reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Civil society, including the press, academia, special interest groups, and NGOs, plays a crucial role in addressing election security and countering malign influence. It is not enough for just the federal government, states, or tech and social media companies to tackle this issue. We need a collaborative effort from all sectors of society to understand and address the threats. This synergy is still a work in progress.

The FBI alerted our team about the presence of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election. They informed us that there might be a release of similar content soon.

Speakers discuss the severity and novelty of threats to the United States’ political system, focusing on Russian interference and the digital domain. - All acknowledge that the country faced a cataclysmic disruption to its political system that is unlike prior experiences. Speaker 2 notes, as a Vietnam veteran, that fundamental institutions were jeopardized then but proved resilient, and expresses hope for a similar outcome now. - Speaker 1 emphasizes two points: (1) Vladimir Putin’s determination to shape political landscapes inside Russia and abroad, and (2) the consequential role of the digital domain, which allowed Russian intelligence to exploit and manipulate more effectively, culminating in the twenty sixteen election. - They note that Russian interference historically involved exploiting elections, but never with such aggression, directness, or multidimensional methods. The Internet and modern technology serve as a huge enabler for influencing opinion and undermining fundamental systems. - There is a discussion of whether this manipulation was unforeseen. Speaker 2 indicates it goes back to the Soviet era with attempts to influence elections, but the magnitude in twenty sixteen was unprecedented. The digital environment provides malefactors with more opportunities to attack and influence. - The panel explains active measures as fabricating or propagating stories (even patently false ones) to advance a narrative, color perceptions, and lend legitimacy to political actors. They note that the Russians focused on specific voter blocks in states like Wisconsin and Michigan, with estimates that 70,000–80,000 votes could have swung the election. - They discuss methods beyond information operations, including collecting information (e.g., DNC and DCCC email breaches) and money-related tactics: money laundering, disguising funding sources for political actions, and potential extortion or blackmail. They stress that collusion is a tool in the Russians’ kit and that they recruit or exploit individuals where openings exist. - Following the money is highlighted as essential across national security domains; FBI financial investigators and intelligence analysts play key roles, and there is confidence that Mueller and others will trace financial pathways to uncover motivations. - The distinction between cyber warfare and conventional warfare is acknowledged: there are no tanks or planes, but the cyber realm constitutes a war for democracy. A robust response is needed to strengthen the cyber environment, including proposals for a congressional independent commission to assess and strategize future protections, involving engineers, technologists, scientists, and private sector input. - They reflect on why the nation did not respond with the immediacy seen after physical attacks (e.g., 9/11). The lack of a physical rubble-like trigger makes cyber threats harder to mobilize a national response. Leadership issues are cited: when the White House diminishes the CIA, FBI, NSA, or intelligence and law enforcement, it undermines efforts to address the threat. - They recount briefings to the president-elect in January, noting high confidence levels in assessments that did not rely on the dossier; the bigger concern is a perceived indifference to the Russian threat and the denigration of security institutions. - They stress the importance of institutional integrity: the press, law enforcement, and intelligence are pillars of democracy, and denigration of these institutions undermines U.S. credibility abroad. They advocate for stronger checks and balances and reiterate their commitment to truthful reporting and protecting the country. - The speakers, experienced and apolitical, emphasize loyalty to the Constitution and the need for decisive leadership and sustained commitment to democratic institutions, despite political challenges. They conclude with a solemn commitment to safeguard the country and its democratic framework.

The speaker states that interference or federal election crimes will be aggressively investigated, and they will work with partners to quickly take appropriate action. They are also coordinating with private sector technology and social media companies. The goal is to ensure these platforms aren't used by foreign adversaries to spread disinformation and propaganda.

We have 40,000 people working on safety and integrity, spending billions on election integrity. Despite concerns, AI helps reduce hate speech on our platforms to 0.01%. AI is crucial for enforcing policies and combating misuse.

The Russians have weaponized social media by manipulating public opinion through biased or fake stories. However, domestic disinformation is also a significant issue. In 2016, the Russian efforts may not have been very sophisticated, but they learned that they don't need to create content themselves as there are people in the US who will do it. There were two types of disinformation attacks in 2016, with the Internet Research Agency taking over existing groups in the US and pushing radical positions. While foreign influence gets a lot of attention, the majority of problems in the information environment are domestic. The domestic threat of disinformation is considered the most significant immediate threat to the 2020 election.

We're advocating for talent to join the private sector. Transparency is crucial in combating harmful content and misinformation. Russia's involvement in election interference is unprecedented. Platforms are taking steps to combat misinformation and protect democracy. Stronger partnerships with government agencies are being formed. Coordination is key in decreasing fake news dissemination. 2018 is crucial for elections worldwide, and efforts are being made to safeguard their integrity.

We have discussed the intelligence community's efforts to share information with social media platforms to address fake content and ensure it aligns with their terms of service.

Concerns are rising about a tech industrial complex that threatens our country. Americans face overwhelming misinformation, leading to power abuse. The free press is deteriorating, and social media is neglecting fact-checking. Lies are overshadowing the truth for profit and power. It's crucial to hold social platforms accountable to safeguard our children, families, and democracy from these abuses.

Many people overlook their options in dealing with misinformation on social media. Early detection is key to tracking and countering harmful narratives. Legal action can be taken against profit-driven disinformation networks. Fact-checking alone may not change beliefs, so building counter narratives is crucial. Our organization helps detect, assess, and mitigate the impact of misinformation to prevent future issues. The recent events at the US Capitol highlight the real-world consequences of online disinformation. Translation: It is important to detect and counter harmful narratives early to prevent misinformation from causing real-world harm. Legal action can be taken against profit-driven disinformation networks, and building counter narratives is essential. Our organization helps organizations address the impact of misinformation to prevent future issues. The recent events at the US Capitol show the consequences of online misinformation.

The speaker emphasizes the importance of partnership between the federal government, state and local colleagues, and social media and tech firms in securing elections. They acknowledge the valuable information and opportunities that these firms possess, which the government does not have. The integration of these relationships has been a critical step forward since 2016. Speaker 1 expresses pride in the accomplishments of the past 2 years, particularly in the last 6 to 9 months, as a collaborative effort between the government and social media and tech firms. They believe this partnership will serve as a model for the future.

We actively addressed disinformation and misinformation during the pandemic and the US election by collaborating with the editing community. This model will be used in future elections globally. We aim to identify threats early by working with governments and other platforms to understand the landscape.

Chris Wray informed Congress that he guarantees the election security of the United States. However, there are concerns about the FBI's involvement with social media giants like Twitter and Facebook. In the past, the FBI's election security task force would advise these companies on what content to restrict, which is not their role. The media should be outraged that a law enforcement agency is dictating their content. It seems that the focus is on preventing pro-Trump information from being shared. This raises questions about the integrity of the upcoming election, as these contracts are still in place.

The Russians have weaponized social media by manipulating public opinion through biased or fake stories. However, domestic disinformation is also a significant issue. In 2016, the Russian efforts may not have been very sophisticated, but they learned that they don't need to create the content themselves as there are people in the US who will do it. There were two types of disinformation attacks in 2016: the Internet Research Agency created personas to take over existing US groups and push radical positions. However, the majority of these problems are domestic, related to how we interact online, political speech, amplification, and how politicians use platforms. The domestic threat of disinformation is the most significant immediate threat to the 2020 election.

Elon Musk stated the media is complicit and lied to the American public, spending minimal time on the story of election interference. He admitted Twitter acted as a propaganda arm of the Democratic party. Congress should demand transparency from Meta, Facebook, Google, Apple, and YouTube. Regardless of the financial outcome for Musk, he has done a service to the country by exposing how big tech will operate moving forward. The press colluded to interfere in the 2020 election, particularly regarding the Hunter Biden story. This was malfeasance, active collusion between the FBI, DHS, DNI, FEC, Twitter, and big tech, to steal the country. Republicans in Congress need to act. To win future elections, Republicans need open platforms like Twitter and Facebook, not just Fox News. There is relentless targeting, including Facebook fact-checking, Google banning, YouTube banning, and Twitter shadow banning.

Disinformation requires a whole of society approach, not just governmental action. Some countries are more progressive in recognizing this challenge. A whole of society effort is key to empowering people with real and accurate information. This approach means sharing experiences and holding governments, social media platforms, and political leaders accountable. Democracy depends on a healthy information space achievable through this effort. The whole of society response includes the private sector, public sector, and civil society. Cooperation from tech platforms, good faith, and enforcement of terms of service are needed. It also requires government acknowledgment that the problem extends beyond foreign actors.

We cannot completely eliminate interference in elections, but we can make it significantly harder. Our focus is on protecting election integrity and ensuring Facebook supports democracy. Although the problematic content we've identified is minimal, any interference is serious. We are collaborating with the US government on investigations into Russian interference, having recently uncovered some activity and shared our findings with Congress. While we can't disclose everything publicly due to ongoing investigations, we support Congress in informing the public and expect the government to release its findings once complete. Additionally, we will continue our investigation into Facebook's role in the election, looking into foreign actors and campaigns to better understand their use of our platform.

The speaker discusses the intelligence community's efforts to share information with social media platforms to address inauthentic content. They clarify that the office of the director of National Intelligence would only participate in approved election security briefings with private companies like Twitter, YouTube, Microsoft, and state election officials. These briefings focus on discussing threats and have nothing to do with content moderation or the Biden laptop as Russian disinformation. The speaker mentions that there were weekly meetings between the FBI, DHS, and Twitter, but only one reference to their office. They hope that this reference was part of the approved process for election security briefings.

The speaker emphasizes the importance of private companies in combating misinformation online. They express concern over the impact of disinformation on democratic institutions, particularly highlighting the refusal to accept election results. The speaker warns of the global spread of rigged election narratives by autocrats, leading to a loss of faith in democracy. They stress the need to trust democratic systems despite imperfections and changing dynamics. The speaker urges vigilance in countering asymmetric warfare through the weaponization of information.

The Russians weaponized social media by manipulating public opinion with biased or fake stories. Domestic disinformation is a bigger issue than foreign efforts. In 2016, the Russian content wasn't very persuasive, but they learned they could use existing US content. The focus should shift from foreign to domestic disinformation, as most problems stem from how we interact online and the norms around political speech. The biggest threat to the 2020 election is domestic disinformation, not foreign influence. The impact of foreign interference is minimal compared to the overwhelming domestic disinformation in the US landscape.

Americans spreading misinformation, whether intentionally or unknowingly, can pose a significant threat to elections. This misinformation can be shared on social media without us realizing it's fake. While foreign interference is a concern, we value and encourage free speech in our country. However, we also need to ensure that if we or the involved firms are aware of foreign-sponsored and covertly sponsored information, we take steps to manage it effectively.

Digital platforms are being misused to subvert science and spread disinformation and hate to billions of people. This global threat demands clear and coordinated global action. A policy brief on information integrity on digital platforms puts forward a framework for a concerned international response.

The Biden administration plans to bring together democracies in a transatlantic summit to address threats to democracy. The European Union also wants to establish a transatlantic digital marketplace and work together against disinformation. Mainstream platforms like Twitter and Facebook have started labeling misinformation, and there is hope that nefarious movements will decline. The EU's Democracy Action Plan, which includes introducing costs for spreading disinformation, is seen as a game changer. The Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act proposed by the European Commission are steps in the right direction. Collaboration between governments, civil society, and industry is crucial, as disinformation is a growing threat that requires a collective response.

Google, Facebook, and others were caught cheating in the last election, referencing "51 agents" and the laptop. It was claimed that they affected the election by many points. The speaker stated that anyone caught cheating in the election will be pursued more aggressively than ever before because they are a threat. Democrats are described as the real threat to democracy.

The speaker discusses the spread of vaccine and election disinformation on social media platforms like Facebook. They emphasize the need for transparency in algorithms and engagement to hold platforms accountable. The discussion also touches on misinformation surrounding Donald Trump, Hunter Biden, and COVID-19. The speaker highlights the importance of self-policing by groups like lawyers and state medical boards to combat false information. Additionally, they mention the need for investigations into profiteering off the pandemic.