The online world has been a crucial tool for education and connection, especially during the pandemic. But it has also spread a new kind of threat. Viral misinformation, deliberately spread disinformation, conspiracy theories, and hate speech run rampant.
The resulting problems have harmed everything from our democracy, culminating in the events of January 6th, to our public health, where an “infodemic” of false information about COVID continues to cost lives and hurt vaccination efforts.
While the efforts to battle and research this problem (some 460 thinktank, university, task force projects!) typically focus on the role of the platform companies and intelligence agencies etc, we’ve largely left our youth defenseless.
This is despite the fact that experts believe that raising the skills and awareness of those targeted by these attacks is among the best responses, and teachers are desperate for help.
It is notable in that it brings together the insights of experts in areas that range from education policy to information warfare, who sought the ideas of people who ranged from NSA officials to high school teachers.
We lay out the need for a new approach, which we call “Cyber Citizenship.”
The concept blends the new skills that we all need in media and digital literacy, with the growing responsibilities of digital citizenship and civics, and the threat awareness of the cybersecurity field.
Even more, we don't just identify the key policy actions that could both aid our teachers + better secure our nation. We are launching a new online portal, where such K-12 teaching tools and curriculum to identify and resist mis/disinfo will all be gathered for the first time.
It is exciting in that, unlike a lot of the proposals/heated debate on what to do about various internet harms, this approach to aid our teachers and kids, and thus our broader democracy and public health, is nonpartisan, doable, and longterm in its effect.
It is also personally exciting to share it with all of you.
A lot of you know me for my future of war, cyber and useful fiction writing, but this is what I've been working on for last year, much of it behind the scenes, from launching the project, fundraising, to now research+writing on ed policy with great partners like @LisaGuernsey
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Some thoughts on yet another right wing online/media mob going after military service member:
1) Always important to identify the players and their history. Today's episode is brought Breitbart's Pentagon reporter, elevating the fellow who helped bring you Pizzagate and multiple other conspiracy theories, as well as has repeatedly elevated Russian info ops
2) We covered this sad player and the tactics in #LikeWar book.
Frankly, it is boring to me to see people still playing this game, as if we don't see through it now. What worked in 2016 doesn't now. Sorry.
DHS Inspector General finds at least 348 cases where Trump forced migrant parents to leave the U.S. without their children apnews.com/article/az-sta…
This directly confirms that Kirstjen Nielsen, now trying to cash in on her role at DHS with cyber $, was a liar.
Nielsen testified to Congress in December 2018 that “every parent” who was deported had a choice to take their child back to their country and those who did not “made the choice not to have the child accompany them.”
She also told Congress in March 2019 that there has been “no parent who has been deported, to my knowledge, without multiple opportunities to take their children with them.”
That is one way to describe a civilian airliner being forced down into authoritarian state territory by a Mig29, so that a passenger can be kidnapped...
Now, I get why the corporate comms team went as vanilla in tone as they could. This is an extraordinary situation in so many ways, meaning no PR team has a playbook for it. And it is really for govts to handle now (with some consequences for violating norms/laws), not an airline.
But @RyanairPress shouldn't also sugarcoat it. That rewards bad behavior and harms your own brand. Add in a line expressing concern about the unprecedented incident and the welfare of the passengers involved, including those taken off the flight.
A challenge for national security wonks today that is akin to that in 2017.
Will you speak to real threats or dodge doing so for fear of "being partisan?"
Back then it was speaking to Russian cyber attack.
Today, it is viral conspiracy theory surrounding The Big Lie.
Today, I gave a speech on key trends in digital security. Covered issues Ransomware to IOT to viral mis/disinformation that can shape real world beliefs, actions and even cause deaths.
By including events of Jan6 and pandemic as case examples, however, was said to be partisan.
As an analyst, you have to include those case examples. To do otherwise is to dodge. But to include them is to make a certain segment of the audience uncomfortable or even angry. Many will thus avoid it...This is disservice to facts and your responsibility as an analyst.
This message is 100% worth your watch and share, not just on Twitter, but Facebook etc
A message from a Republican leader and an iconic figure in our culture, who gets it, and maybe might pierce thru the fever dream too many fell into.
That is, please also share it with those co-workers, friends and family who don't realize the stakes of what is going on, and the near-miss to our democracy of what just played out.
In sifting thru video, I have seen not just the stupid things we all saw like the selfies and literally crapping on the floor. But people need to understand that there was also a harder, darker part...
Some background to Twitter's reference to risk of further violence as one of reasons for suspension of Trump:
This is circulating among extremist accounts.
It made Trump's reversal of pledging "peaceful transition" in video to tweeting he wouldn't be in DC that date worrisome.
IE, preplanned Jan17 militia events mostly outside DC, but Jan20 noise is about retaliation in DC, martyrdom for the woman killed in Capitol, etc.
Trump breaking his pledge, and making it known he would Not be in the city, not taking part in peaceful transition, read significant
That is yet another reason why I don't have much empathy now for the tired "Let's just move on" narratives. Trump chose not to be part of a peaceful transition, and then doubled down yesterday, even AFTER the deaths and riot. That has all sorts of ripple effects.