Understanding False Information: Disinformation, Misinformation, and Malinformation

The challenge of false information is spreading in today's digital world and affecting the public in every possible way. The public receives and believes all sorts of false information, some of which can indeed shape perceptions and even influence major societal events like elections. False information has several different forms, and it might be more useful for us to think about it as taking on a few key appearances, each with its unique set of characteristics. We might call these appearances disinformation, misinformation, and malinformation.

False information that is created and spread with the intent to mislead and manipulate is known as disinformation. This is not done by accident but is a strategy. Disinformation works best when it's used to "sway public opinion through false narratives and misleading information." A prime example of this is the Hunter Biden laptop story from October 2020. In this instance, while the New York Post was publishing emails that were supposedly suggesting some influence peddling, a lot of critics were saying that what was really going on was that media outlets and social platforms were almost immediately labeling the story as disinformation. Whether you agree with the story or not, disinformation accomplishes what it set out to do in this instance: to control the public conversation. Online, disinformation prospers because it's meant to do one thing and do it well which is to provoke. It extracts and intensifies emotions of fear and anger that make our digital public square a little more unhealthy, and it gets us just a bit closer to home as a society.

Misinformation is not by design, it's false information shared unknowingly. It's all too often leading to widespread confusion. It is described as "unknowingly spreading false information that is teaching the public to be confused." It's a confusing definition with some pretty clear, if not flattering, descriptors. Misinformation might lie in its appearing to be harmless, but because it doesn't seem at all sinister, it skips by most people undetected, winning a moment's worth of shares before anyone gets around to checking whether it's actually true. This apparent nature of misinformation speaks to its effectiveness as a tool for amplifying confusion in our online world, where sharing is still the only way to be heard, and where being heard more often than not also means being believed.

Malinformation is information often used to harm or mislead specific targets. Defined as a "strategy using information to harm or mislead," it is something we don't usually think about when we consider harmful information. Imagine a misleading story about a public figure that gets a lot of attention. Now, imagine that story being used as a weapon against that public figure in a certain context. That's malinformation. This kind of false information is especially harmful because it combines fact with malice. Manipulation of information, which is crucial for understanding how malinformation affects us. It shifts perceptions by playing off our trust in partial truths. This makes it prime for political or corporate use, where the goal isn't just to confuse but to ruin. And because it's so well-suited to "the digital space," it can spread through online echo chambers faster than we can hit the "share" button.

Disinformation, misinformation, and malinformation are not simply terms, they are active forces in our world today, shaping events and influencing people. Governments are using false information to build censorship justification narratives. In extreme cases, they frame laws to target "fake news" that sometimes serves as a cover for legitimate dissent critical of the government. This balancing act between harm reduction and free speech is a significant current issue. However, understanding these categories of harmful information offers sneak peeks through the onslaught of narrative information. Knowledge of these three can only encourage us to learn more about what is being done to us.

Living in the Age of AI

With great power comes great responsibility. This has proven to be the case with AI technology. Although AI is still considered to be fairly new, we are at a point where we must start focusing on boundaries and regulations. In the Age of AI, the documentary only confirms what many of us know to be true. AI is a great concern for individual privacy. As stated in the video, AI can be used as a powerful tool to make our daily lives easier, but many companies are taking notice of the capital benefit that AI can provide and are using it for capital gain instead. 

In watching this documentary, I learned that AI continues to drive a further wedge between the 1% of the wealthy and the economically disadvantaged causing further inequality. I also learned that AI has become an important tool for companies. More jobs are being eliminated at an alarming rate creating a bigger economic imbalance. This is creating a terrible cycle because people who are already at an economic disadvantage can not afford to learn and study new trades after losing their jobs. I was surprised by just how much surveillance China has and the danger of sharing it with other countries like Pakistan, Venezuela, and Ecuador.  As frightening as that is, it is equally as frightening on how facial recognition is being used by law enforcement without our consent. 

Individuals have lost their rights to privacy. We are at the mercy of who controls the power and what they choose to do with it. It affects us as an entire society because AI has become part of our daily lives and we are being placed at a disadvantage without our consent. AI is not being governed or regulated at the level of importance it should be. It affects our entire society and citizens. There can be election interference that distorts democracy, loss of jobs that affect the economy, and invasion of privacy which can lead to identity theft. Better controls need to be set in place. 

What is meant to be a useful tool has become a tool used against its users to target them against what they search and use. Companies continue to alter these algorithms for profitable gains. If no regulations are set in place to protect the public, what was meant to be a useful tool to help us, can turn into something that will hurt our society instead. 

EOTO1 Reaction

EOTO2 Reaction

When we presented to one another about new technologies, one that really stood out for me was "The History of Motion Pictures." This segment truly taught me about how film has developed over time and across cultures. I had long thought of film as something that just was (part of my entertainment, part of my life), but this traced the way the film had gone from a simple scientific curiosity to a worldwide part of virtually everyone's life. The first slide, “History of Motion Pictures,” traces the origins of cinema. It begins with the zoetrope, a 19th-century device that created the illusion of motion through a series of sequential images, like Eadweard Muybridge’s iconic study of a horse in motion. This laid the groundwork for moving pictures. The slide also brings up Thomas Edison’s kinetograph, which filmed the first movies in history. From there, the presentation moves to the silent film era exemplified by black-and-white classics and the introduction of sound that revolutionized storytelling. Finally, it touches on the rise of color movies and big-budget blockbusters like Star Wars that transformed the medium into a massive, profit-making industry. The second slide, “Impact of Motion Pictures,” explores how films have influenced society. They convey messages and ideas through the medium of visual storytelling, as in their formation of the classic The Wizard of Oz.

They also influence the public’s perception of events, cultures, and people, with preceding societal norms often found in their frames. For their part, technological advancements have not left films behind, they appear at the forefront of various revolutionary communication technologies, platforms like Netflix making their content nearby and accessible anytime, anywhere. The third slide, “The History and Impact of CDs,” while not directly about motion pictures, connects to the broader evolution of media.

Developed by Sony and Philips, CDs made music and movies portable, holding 74 minutes of content and blurring the lines of radio efficiency. They were also part of the near total envelopment of popular entertainment in the computer, with all the not-so-implicit potential for the use and misuse of computers, as in the illegal sales of CDs. Together, these slides demonstrate the remarkable adaptability of motion pictures and related technologies, which have consistently left a profound impression on popular culture. This investigation of moving pictures pays heed to their still potent ability to charm, teach, and unify people across the eons.

Privacy, Online & Off

 Privacy

Privacy both online and off is a concern that we should take seriously because it affects all of us in some way. Our private information is being shared across multiple platforms without our knowledge. However, because we as the users are consenting to their unrealistic terms, companies continue to be protected while the users become the victims. Our personal information being shared personally affects my friends, family, and myself because our information becomes public to third parties and targeted advertisers without our control. Our personal information is being sold, manipulated, and used for an indefinite period. The amount of breaches with personal information continues to rise while greedy companies continue to expose personal information with minimal to no repercussions.

Our government needs to create stronger laws to protect consumers and users which limits the amount of information that can be gathered and how it is shared. However, the government is also part of the problem as they abuse the power of gathering personal information themselves. Some may argue that gathering information by our government can be for the greater good, but gathering and holding on to private citizen's information indefinitely and without their consent is problematic. 

Companies and individuals need to be held accountable. Stronger laws and heftier fines need to be set in place both locally and internationally which should include consequences such as jail time for misuse of personal information. Because the internet is used on an international level, international laws should also be in place to protect us. The burden should not be placed on the victim to face and address the many consequences and often legal fees. Surveillance features have proven that companies can not control who can gain access which leaves our information exposed. We need stronger protection of our personal information, heavier fines for companies that breach and violate these laws, and harsher penalties for individuals including jail time.

To protect ourselves, we should use encrypted emails and encrypted platforms for better security of our information. Adjust our cookie settings whenever possible, block and report suspicious activities, and teach our younger society to limit the amount of personal data that they share. We must also continue to make our voices heard by local policymakers and demand government enforcement and policy change.

The burden of having our private information protected should not fall on the user. Companies will continue to manipulate their power if we continue to be forced to accept their “take it or leave it” policies which we are often forced to do. 

Ai Image Generation

Stable Diffusion AI 

The creators of Stable Diffusion were Emad Mostaque, Robin Rombach, Patrick Esser, Andreas Blattmann, and Dominik Lorenz. Emad Mostaque founded Stability Ai, while the rest of the team were researchers from Ludwig Maximilian University in Munich. The first version of stable diffusion released to the public in August of 2022 was Stable Diffusion 1.4. Stable Diffusion was created to solve the problem of not having an easily accessible and efficient model. Stable Diffusion also addressed the concerns of not having a high quality model for minimal gpu hardware needed. Most models before Stable Diffusion 1.4 required alot of computing power but Stable Diffusion made it easier to run on consumer grade hardware so that almost anyone with a decent computer can run it. Stable Diffusion also made it possible to be more precise on the art style and features you would like on your photos compared to other models. 

Unfortunately just with as many positives with a new technology like Stable Diffusion can bring, it can also lead to the misuse of that technology. Stable Diffusion can generate highly realistic images that can sometimes be misinterpreted as real. So there were cases were Stable Diffusion was used to create deepfakes of people and to create fraudulent photos. U.S. Representative Joe Morelle is pushing a bill to criminalize deepfake porn online. Morelle says "The images may be fake, but their impacts are very real," She also says that "Deepfakes are happening every day to women everywhere in our increasingly digital world, and it’s time to put a stop to them." 

Even though there are both negatives about this technology there are also positives so I would like to discuss the future of Stable Diffusion and where they are now after version 1.4. Stable Diffusion’s most popular debut model was their SD 1.5 model which really paved the way for Stable Diffusion ai even to this day most models use Sd 1.5 as their base model. Stable Diffusion 1.5 produces much finer images then 1.4 and has an improved image quality. Theres also SDXL 1 released in July of 2023, which generates resolutions that cant even come close to Stable Diffusion 1.5. Some SDXL models can generate realistic images that cant be told apart from real life images. There are also famous people that want to help improve Stable Diffusion to help in film making and such. Avatar director James Cameron is actually apart of the board in Stability Ai. He says in the tweak down article "I've spent my career seeking out emerging technologies that push the very boundaries of what's possible, all in the service of telling incredible stories.”

Overall, Stable Diffusion has contributed to society and changed communication for better or for worse. Stable Diffusion really helped pave the way for image generation to become more mainstream and has inspired companies like Runaway to develop and other companies like Mid Journey to constantly improve their existing projects to not get left behind. 

Eight Values of Free Expression

 

Eight Values of Free Expression

As an American, I believe it is very important to have the eight values of free expression. They are important because they allow us to stand up for ourselves, and stand out from the crowd, and if something isn't right we are allowed to speak up about it. The 3 most important values to me personally are the Marketplace of Ideas, Individual Self-fulfillment, and Promoting Innovation.

1. Market Place Of Ideas: Being able to express yourself and your opinions without government interference is very important. With the marketplace of ideas, you would think your right to express would always be protected right? Well, you would be wrong. In 2020 Twitter censored a New York Times post about Hunter Biden's laptop even though the post didn't violate any of Twitter's rules. I think it is insane how Biden was able to get away with this misuse of power. I believe he should have been held accountable for this and gotten at least a warning for impeachment. I can relate to this because there have been countless times I have liked a post online “exposing” political lies and the posts get taken down when I try to go back and show family or friends.

2. Individual Self-Fulfillment: The right to express yourself as an individual to think outside the box and participate in things such as entrepreneurship and such is a very important part of being an American. This expression I believe is a very underrated one. I say it's underrated because it is a universal fact that America allows this to happen but they don't support it enough as they should. If they truly cared they would tweak the school system in a way where children are encouraged to think outside the box and not be so “cookie cutter”. I can relate to it deeply because I consider myself an individual who always tries to go against the current and do my own thing, and along the entire path it's way more bumpy than it should be. I always felt something was off, I have been doing entrepreneurship my whole life, and every time I came home from school instead of being excited about learning new things, I felt drained and wasted, and my creative and free-thinking energy was robbed from me. On the other hand, when I now have the right classes for me in college and I'm not in high school, middle school, or elementary, I feel more energized and excited to put what I learn into my work. As a society, it's labeled that we have this free expression but I believe our government instead of protecting it tries to lessen its abilities. From starting kindergarten we start programming to go into the workforce and any traces of our creativity are killed. Children are failed by the school system and are robbed of being supported for being creative, taking risks, and learning problem-solving skills needed for entrepreneurship. Ken Robinson's TED talk on “How School Kills Creativity” talks about the need for reforming existing current education, and that creativity is just as important as literacy and basic school skills.

Supreme Court Reflection

The US Supreme Court

While viewing the Supreme Court videos, I learned several different factors. I learned that the Supreme Court receives about 7,000 new cases yearly. Approximately, 100 are accepted for yearly review. I also learned how the cases are chosen, reviewed, and decided. There is the initial petition, the vote by four out of the nine Justices, and the oral arguments. I also thought that a petition had to come directly from an attorney, but could in fact be written by any individual, even a prisoner themselves.

The most important takeaway I got was that Regardless of which President nominates the Justice and is confirmed by the Senate, once a Justice holds office, they are free from political pressure on how they decide cases. They do not have to be reelected, and there is no limit on how long they can serve.  Also, Justices do not choose the issues, the issues are brought to them based on the petitions received so it minimizes personal political agendas. Although the Justices may disagree, every meeting is started by shaking hands to demonstrate the level of respect they hold for each other and an understanding that despite their views, they have one unified goal which is to uphold the U.S. Constitution. 

One surprising thing I learned was that each justice has its own workload. Once voting is done on whether a petition will precede, the nine Justices typically take a few days to hear arguments. This is done amongst the nine Justices openly with no other involvement. Not even a recording secretary. Only one of the Justices on the majority side will write the opinion which can take about a month. Although only one Justice writes the opinion, the other Justices can respond whether they agree or disagree. Once the petition is decided to be heard in front of the nine Justices, only 30 minutes are allotted to present the oral argument. That time is typically used to further answer questions the Justices may have after reviewing the petition which they feel requires further clarification. Based on the level of importance that is placed upon the Supreme Court hearing a case, I found it interesting how the entire process works from beginning to end. I have a better understanding of why it can take such a long time. Also, an important view that changed for me was the reminder that regardless of which political party nominated them, once a Justice is in place, their responsibility is to uphold the constitution and not to a particular political party. The process is open and not secret. Once an opinion is released, it is given to journalists who report on it.  The Public's perception when the Supreme Court doesn’t take its case is often reported as the Supreme Court upheld or ordered which is not accurate.