Saturday, October 13, 2018

Information Terrorism as a Tool of the Far Right

This article from Wired is worth a read. It shows how the Kavanaugh hearing fit right in to right-wing conspiracy infrastructure. I don't know what the antidote to radicalization is, but if there is one, surely an understanding of who the players are and how they operate must be part of it. The extended quote below (emphasis added) will give you the basic summary of the article, but you should read the whole thing. Given that Church members in America tend to be politically conservative, I worry that they may be more easily influenced by these things--or at least tolerate the means because they sympathize with the ends. To them I would make two comments:

1. Look the other way, and it will only be a matter of time until you become the target.

2. "Verily, verily, I say unto you, wo be unto him that lieth to deceive because he supposeth that another lieth to deceive, for such are not exempt from the justice of God." (Doctrine and Covenants 10:28)

Go forth and tweet.

Brett Kavanaugh and the Information Terrorists Trying to Reshape America:

As Kavanaugh was holed up in the White House undergoing intensive prep to combat the accusations, Blasey Ford was off the grid, moving from house to house with a newly employed security detail, terrified by death threats, swarmed and disparaged by trolls and digital attackers whose smears and conspiracies then bleed over into the blogs and then into more acceptable conservative media. So prepared is this landscape for new conspiracies of central bogeymen—crisis actors, pedophiles, Soros, secret CIA plots, and more—that naked absurdities are liked and reposted without much thought.

Gamergate became Pizzagate became QAnon became entrenched modern narrative architecture ripe for exploitation. The cadre mobilized a movement of misogyny and white nationalism and intimidation—of angry boys who reveled in the chaos god of Roger Stone—and cultivated the narrative to make it acceptable to a wider lane of conservatives. This is triggering violence and identifiable forms of extremism that we can no longer ignore.

This is Donald Trump's America. But more, it is Roger Stone's America. Whatever it takes to win is fair game, even if they burn down the minds of Americans in the process. This willful radicalization is a campaign of information terror waged on fellow countrymen—the necessary domestic counterpart for hostile nation-state information warfare to be successful. It seems no accident that Stone is apparently in Mueller's sights, possibly for behavior that suggests coordination with Kremlin-linked actors.

The leading lights in Stone's orbit take scalps and champion memes, only to shed their skins and awake in a new persona, turning their flamethrowers from one topic or group to the next. In a non-Trumpian America, they might have remained the fringe provocateurs they are, trolling the fact-based world for exposure and ad revenue, vitamin hucksters and doomsday preppers masquerading as political commentators.

But as the Trump Train prepared to leave the station, the conservative media was already so thoroughly riddled with conspiracists and storytellers that the fringe had ample bridges to the much-maligned MSM. To name a few: Sean Hannity and his commentators (John Solomon, Dan Bongino, Sara Carter); Tucker Carlson and his Daily Caller, where Johnson and Judge contributed; Breitbart, which helped integrate conspiracy and propaganda like Infowars and Gateway Pundit.

And, of course, the president himself has amplified conspiracy and demonized "the media"—even while elevating a new ecosystem of far-right media groups and personalities, like One America News' Posobiec and whatever TruNews is. This has transformed the way conservative Americans consume information, altering how they make judgments on truth and reality.


9 comments:

Glenn Thigpen,  10/14/2018 02:39:00 PM  

Jared, the article that you linked to and the excerpt that you posted seem to be just the type of "information terrorism" that you seem to be decrying.

Glenn

Jared*,  10/14/2018 06:47:00 PM  

Your assignment, then, is to write a paragraph discussing the author's definition of information terrorism, and to explain how the article fits the definition. Further, you should compare and contrast the article with the examples of information terrorism given in the article.

Glenn Thigpen,  10/14/2018 09:34:00 PM  

From your excerpt:
“This is Donald Trump's America. But more, it is Roger Stone's America. Whatever it takes to win is fair game, even if they burn down the minds of Americans in the process. This willful radicalization is a campaign of information terror waged on fellow countrymen.”

David Millward:
“Maine faces consumer backlash after Senator Susan Collins backs Kavanaugh”
https://www.yahoo.com/news/maine-faces-consumer-backlash-senator-135002653.html

Hillary Clinton:
"You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about," Clinton said in an interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour. "That's why I believe, if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and or the Senate, that's when civility can start again. But until then, the only thing that the Republicans seem to recognize and respect is strength."
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/09/politics/hillary-clinton-civility-congress-cnntv/index.html

Christina Cauterucci on the speech of Senator Susan Collins explaining her decision to vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh to be an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court
“Collins’ 40-minute speech on the Senate floor offered a wide-ranging critique of the strategies employed by Kavanaugh’s opponents and a detailed account of all the decisions in his judicial record that supposedly show his impartiality. It took about half an hour for the senator from Maine to get to the sexual assault and harassment allegations against Kavanaugh. When she did, she went on an excruciatingly cynical and unnecessarily cruel rant about the unbelievability of Christine Blasey Ford’s story, a diatribe that was utterly unconcerned with the psychology of traumatic memory recall and the specifics of Ford’s allegations.”
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/10/susan-collins-brett-kavanaugh-sexual-assault-cruel.html

Laurie Roberts on Christine Blasey Ford testimony:
“Christine Blasey Ford comes across as credible and authentic. Senate Republicans, meanwhile, just come across as clueless.”
https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/opinion/nation-now/2018/09/27/christine-blasey-ford-wiping-floor-senate-republicans-column/1445802002/


“Why We Must Stop Kavanaugh From Becoming Trump’s Next Supreme Court Justice”
https://www.indivisible.org/resource/must-stop-kavanaugh-becoming-trumps-next-supreme-court-justice/

Ken Silverstein:
“Supreme Court: Kavanaugh Stinks And The Process Is Rigged, Say Critics”
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kensilverstein/2018/09/05/supreme-court-kavanaugh-stinks-and-the-process-is-rigged-say-critics/#5e97fd1269e3

Henry Giroux:
“Trump, Kavanaugh and the Path to Neoliberal Fascism”
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/10/12/trump-kavanaugh-and-path-neoliberal-fascism

Jared*,  10/15/2018 06:26:00 PM  

Glenn, you've successfully demonstrated that Democrats want political wins, and that many people did not support Kavanaugh's nomination or the confirmation process and expressed their opinions to that effect. I appreciate your effort, but you have not connected any of this to the article's definition or examples of information terrorism.

I am not trying to be obnoxious. I'm just not convinced that you read the article (or if you did, that you absorbed its point), so I'm pushing you to show me that you've thought more deeply than reflexively turning to a game of partisan Whataboutism.

Glenn Thigpen,  10/15/2018 09:41:00 PM  

Jared, the posts I referenced are more than just showing that Democrats want political wins. That is pretty much a given, as well as the Republicans. Hillary's uncivility mantra and Henry Giroux's article stating that Trump is pushing us towards a fascist state are attempts to show that the article that you excerpted and linked to is just a case of the pot calling the kettle black. There is disinformation, insults, and invective in far right and far left media. There are attempts to intimidate and to smear in articles from both sides. It actually seems to me that most "news" stories are opinion pieces branded as news.

But I do not ascribe to the "This has transformed the way conservative Americans consume information, altering how they make judgments on truth and reality." That is inane, painting a whole swath of intelligent, thinking, and caring people, men and women, with a broad and biased brush. I hope that you have not swallowed that.

Glenn

Jared*,  10/16/2018 06:10:00 PM  

Glenn, I was hoping that you would grapple with the conveyor belt of conspiracy theories generated on the right. To equate the Wired article with information terrorism is to equate it with Pizzagate, the Seth Rich smear, QAnon, and the various right wing conspiracies involving pedophilia, sex trafficking, etc. You are equating professional journalism--even if it comes from a political point of view--with Alex Jones. I doubt that you would actually make that equivalence, so my skepticism that you have actually read the article (which remains, since you still haven't referenced anything beyond what appears in this post) is actually a charitable assumption.

But I do not ascribe to the "This has transformed the way conservative Americans consume information, altering how they make judgments on truth and reality." That is inane, painting a whole swath of intelligent, thinking, and caring people, men and women, with a broad and biased brush. I hope that you have not swallowed that.

Who said anything about them not being intelligent, thinking, and caring? But when conspiracy theories make their way from the cesspools of the Internet, to Alex Jones, to Rush Limbaugh, and then to Fox News and Facebook feeds, and then are winked at (and sometimes explicitly endorsed) by leading politicians or their surrogates, including the President....how does that not influence judgments on truth and reality? You seem to be saying that many (or most) conservatives see through the garbage. If that's so, then we've come full circle to my original post, where I suggested that they shouldn't tolerate the garbage....in which case you really shouldn't have any objection to the Wired article!

Glenn Thigpen,  10/16/2018 10:55:00 PM  

So, you are saying that only the right is generating conspiracy theories? I trust you are not that naive. I am not denying that their are people on the far right who are concocting conspiracy theories. They are rampant on the internet. Twitter is a cesspool. But the left has it's own cadre. Let me just give you a few reminders.

I am not equating professional journalism with Alex Jones. I do not read Alex Jones. I hope that you do not believe that the piece by Henry Giroux, although he may be a professional journalist, as responsible journalism.

Endless variations of Russian/Trump collusion conspiracy theories, none of which have been corroborated even after two years of investigation by a special counsel.
Zina Bash – White Power - Remember that one?
Hillary Clinton – Vast right wing conspiracy - Nuff said.
The New York Times piece by an anonymous source that there is an internal source of resistance to Trump’s policies - Dpn't you just love those anonymous unimpeachable sources?
New York Times piece on the Justice Kennedy retirement conspiracy - Read it again, if you have not already done so.

This is still a case of the pot calling the kettle black. It is something that thinking, reasoning people from all walks of life and ideologies have to wade through on a daily basis. You ask me why do conservatives put up with it? I have to turn that question back on you also.

But the bottom line is that people like you and I have very little control over what is published in the media. The internet has some good points, but is also is a cesspool of disinformation. I don't really have time to try to determine if something is from the left or the right. What I have to do is to sift through the "news" trying to ascertain what the actual facts are. However, so many of the headlines are "click bait." That is how the sites rate an article's popularity, i.e. how many clicks it gets. Doesn't matter whether the article is actually read or not.

The objections I have to the wired article is that it was absolutely one sided.
In response to my objections to a line you bolded you said "
Who said anything about them not being intelligent, thinking, and caring?
Would you please read that line again and see what it is implying?

Now, if you can get all of the liberals to object to left wing conspiracy theories I will get all of the conservatives to object to right wing conspiracy theories. You are just as capable of doing that as I am, and vice versa.

Glenn

Jared*,  10/17/2018 09:40:00 PM  

This has been fun, but I'm off for a long weekend. In closing for now, I'll just say that while lies and conspiracy theories can be found on both sides of the political spectrum, I don't think the ones on the left hold a candle to those on the right in terms of quantity and influence. Then again, some of that influence might actually be Russian trolls. ;-)

Glenn Thigpen,  10/18/2018 08:24:00 AM  

Jared, Hope you have a great long week end. I have to disagree with you on the idea that the disinformation, intimidation, and hyperbole from the left cannot hold a candle to that from the right. The conservative press is greatly outnumbered by media with a liberal bias. Fox News is the main outlet for conservative media and pundits while liberals have a wider variety of sources, according to the Pew Research Center. The Pew Research Center actually uses the term "consistent conservative" and "consistent liberal" indicating more sharply right or left. It is interesting to note that "consistent liberals' are more likely than 'consistent conservatives" to block someone on social media because they disagree with what the person said about politics. Of course that means that you are not a true "consistent liberal" because you have not shut me down yet. (Insert Smiley) According to the Pew article, Fox news is a bit right of center but not "far right." I just do not think that the research aligns with your contentions and that of the article you referenced.

Check out the info at http://www.journalism.org/2014/10/21/political-polarization-media-habits/

Glenn

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP