[Fis] On disinformation

Tue Dec 8 02:39:22 CET 2020

thanks, dai.
one man's truth is another man's lie.  each subculture has its own truth and its own devil spilling disinformation.
to trumpers, joe biden is part of a coup to take the white house fraudulently. to trumpers, the democrats are the liars.  
to anti-trumpers, trump is trying to pull off a coup to upend the election.  trump and his "army" are the liars.  the disinformation spewers.
which group is right?  which truth is right?
how do we judge?  especially if freedom of speech is one of our most basic values?
so far, we are relying on the courts.
with warmth and oomph--howard

-----Original Message-----
From: Dai Griffiths <dai.griffiths.1 at gmail.com>
To: fis at listas.unizar.es <fis at listas.unizar.es>
Sent: Mon, Dec 7, 2020 9:05 am
Subject: Re: [Fis] On disinformation

 That's all true, Howard. 
  I think it is important to distinguish between compliance and consensus. Throwing dissidents to the lions does the trick for compliance, and preventing challenges to power (as per the shocking first chapter of Foucault's Discipline and Punish). 
  As to consensus, the creation of a canon is partly a practical matter: given it takes so long to copy a book, which ones do we think are worth copying and sharing. Printing, and now information technology, have completely changed these decisions. But on top of these features of the medium, there is a political process. For example, it seems likely that leaders in early China saw how consensus through control of the canon could provide an alternative (or a useful addition) to lion feeding as a method for achieving authority, by promoting Confucian ideas. Both strategies are at work in Hong Kong today, it seems.
  The two strategies continue side by side in differing combinations. Some absolute rulers don't worry too much about consensus outside the group of those standing in line to assassinate them. Others focus more on control of the development of consensus through control of the communications ecology, and perhaps Russia has taken the lead in this. Neither of these two extremes is attractive, but both are widespread. Most of us on this list have been fortunate to live in a democratic space carved out between the rock of forced compliance, and the hard place of manipulated consensus. The configuration and maintenance of that space always involves hard work, compromise, and trade-offs that are never ideal for everybody (and maybe for nobody), but I am certainly grateful for it.
  If we want to say something sensible about all this, and if we want to make any practical step which might preserve both our discourses and democracy, then I think we need to address two quite different kinds of questions:
  1) What is the impact of information technology, its accompanying regulatory framework and established patterns of use, on the ecology of communications? How might the patterns change if we altered this or that part of the system? These are cybernetic questions.
  2) Who is benefiting from the emerging communications ecology, what are they doing to shape it's future, and why? What (if any) changes would we like to persuade legislators and organisations to make in response and how can this be achieved? These are political questions. Dai
  On 06/12/2020 02:16, Howard Bloom wrote:

 dai, 
  as an indication that your idea that disinformation is the norm and consensus the exception, 
  look how hard previous ages have worked to impose consensus.  spreading roman culture amongst tribal peoples in the days of the roman empire.  throwing dissidents to the lions. making sure that everyone's education was the same with the same roughly five books studied and the same alphabet used from roughly 200 bc onward in china.   hunting heretics once rome turned christian.  the inquisition.  the absolute rule of the tsar in russia, with all printing presses used for just one thing: printing the tsar's ukases. 
  howard

 -----Original Message-----
 From: Dai Griffiths <dai.griffiths.1 at gmail.com>
 To: fis at listas.unizar.es
 Sent: Sat, Dec 5, 2020 9:41 am
 Subject: Re: [Fis] On disinformation

   Dear all, We tend to think of 'surveillance capitalism' and other related trends as being a disruption of normality. But seen from a longer perspective, perhaps we are living in an unusual period (or the possibly the end of it) in which there has been relatively widespread social agreement about the nature of the world that we are living in. "Ask the priest" used to be the answer to questions of eschatology or social propriety (and often still is) but that doesn't help much in establishing who is giving the orders or why, and what is going on in the town over the hill. We have relied on newspapers for that, and, in the UK, the BBC. As a result, flat earthers haven't much traction recently compared with the conflict between Galileo and the church, and even McCarthyism was primarily about economic power and control, not as unhinged as the witchcraft hysteria that Miller (rightly) compared it to. If it is true that we have been living in an oasis of relative consensus, where did that consensus come from? 
  I would argue that it emerged from the inherent limitations in access to printing technology, and the editorial, commercial, political and social processes that developed to cope with that limited access. It is these processes that generated the authority of some ideas over others, the generalised trust in some media rather than others, and the ability to identify consistent biases in those that were trusted. I suggest that we should recognise that disinformation, fake news, and plain old gossip, are the default state for human social interactions. It is evolved and designed social structures and institutions that overcome this. Our challenge is then to disentangle the way that that informational authority was generated in the past, and the (perhaps disfunctional) way that it is generated at present. My suspicion is that we won't get far in improving the situation unless we question the central role of the recommender algorithms that have taken over much of the work of human editors in determining what is seen heard and read, and by whom. To have any chance of achieving political traction in the face of commercial interests and personal preferences, proposals for change in that area will have to tell and extremely clear story about how we got to where we are, where we should try to go next, and how we could get there. Best
  Dai
   On 04/12/2020 14:06, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote:

     Dear Terry and FIS colleagues, 
  Thanks for the reflections--I will try to continue with rather disconnected ideas. 
  The term 'surveillance capitalism' introduced by Shoshana Zuboff (indeed complemented with a parallel 'surveillance authoritarianism') is  addressed to cover the new negative aspects of current technological developments. However, my opinion is that these phenomena are inherent in all human societies in all epochs, for there is always a tension, say, between the individual "fitness" and the whole social "commons", which can be set in quite many different dynamic equilibrium points, basically maintained via circulating or communicating info flows. It is easy to see that information, disinformation, surveillance, persuasion, and coercion travel together in the socialization-communication pack. Historically, every new means of communication (then we land on McLuhan) alters those social equilibria and somehow demands a social or cultural reaction to re-establish an acceptable collective situation. The problem now, you mentioned in the previous post, is the enormous concentration of power, of brute info flows,  around these new media--without appropriate social curation at the time being. I doubt that these technologies can bring the solution by themselves . Institutional, social intervention would be needed...  Scholarly analysis might be important, providing cues on the the influence on individual and collective moods/personalities, on the possible counteracting institutional alternatives and on the needed new cultural norms to abide along these new forms of communication (sort of 'traffic regulations'), even a personal hygiene of communication... 

  The problems are far more serious, complex, and faster than in McLuhan's time. We have to reinvent his views... But how can we organize a collective, cumulative discussion? I was thinking that a feasible first step, apart of what we can do directly in the list, could be calling for a Special Issue in some interesting, multidisciplinary Journal. Well, at the time being, Terry, Joseph, and myself are promoting a sort of ad hoc group to move things--anyone else would join?? 
  Best regards --Pedro 
  El 01/12/2020 a las 22:54, Terrence W. DEACON escribió:

      Dear Pedro, 
  Great suggestions. I like the idea of an ongoing separate thread addressing disinformation. Of course I only addressed Western disinformation and didn't even touch on highly massaged information that is often disseminated with centralized governmental control. This disinforms by selective censorship and redundancy and is increasingly taking advantage of the myriad new forms of surveillance that can be used to shape the information made available to different targeted audiences.  And Yes McLuhan is definitely relevant. I wonder how he would think about the effects of these new media. How do they reshape the nature of content? How they can be understood using his notions of hot and cool? What is now in the rear view mirror within the new media that once was in the foreground? On these matters Bob Logan might want to weigh in.  
  -- 
 Professor Terrence W. Deacon
 University of California, Berkeley    
  _______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis at listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
----------
INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL

Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el siguiente enlace: https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
http://listas.unizar.es
----------

  -- 
-------------------------------------------------
Pedro C. Marijuán
Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group

pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es
http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
-------------------------------------------------  

|  | Libre de virus. www.avast.com  |

   _______________________________________________Fis mailing listFis at listas.unizar.eshttp://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis----------INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONALUd. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el siguiente enlace: https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listasRecuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.http://listas.unizar.es---------- -- 
-----------------------------------------

Professor David (Dai) Griffiths

SKYPE: daigriffiths

Phones (please don't leave voice mail)
   UK Mobile +44 (0)7491151559
   Spanish Mobile: + 34 687955912

email
   dai.griffiths.1 at gmail.com     _______________________________________________
 Fis mailing list
 Fis at listas.unizar.es
 http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
 ----------
 INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL

 Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
 Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el siguiente enlace: https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
 Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
 http://listas.unizar.es
 ----------
     -- 
-----------------------------------------

Professor David (Dai) Griffiths

SKYPE: daigriffiths

Phones (please don't leave voice mail)
   UK Mobile +44 (0)7491151559
   Spanish Mobile: + 34 687955912

email
   dai.griffiths.1 at gmail.com _______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis at listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
----------
INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL

Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el siguiente enlace: https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
http://listas.unizar.es
----------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20201208/85779fbc/attachment-0001.html>