Social Media Misinformation: The Story that Frances Haugen Fails to Disclose
By James Bone, Skytop Contributor / October 8th, 2021
James Bone is an industry leader and practitioner with more than 20 years of senior risk leadership experience. Thought leader in cybersecurity and enterprise risk management. Author of Cognitive Hack: The New Battleground in Cybersecurity…the Human Mind and founder of innovative solutions for the human element of risk management. Frequent speaker and contributing writer for the Institute of Internal Audit magazine, Corporate Compliance Insights, Compliance Week, Forbes magazine and others.
Founder of Global Compliance Associates, LLC and TheGRCBlueBook a risk advisory service to the GRC technology community for 11 years providing strategic product development services including market positioning and insights to understand the integration of effective risk solutions. Lecturer-In-Discipline ERM Risk Management Columbia University. Founder and creator of several courses in the School of Professional Studies ERM program including: Traditional Risk & ERM Practices, Company Failure, Behavioral Science and Cognitive Bias.
Led the development of industry leading enterprise risk management, cybersecurity and operational risk and risk advisory programs for organizations including Fidelity Investments, Department of Treasury (Making Home Affordable), Liberty Mutual, Freddie Mac, private equity, public accounting and public consulting firms.
Graduate of Drury University, BA Business Administration, Boston University, MEd Organizational Design, Harvard University Extension School, MA Management
The revelations brought by the Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen is being heralded as a ground-breaking moment in history similar to the “Big Tobacco Moment”. Dramatic headlines aside, I would suggest that conflating misinformation with revelations of the dangers of smoking tobacco products (which were printed on cigarette packaging by the tobacco industry) suggests a level of ignorance about the scope and intent of misinformation campaigns that will undermine any meaningful reform.
A Clear and Present Danger, Digitally Manifested
Unfortunately, we now live in a digital society where simple answers and solutions to these problems incentivize traditional media and “experts” to jump to conclusions before fully understanding the context and complexity of emergent hybrid models of communication. To be clear, misinformation is a real and present danger to society and governance broadly.
Misinformation by another name (political propaganda) has been around since ancient times when members of the Roman Senate sent ruffians to intimidate their opponents and to stir the masses. Misinformation and disinformation are simply a fancy term for political propaganda used on social media platforms. The same surrogates used in Roman times are employed today as political consultants, both designed to obscure the intent and attribution of the puppet masters pulling the proverbial strings. Therein lies the rub. It is convenient and distracting to blame social media while further analysis would suggest that we follow the digital money trail to the beneficiaries of political misinformation.
Breaking Records at Facebook
Political ad spending on Facebook in 2020 exceeded all previous records in the last presidential election, reaching $200 million by both parties, up from $81 million spent in 2016 and 2017. These figures represent disclosed spending figures but do not capture the money spent by political operatives hired to capture and develop insights into user behavior to test campaign slogans and trial balloons long used by political consultants. This is big business on a massive scale that incentivizes more, not less, political misinformation.
Curbing Abuse and Its Destructive Impact
What are the incentives for politicians to curb the use of surrogates of misinformation? The efficiency of these ads has proven to be compelling and effective. Both political parties are allowed to rail against social media giants and continue to use them for political means. The U.S. requires political ads over the airways (TV, radio) and traditional print/digital media to have disclosures of the source of ads, but Congress has failed to extend these same standards in social media. Why?
Anyone who has cared to pay attention has known for years what Frances Haugen disclosed in her testimony. Academic studies by the EU member states have extensive research on the impacts of political disinformation and propaganda. Behavioral scientists and psychologists have long warned of the ills of social media and teenage suicide from bullying. Social media’s impact on mental illness is well documented and politicians have failed to draft meaningful reform to counter the effects.
Fake News as an Accepted Standard
An article in the Washington Post in 2017 declared that “spreading fake news becomes the standard for governments across the world”. “The government propaganda evolved with social media and has grown along with it,” said Philip N. Howard, an Oxford professor and co-author of the report called “Troops, Trolls and Troublemakers: A Global Inventory of Organized Social Media Manipulation.” Social media is simply the vehicle used to distribute misinformation and disinformation and is now being used as scapegoats to distract from the real cancer in politics, the systematic dismantling of human rights.
A Message to Leaders Everywhere
As the world transitions to a hybrid operating model of physical and digital assets, novel risks are hidden behind layers of technology that obscure the actors and adversaries in cyberspace. Like a virus that spreads globally we must use caution and become more thoughtful about how new technology is used responsibly because the unintended consequences are growing exponentially.
Machine learning, data privacy, and social media are wonderful tools that have enabled communications and connections globally, but the goods and services provided by new technology are increasingly being used for malintent that will require our leaders and their constituents to demand more transparency and good governance. Let’s hope that the leadership of today and future leaders develop the political will to be more responsible with these powerful technologies before it’s too late.