reality allied) institutions deflect their own responsibility by following the recommendations laid out by this agency. Other allied organizations - media and academia - then support this alliance as "best practice" and demonize any actually independent action. Eventually everyone is forced into the desired mold.
People who oppose something try to get rid of it before it becomes powerful. Conversely people who protect something in its infancy want it to become powerful.
You just told me I'm wrong and then agreed with me. Hello?
In what way did he agree with you?
Riggghhht. It's advisory, just like Operation Chokepoint's recommendations were 'advisory'. Go piss up a rope.
Why do people call him a leftist....
Because they are retarded.
Or the fact you spend so much energy trying to defend these actions through dismissal or misdirection. Because it makes your boy Biden look badly.
Because when left wingers increase government power you attack those who oppose them.
Or, and hear me out, it’s because you and Jeff have spent the last few years reflexively calling almost anyone who might oppose something the Biden administration does as being a Trump cultist.
DesigNate, be honest. Do you think that there are times when the right-wing response to what Biden does is hyperbolic and over-the-top? Do you think that maybe it is possible to criticize that reaction as being hyperbolic without necessarily agreeing with whatever Biden administration action that was being criticized?
Sure. I’ll even admit that I’m guilty of it.
This is not one of those times.
Why do you think this is not one of those times?
Ope, it sure as hell isn’t. Especially not after all the previous efforts to silence dissent. Both direct, and indirect. But Jeffy is a propagandist cheerleader for his beloved democrats.
Do you think that maybe it is possible to criticize that reaction as being hyperbolic without necessarily agreeing with whatever Biden administration action that was being criticized?
If this were a principled position rather than a fig leaf cover for his partisanship wouldn't he have one single time applied this principle to people who refer to everyone on the right as racist and fascist? So why hasn't he? He doesn't apply this standard to them because he doesn't believe it. He invents whatever standard is necessary to attack his enemy, but he would never consider attacking his allies.
Because, as I’ve stated elsewhere, there is not legitimate reason for the board to exist. None of your hypothetical excuses are in any way valid.
The government does not have the authority to determine what TRUTH is, full stop.
What fucking difference does that make? It's still an authoritarian attack on free speech.
And I find it very difficult to believe that Trump started an agency whose job is to "combat dis and misinformation" and there was absolutely zero outcry about this from any media person. Especially given how the MSM just LOVED to cry about how Trump was a threat to freedom of speech.
The point here, though, is that this "authoritarian attack on free speech" did not lead to gulags and tyranny and MINISTRY OF TRUTH in the past.
Things are already tyrannical. Get your fucking head out of your industrial size bucket of Häagen-Daz and look around.
You have a very strange definition of tyranny.
No, just the ability to logicAlly process everything that’s happening. I’m also not a shill for the regime.
I do not agree that "Things are already tyrannical". I find that comment itself to be a wild exaggeration.
Let's see... We have MiniTru, it's a jailable hate crime to use mean words, Americans are surveilled by their own gov't millions of times a year, elections are compromised and there's a single party in power.
Sure sounds like a healthy democracy.
Sure, all libertarians believe protest is illegitimate unless people are already in gulags. That's a perfectly reasonable position.
Right. The process for leftists is to deny each incremental step is meaningful, thus defending each gain. Then when the last step is reached they claim it's "old news" and you're naïve for not having accepted it when it actually occurred in the many preceding stages.
For reference refer to their actions supporting race preferences.
I disagree.
I'm inclined to agree, for now, but it should be reacted to very negatively. Not just because it's a waste of money, but because it's very common for these things to grow in authority and metastasize.
So, it's not good now, and may be dangerous later. This adds up to it being a very bad idea.
Advisory group will then make guide lines and guide lines are treated like laws just like mask wearing it wasn't a law but it was enforced.
Sure would be a shame if something happened to your social media that we don't like...
"Yeah what this board is going to do is write a bunch of reports that no one reads. It's not MINISTRY OF TRUTH, it's just another useless government bureau that shouldn't exist in the first place."
That's what I would have said about the CDC 3 years ago.
You are one of those radical individualists that always believes what the government tells them, it seems.
Only when it’s Democrats.
Have to admit, that CNN interviewer was better than I expected. She directly asked the most important questions. More polite than strictly necessary but good enough.
Mayorkas gave the weaselly answers I expected. Says the board will only have the power to tell "operators" what is best practice but gives no examples of what specific actions those operators might take. Keeps saying civil liberties will be protected but says nothing about how he and his agency define those liberties.
specific actions those operators might take" just like operation choke point banks no longer allowing gun dealers access to accounts. anything the government does now is law even when they admit it is unconstitutional per Joe Biden
This is what I'm writing my article about today. Canada let the cat out of the bag last winter, but Biden is happy to continue treating political adversaries as terrorists and stealing their shit.
Finished article:
https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/free-speech-under-attack-from-all
“which I believe is called the “How To False Flag Your Way Into World War Three” Act.”
Haha, nice.
It's funny because it's true. They are dying for an excuse to get involved in Ukraine.
Civil Liberties will be protected because "private companies" will be the ones actually censoring people, duh! And before you go there Twitter under Musk, well th-that's different because fuck you!
The CNN report is an example of the Law of Holes: When you're in one and want out, stop digging.
Dig up
Classic Wiggum
My butt hurts! Reason didn't write this story fast enough and when they did, they didn't say it the way I wanted them to! I need them to write exactly what I'm thinking dammit!
When you're getting punked by randos on Substack, maybe you should re-think your 'media company.'
Yup.
My butt hurts, too. I worry it's colon cancer.
If it turns out to be prostate cancer, try identifying as a woman and calling the prostate cancer a trasphobe. That will show it!
If your official letterhead says you're about "Free Minds and Free Markets", you should probably be first in line to cover major new government initiatives to threaten either one, instead of waiting a week and then saying it's not implemented very well.
Several weeks on and we're still getting the "WAR ON FREE SPEECH AND FREE ENTERPRISE" from Reason about Florida Republican's effort to repeal some of Disney's tax and regulation carveouts, and the most we can get about the new ministry of truth is that they did a bad job of informing the public and how that undermines public confidence in the new agency.
^ +1
If your butt hurts, then you probably had Tony over for a ‘social call’ and you bottomed for him.
Only if Tony used a strap on. He doesn't have enough going on down there to cause more than a mild discomfort.
I suspect Tony is primarily a power bottom himself, but maybe he was on a lunch break.
Who's jacked off effluence stiffened sock are you? I put you as sarcasmic's but there is an outside chance for Tony since you mentioned butt in under 3 words (but without child so there's that).
It really chafes your ass that Biden is turning out to be the real authoritarian fascist that you screamed Trump would be, doesn’t it?
To be sure the more important question is ; Did Reason have a good time at the weekend annual Biden Tongue Bath/ Trump Bash? Did you all get in a few good licks?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/66890686@N02/51569900538/
After all, it is not the U.S. government's responsibility to decide what is and is not misinformation: People decide that for themselves.
'Exactly. "We The People" == "The U.S. Government".'
Well, government IS the word for the things we do together.
If they were accurate, honest, and open 100% of the time and the best source for reliable information, it is STILL not a power the government should have. So the grounds for attacking it isn't about tweaking it so it works better, it's not something that should ever exist.
Here again, Jankowicz seems to subscribe to a progressive-media view of online speech that is somewhat at odds with reality. Given that the very purpose of the disinformation board deserves skepticism, the fact that it will be chaired by a figure with a dubious record on some of these issues does not inspire tremendous confidence.
Jackowicz didn't get this job by accident. Like Sarah Jeong at the NYT, she got it specifically BECAUSE she subscribes to that view--that anything which mocks, bashes, or subverts the left-wing political agenda is "hate speech" and "disinformation." And like a lot of big-brained ideas in the last 20-odd years, it's being implemented by a party who thinks they'll never be out of power and such tools will never be used against them.
Yep. I haven't yet found a subject where Nina wasn't 100% with the party. She's the 'disinformation' version of Tony Fauci; somebody who will say whatever the administration wants, who the administration will then point to as 'proof' of what they said.
For the same reason Omarova was nominated for Comptroller of the Currency. Because that's the type of person they wanted to fill the job.
Well now we know ho Nina fucked to be rich famous and powerful.
that video of her singing it is amazing
It is indeed. There is a population of people who thrive on attention, require constant affirmation, will do anything to be the center of attention. It certainly seems that she is one of these.
This board will do all its work through innuendo and similar "plausible deniability" methods, and will admit error the same way the New York Times does: on page 38, weeks later at best, more likely never.
On the plus side, the meme potential is outstanding. Until, you know, they declare those memes disinformation and the social media sites start to block them like good little Useful Idiots.
Mencken said something about... running the circus from the monkey cage. So now we’re gonna put parts of the 1A in the hands of a few delusional statists and Marxist regulators. Good grief.
Here’s an original concept: why not simply use the 1A to counterbalance what isn’t favored from the 1A. Biden’s regime is already a three-ring circus. Don’t make it worse.
As I noted on the earlier thread on this subject - you know, the one where soldier and other excitable drugstore cowboys were talking up loading rounds and taking to the woods - the board has no enforcement powers and according to the AP was beginning by countering false BS fed to potential immigrants encouraging them to come to our borders, as well as Russian disinformation - real scary stuff!!!
Now the same weak argument about the director doing to the 2020 October Surprise Hunter laptop story what all major news sources did with the 2016 October surprise called the Steel Dossier - ignore it.
"When the New York Post first reported in October 2020 that it had obtained the contents of a laptop computer allegedly owned by Joe Biden’s son Hunter, there was an immediate roadblock faced by any other news outlet that hoped to corroborate the reporting, as many did: The newspaper wasn’t sharing what it obtained.
The national story quickly centered on the dubious provenance of the material, particularly given how, four years before, WikiLeaks had begun releasing material stolen by Russian hackers at about the same point in the presidential contest. But for news outlets interested in actually evaluating what the New York Post claimed it had, neither the paper nor its source for the material, President Donald Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani, were willing to share. (Giuliani famously told the New York Times that he was hoping to avoid having the material vetted before being published.) It therefore seemed wise to treat the New York Post’s claims with some skepticism.
Now, a new voice has joined those raising questions about the validity of the material that’s alleged to have been on Hunter Biden’s laptop: the guy who recovered that data in the first place.
Last month, The Washington Post was able to publish a report based on a copy of material that we obtained from a Republican activist named Jack Maxey who’d gotten it from Giuliani. We had multiple experts examine the contents of a hard drive that purported to contain the laptop’s contents, validating tens of thousands of emails as likely to be legitimate. But an enormous amount of the material on the drive couldn’t be validated as legitimate, in part because of the game of telephone that the material had undergone by the time it reached us. (The report notes that efforts to obtain the material in 2020 were rebuffed.)
“The experts found the data had been repeatedly accessed and copied by people other than Hunter Biden over nearly three years,” our report explained, with those we spoke with being unable to “reach definitive conclusions about the contents as a whole, including whether all of it originated from a single computer or could have been assembled from files from multiple computers and put on the portable drive.”
For example:
“[An expert] also found records on the drive that indicated someone may have accessed the drive from a West Coast location in October 2020, little more than a week after the first New York Post stories on Hunter Biden’s laptop appeared.”
“Over the next few days, somebody created three additional folders on the drive, titled, ‘Mail,' ‘Salacious Pics Package’ and ‘Big Guy File’ — an apparent reference to Joe Biden.”
One expert likened it to a crime scene that was littered with fast-food wrappers thanks to the first police who’d arrived on the scene. That’s meant as an indictment, but it’s also generous. The first people on the scene weren’t police, in this case; they were (to extend the analogy) people aiming to obtain an indictment against a particular person....
What Mac Isaac (computer repair shop owner) said next, though, is what was most noteworthy. When he did his “deep dive,” he said, he “saw a lot of photos” — but “did not see a lot of photos that are being reported to [have been] seen.”
“I do know that there have been multiple attempts over the past year-and-a-half to insert questionable material into the laptop as in, not physically, but passing off this misinformation or disinformation as coming from the laptop,” he said. “And that is a major concern of mine because I have fought tooth and nail to protect the integrity of this drive and to jeopardize that is going to mean that everything that I sacrificed will be for nothing.”
In other words, Mac Isaac says that he has seen claims about what the laptop contains that don’t actually reflect what he saw on the laptop at the outset.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/04/12/now-warning-about-hunter-biden-laptop-disinfo-guy-who-leaked-it/
so what.
its not the government's job to gatekeep and control 'misinformation'
When disinformation is causing damage to the US based on falsehoods, of course it's the government's job to refute it. It's anyone's job that has the facts, just like it's my job to keep you fuckers from believing whatever crap you pick up from MAGA news.
As a libertarian stating because X is causing damage it's the governments job to control X falls far short of the threshold needed for government action.
To a libertarian there needs to be very strong proof that the damage caused by X is worse than the damage caused by government intervention in X.
To a moderate - frankly I think any reasonable person - there should at least be a reasonable argument that the damage caused by government control of X should be less than the damage of X.
Don't just state X is a problem therefore the government must fix X.
Do you honestly think that the damage caused by misinformation in the US (say distorting vaccine safety data) is worse than the damage caused by countries that effectively control "misinformation" like Russia, NK, and China (say invading the Ukraine and not letting Russian citizens hear "misinformation" about the war)?
When disinformation is causing damage to the US based on falsehoods,
OOOOOOH NO
Who decides this ?
Remember how Chairman Mao decided which kinds of "disinformation was harmful" to the Party? Those were good times.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults. It is exactly what he deserves.
Not a one of his posts is worth refuting; like turd he lies and never does anything other than lie. If something in one of Joe Asshole’s posts is not a lie, it is there by mistake. Joe Asshole lies; it's what he does.
Joe Asshole is a psychopathic liar; he is too stupid to recognize the fact, but everybody knows it. You might just as well attempt to reason with or correct a random handful of mud as engage Joe Asshole.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults; Joe Asshole deserves nothing other.
Go suck the rest of the formaldehyde out of Lenin's cock, you tankie scumbag.
-jcr
I'm grown up enough to have never voted for Trump, so I don't need your help!
Fuck Off, Mrs. Grundy and go fly a kite!
"I'm grown up enough to have never voted for Trump,.."
Me neither, since in CA, my vote doesn't count.
But if I lived elsewhere and did vote for the re-election of the best POTUS we had in the last century, I'd be hanging my head in shame. Last I saw the TDS-addled adolescent assholes haven't grown up enough to focus on policies rather than personalities.
What's your excuse?
...and did *NOT* vote for the re-election of the best POTUS we had in the last century,...
You have no job, you’re someone who needs a beating, or series of beatings that your parents neglected to teach you growing up. You have nothing to offer here, save for ignorance, lies, stupidity, and Marxist treason.
You should burn in hell. The sooner the better.
Good!
Exactly how intelligent folks should respond to Joe Asshole!
Lol. Joe, it’s your “job” to keep people from believing stuff? No shit?
How self important can you get? I figured you for a government employee.
You're going with the laptop is misinformation again? Based on Isaac not looking at every single file on it? LOL.
Only part of why the laptop is damaged "evidence" Jesse, but hey, I know your attention span is very short.
No you are being disingenuous. Thousands upon thousands of documents on that laptop could be confirmed, and some number could not. That doesn't make it disinformation. It just makes it unconfirmed.
But folks like yourself, Joe Friday, cannot *stand* that you have been made a fool of by your Media gods. So you are grasping at every straw you can find to say, "Well, ackshewally, the fact that um...Giuliani had this...and um...someone could access the laptop...and um...some stuff was missing...um....DISINFORMATION!"
No, you are wrong. I've been in the IT business for 30 fucking years, and I know bullshit when I see it. I knew it when I saw "Cyber security experts flagging evidence of collusion in trump tower" and I know it now when you are trying to use innuendo and IT terms you do not understand to indict an ENTIRE body of evidence, based on very shaky circumstantial information. And you are doing it because you were embarrassed.
Just as you were embarrassed when you couldn't describe what Vaccine efficacy means. Just as you were embarrassed when you couldn't articulate mortality figures. You do this constantly: shift the subject just a little bit (memory-holing your mistakes) so you can claim you were right all along.
It is transparently obvious and only makes you look more foolish.
"Well, ackshewally, the fact that um...Giuliani had this...“
That was Reason’s initial stance as well.
"...And you are doing it because you were embarrassed..."
You are entirely too generous: Joe Asshole is too stupid to experience embarrassment and too stupid to understand that his lies have been shown, by facts, to be bullshit. He is stupid such as to be incapable of learning and nothing is served by engaging him.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults.
Not a one of his posts is worth refuting; like turd he lies and never does anything other than lie. If something in one of Joe Asshole’s posts is not a lie, it is there by mistake. Joe Asshole lies; it's what he does.
Joe Asshole is a psychopathic liar; he is too stupid to recognize the fact, but everybody knows it. You might just as well attempt to reason with or correct a random handful of mud as engage Joe Asshole.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults; Joe Asshole deserves nothing other.
Yep.
Joe Friday is aptly named.
Joe Asshole:
"Only part of why the laptop is damaged "evidence" Jesse, but hey, I know your attention span is very short."
There's a further reason no one should bother engaging piles of shit like this; the assholes invent whole new irrelevancies which you'd hope to address, only to find Joe Asshole had come up with brand new misdirections!
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults.
Not a one of his posts is worth refuting; like turd he lies and never does anything other than lie. If something in one of Joe Asshole’s posts is not a lie, it is there by mistake. Joe Asshole lies; it's what he does.
Joe Asshole is a psychopathic liar; he is too stupid to recognize the fact, but everybody knows it. You might just as well attempt to reason with or correct a random handful of mud as engage Joe Asshole.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults; Joe Asshole deserves nothing other.
I’m 99% convinced Friday is actually Biden.
The Biden Whitehouse didn't have any power when they 'advised' Facebook and Google to censor stories, yet they still did. Now go finish your paper route or deliver your pizza's and change your depends.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults.
Not a one of his posts is worth refuting; like turd he lies and never does anything other than lie. If something in one of Joe Asshole’s posts is not a lie, it is there by mistake. Joe Asshole lies; it's what he does.
Joe Asshole is a psychopathic liar; he is too stupid to recognize the fact, but everyone else knows it. You might just as well attempt to reason with or correct a random handful of mud as engage Joe Asshole.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults; Joe Asshole deserves nothing other.
I tore him apart on the new Ukraine article less than an hour ago. Once again, I counseled him towards self harm. I didn’t want, but I felt I owed it to him.
Problem is, like turd, he's so stupid he's forgotten the lies he told 5 minutes ago, so he simply repeats them; he is stupid such as to be incapable of learning and nothing is served by engaging him.
Joe Friday, go fuck yourself.
^ This
He needs to have his testicles beaten with his own shoes.
So?
“online harassment—a real problem, to be sure”
I’m not so sure about that.
it is a problem for little gen z snowflakes. "somebody hurt my fweewings" is basically what it's about.
Gen Z snowflakes are also the biggest harassers online. You can really tell that none of them have ever been punched in the face for saying something shitty, because they never think twice about saying something shitty.
I think the Disinformation Board has done a great job of spreading disinformation. Some call it propaganda.
Thank you for your kind words! We do aim to please.
Have a pleasant day!
If the govt is unpopular, that just means they did bad PR, or even better, that they're acting in the public interest and one day the ungrateful people will understand.
If the government is popular, then that means the people are all-wise and insightful. Since that scenario is fairly rare, they usually go to the explanations in the paragraph above.
It's a mechanism to be put in place now and have the definitions and purpose change over time. Gov loves to make you think it's a minor foot in the door when they really desire to kick the door wide open.
Full body scanners will be a secondary screening tools at airports.
Hillary Clinton ran the greatest misinformation campaign I've ever seen. There is little interest in going after that.
Also, I would call the letter that the 50 intel people signed about Hunter's laptop a disinformation campaign designed to discredit. People like that like to have a mechanism for plausible denial. In this case the statement later in the letter saying they are not saying it's Russian disinformation. They new damn well the press would be parading that letter as proof that it was Russian disinformation.
Government wants the ability to restrict unauthorized disinformation to help control disinformation narratives approved by the party.
No, incompetence and lack of oversite is a feature not a bug in 1984 like government departments. The purpose of this introduction was not to inspire confidence, but fear. And from articles like this I suspect that it worked.
Now, now. The Biden Administration has amply demonstrated that it needs someone to coordinate its disinformation efforts, and Nina Jankowicz has quite a record for coordinating disinformation.
It's a bit too on-the-nose to call it a "Disinformation Governance Board", though. This isn't the 1930s, you can't just call your government's equivalent to Herr Goebbels a Propaganda Minister anymore.
Contrary to the last sentence, I have TREMENDOUS confidence about this board. Confidence that it is unconstitutional. Confidence that its purpose is not as described. Confidence that is a governmental extension of the so-called "content moderation" of social media. Confidence that 99.99% of the "misinformation" and "disinformation" identified will be from the right. Confidence that 75% of the "misinformation" and "disinformation" ignored will be from the left. Confidence that we will never be able to root it out, except with an (R) election in 2024.
Rico, it's not the messaging, it's the product, and the fact that Mayorkas is attributing the issues that people have with the product to it not being presented with the correct spin is as troubling as any other bs from this administration. As for Jankowicz, her risible take on online harassment is only one indicator of her lack of qualification for the position. The fact that the belief is a central tenet in her worldview is a permanent disqualification from any position of authority in which she influences policy or law.
To be fair, strictly speaking nobody is qualified for a position which shouldn't exist at all - things could be worse if the job was given to a non-moron, and could be worse than that if the appointee was a sophisticated intellectual.
"...The most comforting thing he said was that the board won't have much actual power, since it's only acting in an advisory role..."
Remember when masks were just 'recommended'? I do.
We feel the need to correct your errant memory and point out that masks were REQUIRED, NOT merely RECOMMENDED, for the entire time we have been at war with Eastasia.
Certainly feels that way.
Have a pleasant day!
Perhaps one of the totalitarians on this forum (JF, chemjeff, etc) can explain why a government board would do a better job sorting through misinformation than snopes.com?
I think "our resident totalitarians" have either (a) said they're withholding judgment on the details of what the board would do or (b) defending Reason's coverage of the board.
As for withholding judgment, this fails to show the "jealousy" the Founders recommended toward any attack on the public's rights. "Jealousy" is what sophisticated people nowadays call "paranoid," but without such jealousy we'd still be drinking toasts to the King (or we'd be forced to refill the mint juleps of the people doing the toasting).
As for Reason, they should, To Be Sure(TM), have jumped on this story right out of the gate. Now they're trying to make up for lost time.
Yeah, I personally can give Reason a Mulligan for being a couple of days late on the story - it's not the worst thing ever.
But withholding judgement on Biden and DHS on this seems overly cautious. If Biden/DHS/Democratic Party had a reasonable explanation for the DGB it would have been all over the news by now.
DGB is what it seems - a government agency designed to squash any story they don't like. In theory I suppose one could argue this is a good thing IF there were ethical objective people in charge of it - but clearly the person in charge is not objective.
"...Now they're trying to make up for lost time."
Reason has been late to the party for at least two plus years: Reason should have been organizing riots in the streets the day Newsom decided he had the authority (and the knowledge) to lock-down 'inessential' businesses.
The problem I see here is that Reason is now run by the same sort of folks who populate the CA (and SF city) governments; seemingly not a one has ever worked at a for-profit business where you can be summarily fired for gross incompetence.
I feel like Reason is caught in some sort of time warp and are fighting for issues which have already been won while ignoring present reality. They're still writing a lot about drug laws, asset forfeiture laws, LGBT+ rights and other issues which might have been among the worst violations of personal liberty 20-30 years ago but aren't any more because laws have changed in favor of liberty on those issues while the government has greatly reduced liberty with the pandemic restrictions and the limits on freedom of speech.
Another thing Reason tends to get nostalgic about is the old libertarian line "Maybe a dime's worth of difference between the Democrats and the Republicans". That used to be somewhat true - but that was before the Democrats decided freedom of speech was a bad thing and implemented cancel culture, then declared all out war on freedom with the pandemic.
Remember when it was just recommended that Lois Lerner/IRS look at the Tea Party? Remember when it was just recommended that people switch their insurance? Remember when it was recommended to switch from incandescent bulbs to "higher" efficiency light bulbs? Remember when the Whitehouse recommended what stories to kill to Facebook and Google? Remember when it was recommended to follow the science? Good Times! Good Times for All!!
Don't forget the recommendation to do away with due process on campus.
Just more bullshit by Joey's regime, stuff and people we won't believe. If you are telling the truth you don't need a board of political hacks to say anything.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opinion-00029473
In Politico: leaked draft opinion indicates SCOTUS set to overturn Roe.
Two thoughts:
1. Who the fuck leaked this? The decision isn't expected for a couple more months, and I can't help but think this is an attempt to intimidate the anti-Roe majority. Cue antifa showing up at ACB's house with torches over this.
2. If this is the decision, DAMN.
And I mean damn as in, "Holy shit, that's huge."
1. Or breathe life into the Democratic chances of retaining the Senate in 22. Those chances were dead before this news.
Possibly. But the decision was coming either way, either today or this summer.
Thanks for bringing this to light. It does beg you to think. Keep it up.
Thanks for your beyond belief blogs stuff. looking for a Accountant In St Neots ? Check out this!
Too bad. You can only inform people who trust you.