Transcripts For CSPAN2 Nina Jankowicz How To Lose The Information War 20240712

By your very own nina who has done stellar work at the Wilson Center disinformation fellow. The coolest title ever, since last october. Before that she was a scholar on russia and ukraine. How to lose the information or , russia and the future of congress conflict is an amazing title for it is essential reading for everyone on this call, zoom in all of your friends. We remember russian Successful Campaign in 2016 showed distrust and confusion in front of the president ial election. In order to win the information war, as needed say, we need to understand what disinformation is. I have heard her on this topic before. And it what it is not. This information is used to false or misleading information with malign intent. That is different from misinformation which can also be harmful but lacks malign and intent. It is brought goals and propaganda which involves the promotion of a nations worldview. What need arise, unlike soviet propaganda, sought to promote specific communist centric worldview, the kremlin today divides populations around the world with one goal in mind. The destruction of western democracy as we know it. Our democracy, no supplies to anyone on the zoom, continues to face tremendous threats from disinformation. This year we face not only another election, but also a pandemic which nina will tell us has spread a shadow pandemic of disinformation of Covenant Team prayed we have heard her on this topic and have done programming on this. In writing the book, nina had the rest of us had no clue the coronavirus are working around the corner she is done excellent job keeping up with the changes and disinformation affects more and more of the media landscape. Id like to say that ninas job is to spread information in a world of disinformation. In her work jump book she engages a writing so with a rigorous look at how disinformation spreads she draws her on the ground experience in ukraine where she received a fulbright grant to advise Ukrainian Government on strategic communications. Most importantly, she does with the Wilson Center does the best, which is to offer clear headed policy recommendations to the United States and other governments facing this challenge. Joining me on todays panel is matt your jansky. As well as a former fbi counterintelligence agent who is now senior lecturer at lail University Jackson institute for Global Affairs print please note that if you have questions for the panel, you can email them to canon at Wilson Center. Org bird Wilson Centers one word printer mention is on 20 and on twitter at the Wilson Center to kick off the discussion now, it is my delight to recognize maps. You are a treasure at the welcome center. And all the good work you do for us is just magical. Very exciting part okay matt. Alright thank you so much i mexican start things off and im going to that by thanking you and everyone at the Wilson Center so much for your support for the past three years its been a three year long process from conception when i was living in ukraine to today hear from my office. I would not of been able to do without the support of the canon institute. And matt saw the worst of the project when it was in its infancy and help save me the room and the space to develop it. And of course megan the program really sheltered it to the end. Im so grateful for your support and im thrilled to be with you here today. I thought i would read a little bit from the conclusion of the book which i wrote around this time last year. The end of july early august when i was trying to realize what future scenario would look like for the United States. We did not begin to push back against disinformation. Not just a russian but the domestic variety as well. It has begun to our discourse at an alarming rate recently. So again, think youll find some of the elements or hitting a little bit closer to home than i imagine when i wrote them. Though imagine its july 2028 in another president ial election is fast approaching. Talking to most americans are you would not know it, turn out has on a steady decline since 2020 when allegations of a nationwide Democratic Party organize social media manipulation campaign spread. After election and came and went, trump easily won a second term. A ukrainian journalist uncovered the manipulation story was fabricated. It originated from a troll account based in russia where another troll factory had been operating quietly for years. The story alleged the leadership of the Democratic National committee itself ive been using russian style social media tactics with the well timed tweet from an end account to Rudy Giuliani the rumor got its legs. With the single retreat, the former new york mayor during the entire twitters fear rabbit. Across party lines. It was no better that the story was complete hearsay. No one ever produced a shred of concrete evidence about the whole affair. But after the dnc had been hacked and emails plaque jump plastered across the internet in a 2016 election. It lost the trust of its members in the unaffiliated swing voters for they are fed by nonstop talk of scandal. Is it vicious unending circle the news media reported on the new allegations despite a lack of evidence. It is with voters, candidates, and parties were discussing how could they leave it untouched . That and the integrity of the electoral process balloons. On election day technical difficulties that precincts with electronic Voting Machines were perceived as potential votes of packing. Theres the security of improvement of the election since 2006 he made that theory plausible. Doubt for low turnout despite four years of organizing against trump, you third outreach to the lowest turnout ever. Young people were too disillusioned with the correct system to participate. Trumps base ever loyal turned out into roseburg reelection and the deterioration of the american ecosystem continue to pay spread his Administration Funding for the public broadcasting station and National Public radio. Inset u. S. Foreign broadcasters on a path to extinction. This of course is the ideal outcome for moscow. Americans democracy once a shining city on a hill is weak and crumbling in 2028. The debate, dissent and protest was that the u. S. Was founded are increasingly foreign concepts. Corruption, was kept in check by an active media and engage electric, reaches the highest levels of government. Consumed by problems at home, the u. S. Is less engaged abroad. And the kremlin points to the failing of our democratic system to justify repressions in a broader embrace of authoritarianism inside and outside its borders. This scenario should not seem farfetched. The United States, along with some of the countries profiled in my book, and european democracies were all on our way to affect reversion of democracy like, it which the tenants at the democratic process, participation in protests are under attack. My book, how to lose the information work, lays out how to avert this scenario. And really about how to rebuild our discourse. Reporting from five countries on the front lines of the information war, estonia, check you crop public and ukraine, introduce readers to the people who fought this information prayed some successfully some less so. And the lessons that they have learned. The most important what is that people need to be at the heart of the response to this disinformation. Tech platforms, governments, journalist, none of them can fact check their way out of the crisis of truth and trust that we face. But, if we educate our citizens and repair the crooks in our democracies that allowed troll farms to influence in the first place, we might have a shot at averting disaster. If we dont, i hear our efforts will become another cautionary tale and another example of how to lose the information war. And now im going to turn it over to matt. Thank you so much, thank you jane, and also for joining a straight nina said it exactly right we at the kennan institut institute, it was just canon supporting nina buttoning his work supporting cannons mission at a really difficult time for talking and thinking seriously about russia, ukraine, former soviet reunion luncheon region issues and certainly anything that had a whiff of election interference about it. You will all know very well, cant imagine inuit on this call is not noticed you cant open your mouth and have a conversation about what is happening in that part of the World Without it instantly, really basically being about american politics. Nina comes along with a doggedly i would say clear commitment to the idea that you can work on this topic and not have it just be a prophecy for american domestic policy or for some other political agenda. I want to offer a few further thoughts on why this book is worthwhile to read. I have reddit. I really enjoyed it and why the candidates were so fortunate to be able to support nina and her work. First is that there is something almost metaphorically perfect that nina began as a fellow in what seems like ancient history back in 2017 buried and has now ended up wonderfully with us at the Wilson Center but in the Science Technology and Innovation Program as a disinformation fellow. Sounds like something youd have on the death star but its not that part is a cool new opportunity that did not exist back in 2007. When you start to unpack a lot of the dysfunctional and dangerous dynamics and russias conflict with the west, disinformation being only one of them. You find yourself relatively quickly when you get to the essence of the issue you find yourself in a place its not so much about russia or about u. S. Russia relations. Almost always muscle needs bigger, something thats fundamentally human. Something that thats about who we are, how we define ourselves, the conflict the makes the world go around and so on. Section very sitting that ninas research follow that pathway as well. I will come to that in just a moment that i think her final are just. They are just exactly on point in that respect as opposed to so much of what we see and hear in washington. Mr. Book thats organized into chapters. I read a lot of books about the former soviet space. A lot of them or organize intercountry regional chapters. A lot of them are not worth your time for that reason. They sort of treat each of these cases is kind of interchangeabl interchangeable. They will apply the same tired methodologies. They will shoehorn individuals players into the same what you would call type cast role. Who is a champion of democracy in this country . You all know these narratives. Nina doesnt do that, right . These are rich i think being used to almost journalistically very well narrated retelling from ninas own expenses on the ground in the country to give you a very rich feel of what is like to be engaged in a public debate in which disinformation features prominently in countries that are by and large in the border regional and of course the Czech Republic not. But they are in the legacy with quite a bit of russian influence there is a russian element, theres an element much bigger than russia. There is an element that is very specific to the region, the country, the time and place for all that is of great value. Then there is a big question that is raised. I hope we can come to this in our discussion. This is something that we as americans seem to be thinking very hard about now. We would have what i would argue, jane would know very well the most rigid twoparty systems in the world. Where the incentives if you are coming from the outside or from the french, heaven forbid you have an idea that is not mainstream. If someone is apparently helping you, stirring up dispute that maybe brings more attention to your cause, its very hard in the face of that sort of monolithic mainstream machine to decline that help or distance yourself from it. This is one of the topics it is absolutely vital that nina raises in the book as we watch really dangerous fringe elements gain traction through disinformation in our case studies. But how do we address it with the United States in a context is that he was out of the gate that new ideas are not needed in our debate . And finally i just want to echo, ninas own concluding words in her excerpt its about people its about education is about democracy. And i use the term resiliency. Kind of completes the thought i opened earlier. One of the most exhaustively written about, and i think also exhausting and effectiveness policies is that of punishing bad guys. We have been in search of a quartercentury or more of tools that will work to punish bad guys. Whether that is Vladimir Putin or kim jongun, or al qaeda. It is an overuse of sanctions, ocs under and over use of drones diplomatic finger wagging. Its enormously refreshing and if i do say so fundamentally about what nina has written is it looks inward. It is selfcritical about the way that we are not resilient in the face of challenges that are going to be there. But it is the Vladimir Putin out there behind us or there isnt. I find that very was rushing. Its an unfortunate description of a reality. But its very refreshing. I think well have a bit of a conversation have a question for jane for audience out there, please. Thank you matt. I wanted to pick up where you left off in terms of why this book is important to americas understanding of this problem. Which i think is stymied this book actually addresses all three of those. The first is that, as nina points out in her book, this is not americas first rodeo with disinformation coming from russia. This is the kgb mo, their hearings about this in 1982, we have looked at this. Largely with the fall of the soviet union, we thought it was all over. We find that what ninas book does is it goes through starting soon after putin comes to power, and how methodically the kgb tactics and methods have been practiced, refined, inc. , new technologies. And basically as we stood by they have been practicing. And they have been finding ways to make it more and more effective as it crept closer and closer to the United States. And it literally caught us unaware. Because we stopped seeing russia as a serious threat. In 2008, think of or 2012 obama made fun of romney for saying that russia was a threat. I think what nina chose also was our blinders being on and with what she mentioned about russia not being constrained by an ideology is it gives russia much more ideology of putting its tentacles into American Society which is something that is very constraining for it during the cold war. We had a natural prophylactic because we were in an ideological struggle. Theyre only really fringe elements that could be receptive to communist efforts. Now we see they have made inroads into the left. And so i think it is this kind of global iteration. The practicing of all these methods but we can see each of these case study elements that have shown up in the United States. In each of these countries. There are some aspect of it that has manifested here for it is an important lesson for us. The second thing and it kind of goes along with why we had a blinders on, about americans had going to the fbi in 2002, right after 911. It has been all terrorism all the time. We dont think of a threat if it doesnt involve blowing things up and dead bodies and someone trying to light a shoe on fire on an airplane. That is him start taking drastic measures. This i think, for americans, we are very naive about this. It is hard for americans to get their mind around. I think this is just also partly about the american psyche because we have not been practiced upon or they develop a certain understanding of it. Americans fundamentally dont get it. We think of war we have very clear dichotomy in america. War and peace. Terrorism or no threat or Something Like that. We have these very clear ideas. The Information Warfare really turns this on its head. And i think these case studies really help illuminate why this is very dangerous. Why this is a threat even if you dont see something blow up. Its not, an explosion or Something Like that. Think related to that, this is the third thing purred i also make americans a very naive about the idea of information as a weapon. This i think is partly a good thing. It is because our first amendment, our constitution, offers so much robust space for robust disagreement. The freedom of the press. We have been conditioned as americans to think of speech and information as a net positive. The way the marketplace of ideas, the movie combat bad speech with good speech. And we havent fully understood how the marketplace of ideas doesnt necessarily translate into the digital space. In this whole idea of information as a weapon. It is really something there just get your mind around. I think nina does a fantastic job of why this is dangerous why it can translate purred the flash mob pizza in your first information about how information can translate into behavior where people can actually become puppets and then act out on the beliefs that they are being they are consuming. I think it is a very, very important lesson for the american body to understand. I think you kind of hit all of these blind spots. These places of ignorance that american audiences have when it comes to the issue. I hope we kind of touch on all of these. It can be hard to get your mind around. It is very easy to say, you know, yeah i can check my sources. Whats the big deal . Why is this really a problem should address . So thank you for that. I learned a lot from your book. I will admit that i am not a person who is an expert also someone who is affiliated with the media purred our media does not do a good job also of focusing on what is happening abroad we are incredibly ignorant of what is happening abroad. I think you shine a light on why that is important to us and whats happening now. Thank you prayed the goal for the next 15 minutes or so as to give people a bit of a teaser with the important takeaways from the book. I think the single most important to start with is from all of these case studies in the history its referred to as not being new, what is it that we can learn, that we should have known as early as 2016. But really we should know in 2020. Specs so, there are three things that i think stands out in his case that is they werent necessarily things i knew i was going to encounter when us out there during the interviews during the reporting. The first is the homegrown element all the operations i detail. Americans talk about fake news. Lets stop that its cut and dry fake. I had a conversation with my editor about the subtitle of the book because i didnt love the fake news wasnt it. It is a signpost for people right . The terminology is wrong. The best disinformation is grounded in real visceral feelings. The most successful operations use these homegrown actors in order to get them out there. On 2007 russia was able to kind of manipulate the russian ethnic population in order to form unrest. In order to carry out Cyber Attacks from abroad on estonia purred and undermine this newly transatlantic countries future who would know this to become estonias brand as the defender of cyberspace in each country. That kind of flipped on its head. And now the other case studies in poland, using the 2010 plane crash that killed the president in the Czech Republic using anti muslim sentiments, and in the netherlands when the netherlands was voting on a referendum for Ukraine Association agreement using the dutch kind of eu skepticism, year old skepticism against ukraine to undermine unity but undermine Ukraine Support in the euro atlantic community. So all these things are preexisting on they are brought forth by homegrown actors for it also touched upon the example of the first chapter of the book that was published as an exit by political magazine this weekend. To anyone who wants to get a peace of it can look that up. But it is about a flash mob that was a musical showtunes in front of the white house and 2017 put a leftleaning group have been supported by russian actors to go out and do this flash mob and get a large amount of the of attendees to facebook advertising. So homegrown actors is a huge part of it. But all these countries have a somewhat successful response that i noted in the excerpt i wrote now, they now address peoples participation in this equation. They dressed education, they address journalism and media as a public good and they are investing in these longterm Generational Solutions that help people navigate the information environment that they are in. The information ecosystem that is now kind of rapidly degrading rather than trying to eliminate accounts and bad actors online. And the third theme, as i think that we cannot fight this information coming from abroad we are using it ourselves. I saw this playing out in georgia last summer when i was there during the protests that broke out after maybe russian parliamentarians appeared in Georgia Parliament during a french orthodox conference they were having there. The Georgia People were not having met. Annette the ruling party was using this information to spread a different narrative about what had happened. It is certainly happening in poland. Well see it lead up to their election this weekend. And it is happening in the United States as well purred our National Security doctrine, people i know across the government, many folks on both sides of the aisle and capitol hill really believe this is an issue thats a threat. Get all that good work is undermined by things that are happening unfortunately in the executive branch and narratives that are being spread from the white house that is very disturbing to me. We cannot fight this information coming from abroad and now its not coming only from russia but china, iran, venezuela. If we are creating it using it on her own people. That is the biggest warning for me as we head into this election cycle. Spin it lets stop for just a minute on your last point there, nina, if we can. The first, im curious if you can give a broader acrosstheboard assessment of where the United States is maybe successful . The picture sounds pretty bleak. Are there any areas we are doing a good job as a matter policy . And then on the other side of the equation, yeah, may very well be true that the government shoots itself in the foot in terms of the response, there is not enough political will. What about the areas of the phenomenon of government is the problem . People distrust government that cant just be about this time and political moment for 30 years. People feel there is an elite cobol of people to address their agenda and National Security here in washington to try to control everything so therefore the opposite of what they say has a good chance of being true. There is a conspiracy crowd if you will. I just want to put a few of those ideas out there and invites you both know where we being successful . Were being unsuccessful work government should it have a ruler cant have a role . Monster go personal build on what you say. Yeah, i think there is a sense that the government should be solving this problem. Ironically think the government is really very ill place to solve the problem. Even if there were political will which nina noted there isnt. When i was in the fbi worked with what i called perception management cases. These are foreign intelligence operations that are trying to engage in propaganda and misinformation for their very difficult to work for there is no punishment that you couldnt really put purred you cannot censor them. You might threaten them with the agent registration act. But what countries like russia take advantage of is the society. And our free press. I think compounding that problem is just a lack of technological study among members of congress. This is like, their older. They are not necessarily using these technologies for they do not fully understand the model. Theyre not going to mean a great place to regulate them. Even regulation cant keep up with the pace of technological change. It could become obsolete. What i will say about government response is that as an intelligence operation, the way you neutralize this information is through exposure. In other words, disinformation can only work if you are being duped into believing the information is coming from say an organic source or fellow american. At the flash mob is just their fellow progressives that are putting it together. When you know the source of it, it ceases to have the same power. And in this way, i think this a book, things like the special counsel indictments, the russian nationals and the companies that are engaging the social operations, the exposure is very important because that breaks down, really the entire power of the operation. That is what i would say. But i think the government, think you addresses in your conclusion, nina, we are expecting the government to save us, its not going to happen. Many government can engage in strong deterrent tactics as a foreignpolicy response, against putin. But as far as stopping the disinformation that is not going to happen. This is about equipping the populace. Matt, you mention a really important thing i hope we get to which is also there needs to be a rebuilding of social trust among americans that will then also acts as a prophylactic. I think in countries we have a lot of social trouble, for example i think japan would be a difficult country to infiltrate with different disinformation. As a very strong country with a lot of social trust among its citizens. That is what i would say, nina sure you have more to add purred. That is a great jumping off point for me. I will get to some of that of what he think we should be making in the citizens oriented spaces i call it. The place i think is doing a good job and that awareness raising and kind of exposure element is the department of Homeland Security Cyber Infrastructure securities is doing a great job pretty think that an Interesting Campaign about how this information works related to pineapple on pizza. And it tried to pit people against each other based on whether or not they liked pineapple on their pizza. It was kind of a silly example. But drew people and explain to them how that discord is created online. Its not necessary about changing votes. Its about distracting us in creating discourse. I hope they get more funding not only to those sorts of campaigns but to campaign our electoral infrastructure prayed that is where their main jobs. Other parts of the government of think are suffering from being a bit sideload and having too small of a mandate. The Global Engagement center there are some fantastic people there. Their focus on programming abroad. Thats great, for not repairing the fissures in our own society when we are just projecting outward. And that is something not invested enough in yet. There several bills stuck in congress unfortunately because they have been politicized. Not only with transparency and social media, but about education and awareness building. Senator klobuchar in particular has an Education Bill that is stuck in committee right now as well. So i hope to see more investments in that area. Of course its a little bit difficult with the way her federal education system, you cant tell states what to do. But you can get them grants to develop the curriculum, together to implement not only throw schools but to voting age populations as well for things like the library as well as Civil Society organizations that are locally based in the state. That is something i would really love to see. And more investments in public media. One of the reasons i decided to read that excerpt today, is not just a pat myself on the back and say look how precious i was. [laughter] but because today we have news that the u. S. For globally it media which oversees radios for europe is cracking down even more and kind of the freedom the journalists there were enjoying. Theres news that the foreign journalists wont get their visas renewed at the end of their visas which is a real shame. These are two vectors, listen our region, matt, that have a Huge Positive impact. A really good Brand Association in our region. And the fact that the government is trying to dismantle them at this moment is something i feel really, really strongly about. And i think is a real mistake. So i would caution that for anyone who might be listening dealing with that policy to revert back. Because i think those are jewels and the crown. They are established. I dont matt and i have both don on voice of america programs recently. We do that because we know that reaches peoples ears there. And its worth investing appeared civic i wanted to ask nina about her first point, to responses ago. You know about russia exploiting in these countries. And one of the things that struck me about, when i was reading your book is how in the weeds russia is within knowing its enemy. Right . It understands that poland is different than it really knows what Little Things to tweak. Especially in the u. S. And i was wondering if you could say i was especially struck by your case study of poland. And after the plane crash, you mentioned that one of the things russia did it was a very simple move but it was so effective. They would not provide any there not provide the records from the plane or anything. I saw this as an flex of control. They just withheld this prayed with they knew would happen it would bolster Conspiracy Theory paid because it with withhold the information. That itself would take on. And so, hugh dont mention reflexive control directly. It is something they do. Theyre able to do it because they know exactly how their enemy will respond to the smallest action. I am just wondering, if you could just comment on that generally . That they are very methodical in that way. In a way dont think our intelligent agencies are quite frankly. And also, how do we protect against that . Its almost like, we are complicit in the information because we kind of advertise exactly what will push our buttons i guess. Could i get there as well. Thank you for bringing that up. This is our hobbyhorse with the three years running the think tank for regional studies. Certainly the leading institution in the United States. One of things it is always characterized russia they play close attention to what is going on in foreign country discourse about themselves. I got to ask you all. Dont know you dont nestle work on this every day, but do you really think your crosssectional American Government tell you how russia sees themselves . They could maybe name one russian Vladimir Putin thats what weve got. As part of unilateral disarmament. Cnet thats a great way to put that prismatic is going to invite you to guide you did that pretty think regional study or something we should absolutely be investing more in the fact that i ended up at the Kennan Institute as my first appointment is not a coincidence but i did to area studies before that. I think thats knowledge of something that russia has always invested in. In the United States as well. The manipulations here are on all sides of the political spectrum. They get down to some wonky, weird little cleavages in our society. Your absolutely right. How do we protect against it . We need more expertise there again. And all the regional studies area. It is extraordinarily important. But again, its also about building a Broader Knowledge base. Really responsible coverage in the media. Which i am not sure we have had over the past four years pretty really cringe every time i see the cathedral propagated as the kremlin and the imagery about russia or relics or that sort of thing. The present russia is only our foe. Were going to have to get through this and cooperate and when it that will happen. Right now that is not necessarily possible. We need broader understanding for not only of rossa but all of our adversaries to understand how theyre going to react to things the same way they are doing this to us. That would be my answer they are bright i know that is not satisfying to a lot of people. We wanted to play much larger version of countries but that is not sustainable over the long term. My think sanctions and holding countries their grievance internationally as we also need the stuff that makes us more resilient in the longterm. That is with the book tries to get to perry. I would add in there they think it is also a consequence of our sense of military superiority. Understanding your enemy at a cultural level is the poor mans warfare, right . From our point you like well if push comes to shove will just bomb them. I think thats the way weve always approached it. Think it really puts us in an imbalanced situation. Because it just makes us an easier adversary. Because we are really just approaching the issue from completely different ways i think we talk about that whole idea of hybrid work there and how we just dont get our minds around it at all from the Western Point of view. Im sorry matt goahead pre i was actually going to pivot up to some of the many questions he got in from the audience. I just want to echo what you both said at the exceptionally important point but we continually find ourselves shocked, shocked by what is being done to a sprayed the reality its become weve been complacent for so long. By that i dont mean we been tough enough. Weve been too comfortable in the idea we are the predominant power in the world. We tell people how it is going to be. And they ask how high should i jump, right . And the reality is when others want to push back of course it will push back asymmetrically. That is with this entire conversation is about. This is a hybrid would everyone a call. Jane if you are still with us i like to give you the first audience question. We have more with about 18 minutes to get through, so. Jane are you with this . Yes change back. There you go. Ive been trying to get income i dont how i got out. But nevermind, modern technology everybody. Nina, ive just got to tell you again how proud we are of you and the contribution you make. The passion you have for the scholarship and to improving the world. Its all stuff i resonate with. The whole conversation could not be better. So i am channeling david who most of you know is a famous american retired general who always asks how does this end . He asks about war. Its a war of sorts. How does this end . Does it ever end . For example we teach Artificial Intelligence among other things. We teach to the staff. I dont think ai ever ends. Think we find a way to ride the tiger in all of that. Is that what this is to . Is this this not ever going to be defeated . And i said resilience is a huge part of the strategy, i get that. As is always going to be with us . I think to some extent pretty special when you look at the historical examples, not only from the soviet period, you can go back to ancient greece and certainly to the purity of yellow journalism here in the United States for similar examples. But what has changed about today is the tools and tactics in the speed at which the information spreads. So part of this is not only building resilience we have to get the Regulatory Framework in place. So that we can respond more effectively. I know we have done work in february we were lucky enough to have senator warner here addressing us, not here in my room but at the Wilson Center in a past life. When we were discussing how to bring about positive social regulation. It is an area that the United States is advocating its leadership in right now unfortunately not only for on citizens, but for the governments that have a lot less visibility with the social media platforms that are dealing with genocide that starting on their platforms like in burma are doing with an onslaught of fake news from an adversary like in ukraine. Think the regulation point will allow us to stem the flow. But i dont think its ever going to really fully change. One thing that will also help us of politicians are going to Start Holding themselves to a higher standard. I know matt was really interested in discussing this question i bet howd you incentivize the fact that it helps politicians and parties to do this very sort of cheap manipulation of the information. My answer to him a were discussing this earlier was regulation. We have to have regulation about Campaign Finance, about online transparency, for political ads et cetera. They need to be in place for the fact that we havent got that done over the past three to have her for years, leaves this way more vulnerable. Not just to formal but manipulation from within as well. To make that a such a hugely important point, nina. I wish it were as easy as knowing that we need regulation. But as you say with Campaign Finance jane knows it very well. It is because both sides are arguably all size in a multiplayer game be potential advantage. When the gray money or whatever it is works to their advantage just as when the information can work towards their advantage. Asking people to be the bigger person and that kind of winner take all context seems like a fools erin. In one very small point here, as a regional studies person i really felt the differences between very small and relatively tightknit societies georgia although there is chaos in georgia politics as where versus the United States. Going to have a response is like asking to have singapore petty vandalism. It aint going to happen. If you read the book. I want to if we can take a few questions here. Ill invite you to comment as well. Theres a couple that are grouped around the sort of policy prescription related to education. So im going to kind of quickly read them with the World Politics if nina can elaborate on Education Finance and disinformation, what kind of education is needed and so on. And then colonel jason who is with this at the Cannon Institute with her Army Institute fellow who is of a in the region he asked for an event to comment on ideas for digital and Media Literacy to combat disinformation akin to what has tony has done. So talk a little bit about that. I think both of those can together. Its not just education and Digital Literacy has to be separate i will bring up ukraine as an example of a good case for this has really had an impact in a short period of time. The organization, iraqs which i think there were a few on the call the attendee list for it i was bring up their Program Learn to discern, which trains a lot about First Library into then went out and train people and all the regions for that done a really interesting study, a followon study on how the skills are retained over a period of a year end a half i think. Theyre really positive results for you but i love about this program its not politicized. Teaches people how to recognize emotional manipulation. It teaches them basic source evaluation about the media environment in ukraine. Teaches him about hate speech. This is the type of program i would love to see. How do we deliver that . Again i mentioned libraries in society before, think is room for the social media platform to be doing more of this work as well. These are billiondollar corporations with ubiquitous access to peoples lives. The fact that they think that somehow that say the news is enough in terms of a false attempt to reach out to their users, and use them about the stuff is pretty laughable. One idea been bring up a lot recently, i hope someone takes it on or funds or Something Like this is a fake news or disinformation museum. So rather than just taking down all this bad content when the platforms are playing a whack a mole. I love her people to get a notification that interactive content that is been removed. Here is wise been removed. Then you could interact with them in the ecosystem it exists in, understanding how many engagements i got. Understanding what the network was buried how it all connects. Because so often especially with things at work took down yesterday include the accounts in ukraine they give us snippet snippets. We have to trust their narrative on how it works. I think their soma new people who do not understand the broader fabric of how the separation works. Think that could beat interesting way to educate the people who are interested in learning them. Not everyone is going to be. But for those who are, making that interesting userfriendly experience could be a way to do that. Asher if you have anything to add . I would add only, i would add specific education stuff. I think one of the vulnerabilities that russia exploits is just the fragmentation that exists because we have increasingly lost sight of a common civic value. Things like rule of law, importance and free press. Why we dont like dictators. Those kind of things i some of us growing up kind of got those through entertainment. My class i have disinformation schoolhouse rock for example. I think in some ways hamilton is able to convey some of that. We need that on a larger scale. I think only nine states in the country require a full year of civic education. And so we are increasingly getting a population that can fall prey to things like there must be a deep state. Because there understand how the government works. As a civic education. I echo your idea of social media platforms being a vehicle for Digital Literacy. That could be regulated. Whether some is some required content. But these platforms have to convey a mix of the users interface with and teach them the skills. Because i think, this is a whole other topic. But the economic model based media media platforms are built on are not incentivized to encourage Digital Literacy. They want you to be addicted. They want you to get to the most extreme content more clicks it makes them more money. You have to find a way to get them out of that. Basically the equivalent of tobacco. They are todays version of tobacco. The not really good for anybody but their interests are not aligned with that of the public. That is where the issue should come in. Talk about Popular Culture i like to blame star trek and the prime directive for the reason why all of the nerds that facebook dont want to interfer interfere. The prime directive is you dont interfere im seriously thing to myself like no, no, no, they would never do that. Theres sort of studying the blended petri dish in chaos. Liquid got a lot more questions. Let me ask a couple if i can quickly go through them that wa way. This one from kurt clune what is the difference in the marketplace of ideas on the cyber platform but disinformation on tv radio. And then he sort of repeats this line that you engaged with earlier given truth and debate the marketplace of ideas note argued does it make a difference in cyberspace versus were everyone is equal, everybody in cyber space can put in their 2 cents you have a Walter Cronkite line. [inaudible] i think another big difference is way the information is incentivized that asher was just getting out. There is not a inequitable debate on social media platform. Ive been looking a lot of facebook groups slightly. People in groups, talk about filter concrete bunker, there is no way into some of these groups. They are secret or close, they dont include people with a dissenting voice gets excluded the platforms are incentivizing people to join similar groups and they get notifications of people are posting content there because they want to keep them engaged. They like this is not in the digital Public Square dish or Digital Living room. I was saying no no it is a digital creepy basement where you go to talk about things you should not be talking about. [laughter] its in the Public Square right . That is a real problem right now part actually dont if you have anything to add. Out complete agree with you. Its not only your digital creepy basement, it is even the real creepy digital basement you would not have sick people there. You are really only limited to actual human beings. So it gets distorted if you are in true publix where the voices are limited to the people who are actually there. You go to the Speakers Corner that appeals to you, youre going to walk away from the ones that dont. Theres an additional fear that theres artificial amplification of the particular ideas. The cheating and the ways in theres platforms cannot find an effective way youre not approximate the true publix i would say. Ive got like four more minutes there. Got two questions one from robert and hersey pennsylvania. If we were in a disinformation war with russia, are we still . Or is it the case its basically homegrown forces have learned may be other third parties have as well. The russians can update that one. They can declare true the problem does not go away to the extent that that may be the case, when we do about it Going Forward . I would say we are absolutely still in an information war thresher. We have not imposed on russia june extent that is been a necessary deterrent. Our government, parts of our government executive branches openly accepted foreign assistance in terms of interference related to the election. And not only that, the social Media Companies also have not closed off all of the avenues that the foreign adversaries are using to manipulate our discourse. It is such a low cost both in terms of human and monetary spends, there is no reason any bad actor would stop right now. It is really quite effective. With evidence for that even in 2017 a flash mob story that i told before, that was after the election. We saw evidence of election interference in the midterm elections. As a bit different everyone looking for troll accounts. Where they werent necessarily there. Instead whats happening is these vectors of domestic are being somewhat manipulated by bad actors who are information laundering. So rather than creating a fake account and using that to amplify certain narratives, a narrative is being introduced was politically kryptonite, i wouldnt necessarily point to this all the time. A great example of that is ukraine impeachment narrative about the crowd straight Conspiracy Theory we heard being repeated during the impeachment proceedings during the narrative that zelensky was sort of trump enemy. All this was laundered through foreign actors. And we dont know if they were necessarily connected only to ukraine or there is some russian influence there with folks who were you working with Rudy Giuliani. And as part of the congressional record during our conclusive inpatient proceeding. That is an example of narrative laundering. It is still happening but its very difficult to track and prove. But i dont think there is any reason for any bad actors. Brushes one of the most adept at that. Tosha and he finally comments . I think thats one of the biggest lessons once these get adopted by domestic actors youre entering very dangerous territory. I think india is in his example of a place were a domestic governmentsponsored disinformation apparatus essentially is helping bolster authoritarian regime and also a lot of secretary and violence. I think the only thing then standing in between you is the free press. The press is going to have to work to accommodate a new arena. And then in many ways, help amplify disinformation. You cant estimate yet the call a lie a lie. Cropping that little lie is very difficult from an journalistic ethics point of view. Its going to be something we grapple with. Are if got to wrap right now people let me end speaking of you can get ninas book everywhere were books are sold bird out there you go you reopen it,. [laughter] alright you win. Thank you all so much. Thanks to both of you and jane for joining our discussion, thank you all for tuning in, for your questions. And congratulations again to you nina and buy the book. Thank you, thanks everyone. Thank you. Speed netbook tv continues now on cspan2, television for serious readers