Reading the news like a spook (Part II)

More on using tools of professional intelligence analysts to weed out "fake news."

---

Reading the News Like a Spook, Part II

by J.P. Atwell

The next step in learning to approach information integrity like a professional intelligence officer is self-diagnosis and correction for personal bias so that we are objective consumers.  What do I mean? (If you missed the first installment, see the Island Intelligencer column on 03 August 2022).

We all come to the information table with mental filters, based on personal life experiences, that color how we see things; political and religious leanings are major ones.  If we do not identify and curb our own prejudices, we may reject sound reporting because it is delivered by a person or platform with philosophical, political, or moral views that differ from our own. Alternatively, we may embrace bad information simply because it is delivered through a vehicle that aligns with our personal proclivities or because the narrative itself agrees with our preexisting views (confirmation bias).  We must also resist the human instinct to fill gaps in information with a personal assessment and then embrace it as a factual completion of the story, and ignore the seductive nature of the sensational, the conspiratorial.  (Apply Occam’s Razor, the principle that the simplest explanation is the most likely to be true.)

Also crucial to becoming more media literate is the ability to parse news stories, to separate fact from opinion.  Statements of fact are relatively easy to identify.  Their point of origin is usually clear—content of a document, an event caught on camera, an eyewitness account.  Opinion, on the other hand, can fall into a gray area.  Some is clearly offset by code words—“in my view,” “we assess,” “in her judgement,” “they believe.”  However, some is worded like a factual statement, particularly when the author is aiming to influence us, and may be flagged by subjective qualifiers—“it is clear that,” “everyone agrees,” “it is easy to see.”

Then there is the need to identify information that is carefully crafted and delivered to influence as much as, or more than, inform—propaganda.  Generally speaking, there are three types:

• White. Acknowledges its source.  Advertising is one form. (“Come try Uncle Kimo’s ono poke, the freshest on the island!”) State-run media is another form.  Radio Free Europe’s ongoing transmission into Russia of Russian-language news about Ukraine is white propaganda; Uncle Sam is clearly identified as the source.

• Grey. Does not acknowledge its source.  Most often today encountered in social media, frequently as emotionally charged stories that push an agenda—issues of pandemic maintenance, election integrity, oil prices, inflation, or social justice.  Rule of thumb:  If the ultimate source of the message is unclear, or the funding is obscured, it is likely grey agitprop.

• Black.  Paints another party as the source.  Most difficult to identify.  False flag operations, be they information or action in nature, are a type of this insidious art form.  (Welcome to the dark side.)

Finally, a word on evaluating visual media.  Photographs and videos are powerful tools for influencing target audiences. (“A picture paints a thousand words.” Right?)  The 1994 release of the film Forest Gump opened the world’s eyes to the possibilities of deep fake imagery.  The technology has since improved, become more accessible to average citizens, and appears with some frequency in social media posts intended to sway opinion.  Context is equally important.  A legitimate photo of one event presented as if it represents another event can be equally misleading.  So we need to ask ourselves two questions about news-relevant pictures and video: are they doctored and are they in the right context? One free online tool to help address these questions is reverse image search engine tineye.com.

Phew!  That was a lot of ground to cover in very few words and I feel that we only scratched the surface.  Nevertheless, this two-part series has given you tools like those used by CIA officers to more effectively navigate the wilderness of mirrors that is today’s information ecosystem.  I encourage you to employ your new mental kit as you consume your news, especially when weighing competing narratives, whether it concerns Orchid Isle politics, the Ukraine conflict, future elections, or the latest hot-button social issue.

Be informed, not influenced.  Be akamai.

Originally published in the Hawaii Tribune Herald on 23 April 2023.

---