-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 12/25/2016 09:41 AM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote:
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Yosem Companys" Date: Dec 9, 2016 1:51 AM Subject: [liberationtech] Fake News To: "Liberation Technologies" <liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu <mailto:liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu>>,
Anyone know of any academic studies showing that fake (social media) news influenced the 2016 presidential election outcome?
Not me, and I think it's not likely that such a study will turn up any time soon. A study analyzing the impact of "fake news" would have to present a defensible thesis based on begging the question, as "fake news" is a buzzword promoted by a propaganda campaign. As an example of actually fake news, I would cite the Big Lie that Russia "interfered with" the election. Numerous unsourced allegations presented as straight news grew up around one press release from one Department of Homeland Security dated October 7, 2016, asserting that Russia interfered with the Presidential election. Note that this was a press release, a.k.a. propaganda placement. Its content is attributed to the USIC (United States Intelligence Community). As there is no such agency or department, this speculative assertion can not be attributed to any formal process or responsible party, which confirms its status as fake news: "The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks .com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process." https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/10/07/joint-statement-department-homeland- security-and-office-director-national No causal link is presented connecting Russian "methods and motivations" with disclosures "intended to interfere with the US election process." The statement presents an example of transfer, a widely recognized classic propaganda technique. Subsequent stories asserting that the CIA has confirmed this speculation follow this template: A reporter says an anonymous source claimed an unnamed senior intelligence official told them that unspecified secret information confirms Russian involvement in releasing incriminating DNC e-mails to Wikileaks. The Obama Administration propaganda placement blaming the leak on Russia was a component of a larger campaign to demonize Trump by depicting his stated willingness to negotiate with Russia as proof of collaboration with a foreign enemy. Post-election, it became the rarely-cited but always referenced cornerstone of a separate campaign asserting that the election was stolen by Russia and Trump. The content of the leaked documents this camapign references indicates that Clinton's DNC conspired to steal the primary from Sanders. News stories about "Russia interfering" never deny that the leaked documents are authentic, because drawing any attention to their content would defeat the diversionary purpose of the entire Big Lie campaign: Blame Russia, not the DNC, for handing Trump the Presidency. The original DHS propaganda placement is the best known and most often repeated Big Lie of the election. But, even after showing that it presents an example of "fake news" - a very defensible proposition - how can an academic develop persuasive evidence that this fake news influenced the outcome of the Presidential election? :o) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYYTsZAAoJEECU6c5Xzmuq6t8IAL08LulABxBLIVc+MPuTNDb1 sIK0M8gljNP4TPA6IGvRRKKK7xrYAyetjZw4DxKeck36iKK67fyQS6OOiUXOwVSU GkJbdR/QGbDdhZQWF5jT+7TTN9SO/2ta6uyh30EIWgH6iMtcTs5MfA1dek64i3cf qSrtr4Z2QA6V2WrZaOG3GHjAWIbN9zEdGAuSESkSb9BSlpEhYdvcUkSEkIsDpR0k //ta5IxMWbMNyllDIFLztEt3F0U0UzGW/++LgRGS5UPvUxs7SJvmlMiAH4k6S7nz VUZWMidIDRSxy1x671McUsGh9f9EtIOUTqwQErUBOyKAm9Bqqe9c5zyk5WFx8bo= =77zx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----