Main Edition
US
FR
January 15, 2024 - 2:30pm
AI-powered lies and manipulation constitute the gravest threat to humanity. At least this is the dystopian scenario espoused by the collective wisdom of 1,500 experts surveyed in the World Economic Forum’s 2024 Global Risks Report last week.
Unfortunately, such outbreaks of “elite panic” are a recurring phenomenon. Whenever the public sphere is expanded through new communications technology, the traditional gatekeepers fret about the dangers of allowing the general public — too fickle and unlearned — unmediated access to information.
As the WEF’s annual meeting in Davos begins this week, the fear of democratic institutions drowned by lies in a “tech-enabled Armageddon” supercharged by AI marks the third wave of elite panic in the digital age. The first wave was ushered in by the widespread belief that Russian disinformation campaigns on social media contributed decisively to Donald Trump’s 2016 election victory. The second wave was the so-called “infodemic” unleashed by Covid-19.
It is undeniable that lies, propaganda and conspiracy theories thrive online and can lead to real-world harms. But there are good reasons to take a deep breath and adjust the hands of the disinformation Doomsday Clock. For all the visibility of mis- and disinformation, several studies suggest that its share of overall online content is modest. What’s more, those most likely to fall for and share unhinged conspiracy theories constitute a relatively small group of political hyper-partisans with low trust in institutions and the media, who already live in warped realities. For instance, one study showed that a mere 12 people were behind 65% of online vaccine misinformation.
Quite often, it is the panic that causes more problems than the issue itself. Over the years, top-down measures used to “combat misinformation” have resulted in higher degrees of censorship, which can also be weaponised. The first two waves of elite panic demonstrate this danger vividly: between 2016 and 2022, 91 laws were passed to target false or misleading information around the globe, leading to the arrest of journalists and others who questioned official government policy.
France adopted a fake news law in 2018, and in 2022 the EU banned state-sponsored Russian media from being broadcast and even shared on social media. Both impeded efforts to document and debunk Russian propaganda. Meanwhile, in December 2023 the European Commission opened a legal investigation into X (previously Twitter), alleging shortcomings in the “effectiveness of measures taken to combat information manipulation on the platform” under its sweeping new Digital Services Act. This grants the Commission — a political body — powers to enact and enforce new speech rules affecting even legal content.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribePower hates anything that threatens it, even if it means the proles having access to factual information. Perhaps, especially if it means that. This part, however, was curious:
The first wave was ushered in by the widespread belief that Russian disinformation campaigns on social media contributed decisively to Donald Trump’s 2016 election victory.
There was no widespread belief. This was a talking point. Just like the four years of “collusion.” Just like the hand-waving of Hunter’s laptop as another Russian fabrication. And just like everything about Covid that we now know was accurate.
The rise of bodies like the WEF makes the free world less free. This article points to numerous examples of free expression being eroded, whether covertly or in your face, through idiotic laws that should be laughed off the books. I doubt anyone involved here is ignoring that the political and official classes are the most frequent sources of information. If anything, they are bent on retaining that monopoly.
Let me repeat one of my comments:
I was banned twice in the last days, once by a Facebook robot, the second time on another site (funded by the Department of State) manually and forever. Both times for the statement that a man who has changed his gender to female still remains a man.
It is my understanding that I was punished for spreading misinformation. I think that’s all we need to know about the WEF
“For instance, one study showed that a mere 12 people were behind 65% of online vaccine misinformation.”
I assume that they were all government health officials?
Excellent rebuff.
But WEF is right on this – This writer always goes back to 2016 – before Chat GPT and deep fakes. AI will shortly be able to spam, with products unable to be found to be true or lies, to any amount the bad actor wishes. Naturally this sort of underhanded creepy political action is almost entirely the purview of the Liberal.Left postmodernist neo-Commine, Neo-Cons. Actually much like the WEF Lizard People themselves. I think they are just telling us what they plan for us. Like the 15 minute cities, owning nothing, eating bugs, living in Pods, and 95% depopulation.
I did love Putin saying it was time to give old Clause a final goodby.
More like Unherd readers.
What was the online vaccine misinformation? It has caused massive damage to the immune system? And their are causal links to other illnesses which need to be explored. Why is this such a toxic issue? If it has caused harms why can’t it be explored.
The “misinformation” is that which made the official claims about the virus, the vaccines, and the efficacy of other mitigation measures look suspect. Public officials often fancy themselves as high priests and any challenge to their authority is, by definition, heresy.
The indictment of vaccine misinformation brings to my mind the protestations of Joe Biden, Kamala Harris and Gavin Newsom back in the fall of 2020 that people should not take the “Trump vaccine” because it was not sufficiently tested. Then when tests showed it was safe and effective in Phase 3 clinical trials Pfizer and the FDA conspired to withhold those test results until after the election. A bit of misinformation-related election interference that doesn’t get much mention.
”What’s more, those most likely to fall for and share unhinged conspiracy theories constitute a relatively small group of political hyper-partisans with low trust in institutions and the media, who already live in warped realities. ”
Haha, ‘Warped Realities’
But I would say the writer is 100% backwards. The ‘Agenda’ which has captured the Education, Entertainment, Media, Social Media, Deep State, the left and right branches of the Uniparty, the WEF Lizard People – Postmodernist Neo-Con devil worshiping Kid F***ers (as ‘Salty Cracker’ calls them)
They will be 99% of the ones who use this weapon – in this 5Th generation World War against us decent people – this will be their favorite and most effective weapon.
The writer has no clue.
Is this Schwab fellow the offspring of ‘Jabba the Hutt’ does anyone know?
It seems Mr. Mchangama is himself a contributor to online misinformation.
I’m uncertain why the author is so cynical about this story. I’m no fan of the WEF or anything, but they have a serious point to make here and the risks appear to be valid.
After reading the report, I have to side with the cynics. My cynicism comes from the hyperbolic tone of the World Economic Forum report measured against reality. The experts believe that the biggest threat to the world in the next 2 years is misinformation and disinformation, driven by AI tools such as those that allow deep fakes to be made. The report says:
Really? That’s the biggest threat to the world? Past history and a realistic look at the power of those new AI tools suggests this fear is overblown. Let’s take two examples.
First, the supposed Russian meddling in the 2016 US election won by Donald Trump. After the election accusations were made of election interference, focusing on a “troll farm” called the Internet Research Agency in St. Petersburg. The IRA was founded by Yevgeny Prigozhin (who also founded the Wagner Group and was assassinated by Vladimir Putin last year). In 2018 Robert Mueller indicted the IRA, Yevgeny Prigozhin and others for having conspired to defraud. But the charges in the indictment were laughable. As propaganda, the efforts by the IRA were amateurish and ineffective.
Second, the suppression as disinformation of the photos and emails from Hunter Biden’s laptop in 2020. Here accurate information was suppressed by the media and then-current and former government officials, led by now Secretary of State Tony Blinken. If polls are accurate (and they rarely are), enough people were persuaded by that misinformation about the disinformation to have swung the election from Joe Biden to Donald Trump.
My point is that propaganda and disinformation are not new. They are as old as human civilization. The postcard and the phonograph were viewed as dangerous in the World War I world because they could be used to spread propaganda faster than ever before, in the form of writings, cartoons, speeches and songs. But they hardly made a difference.
Why? Because the flood of information in a free society drowns out disinformation and misinformation naturally. The truth will out. It’s a bottom-up process, like Charles Darwin’s view of evolution. That’s why freedom of speech is so important, as it creates a free market of ideas. And market forces are very powerful.
The World Economic Forum wants to stifle that free market and have governments control the flow of information. But that top-down control worsens the problem. Then the government is spreading propaganda, and telling people what to believe instead of letting them figure it out for themselves.
Those charges were also dropped in 2020 after the IRA responded to the indictment and the FBI refused to divulge their evidence to effect a criminal trial. This happened just after the covid lockdowns started.
Agreed, and some other valid points. AI and the internet take this to a completely diferent level however. It’s very powerful, very convincing, cheap and easy, and can reach millions of people in moments.
While I agree that the right to free speech must be jealously protected, governmental officials should have the right to participate in the marketplace of ideas along with everyone else. Nothing should stop government officials from “putting pressure” on social media platforms that is short of coercion. They can pressure but they cannot force. And there is plenty of case law to draw on to tell the difference.
In these cases, the social media platforms were asked to ban certain accounts. A government official would have a list of accounts that he or she felt violated the policies that the social media platforms had themselves adopted. The social media platform would investigate, and ban some and not others. They were asked, and yes, pressured, but not forced. They had the right to choose.
Do you think Twitter or Facebook was forced by the government to ban Donald Trump? Do you think Elon Musk could be forced by the government to ban anybody?
Free speech works when everybody has a voice. Government officials should be able to speak too.
Govenments have the coercive power of the whole state at their disposal. Of all organisations, a Government is the least likely to want, need, or permit, free speech.
If the government uses their coercive power, that is indeed a problem. If it does not, should it be muzzled anyway?
“For instance, one study showed that a mere 12 people were behind 65% of online vaccine misinformation.”
Does anyone bother to click on the links behind the ‘facts’ in these ‘reports’?
If you follow the link here, you get to a report (not a study) from the dubious Center for Countering Digital Hate – a non-profit funded by philanthropic funds. They don’t tell us which funds, actually, but I’d be willing to bet the Gates Foundation is there. (Remember that Bill Gates was heavily invested in mRNA vaccine technology).
Crucially, reading the ‘report’, one quickly learns that in fact:
the report dates from 2021
the figure refers to ‘online anti-vaccine content’. Not ‘misinformation’. In fact, no substantive effort is made to judge whether that content is misinformation or – as is more likely – actual online information which officials were unwilling to disseminate widely.
The CCDH is well known for being a dangerous source of misinformation. As Twitter’s lawsuit against them puts it:
“[CCDH] as a history of using similar tactics not for the goal of combating hate, but rather to censor a wide range of viewpoints on social media with which it disagrees. CCDH’s efforts often rely on obtaining and intentionally mischaracterizing data in “research” reports it prepares to make it appear as if a few specific users (often media organizations and high profile individuals) are overwhelming social media platforms with content that CCDH deems harmful.
CCDH uses those reports to demand that platform providers kick the targeted users off of their platforms, thus silencing their viewpoints on broadly debated topics such as COVID-19 vaccines, reproductive healthcare, and climate change. In this manner, CCDH seeks to prevent public dialogue and the public’s access to free expression in favor of an ideological echo chamber that conforms to CCDH’s favored viewpoints.”
In the current world of relativism and individualism we lose trust in authoritative figures: governments (with some good reason) and scientists. The view of an ignorant person unsupported by evidence is given credence, and we do not always trust the official views.
The handling of the Corona virus by English authorities was as flawed as in the USA; but scientists at Oxford University worked with Astra Zeneca to produce the first vaccine. For that I hold admiration and gratitude.
Sadly the WEF provides the EU Commission (and other elites) with scare stories – which they can then label as a crisis – and in turn use to grant themselves more powers.
We need our governments to start learning to ignore the WEF – and the WHO and the UN etc. etc.
Did you read the WEF report fully? The point about mis- and disinformation is that it makes the underpinnings of geopolitical stability slippery by eroding trust.
I don’t see any “elite panic” I see an upswell in this concern in the one unprecedented year that half the planet is going to the polls. How the planet starts the year and how it ends the year, from a geopolitical perspective, could be vastly different.
Propaganda favours the autocrat because they can drive agendas faster than democracies, including smothering or simply removing dissent. While democrats argue, autocrats (and, increasingly, plutocrats) decide and demand. AI empowers propaganda at an unprecedented scale: authentic-looking fake news is a powerful tool for herding the masses. The 2016 Russian meddling is more than “widespread belief” with this bipartisan report concluding that they did meddle. The unresolved part was whether the Trump team colluded with them. AI enables such meddling at far greater scale than 2016.
I broadly agree with what you’re saying, but a) this isn’t panic and b) I think you’re underestimating the threat.
‘Mis/disinformation’ claims are too often used to silence those the authorities disagree with.
I don’t get the panic about AI-generated fake news. I readily believe that AI generates fake news – a friend recommended Chat GPT as a research tool. When I asked it for secondary literature, Chat GPT made up a very plausible title by a plausible author, and even provided an ISBN. All fake; Chat GPT developed an amazing amount of “criminal energy” to generate the fake.
Ultimately, though, it will still take a human to set up the AI to generate and spread the news.
Ultimately, also, the news has to be consumed by humans, and there, it makes no difference whether the news was generated by AI or humans. The deluge of misinformation and disinformation currently peddled by governments and swamping news sources claiming to be reputable is not AI-generated, but human-generated (though whether the “I” is appropriate in some of these products is doubtful). The same tools of information literacy need to be applied.
Throughout history, censorship has always been used to stop truth from being told.
Censoring lies is not worth the bother.
The authoritians want to deny free speech inder the goal of trying to ‘save’ us.
In other words, they want to deny us basic rights to ‘help’ us.
If they’re so concerned about misinformation created by AI, why don’t they start researching a bot that anyone could use that would detect stuff generated by AI? Is it possible they use AI to generate their “information” and don’t want that made generally known?