DHS is creating 'Disinformation Governance Board'

[Autochthon1990]

41 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

He's a lawyer.  All of what he's about the suppression is entirely his paranoid imagination running wild.

First, two out three people lie that they've read 1984.

Now, it's stated that will doing the same task that Divisions of DHS have done in the past.  Those task were not suppresion or censorship.  It's countering misinformation with the correct information.

The DHS is governed by an Act of Congress so of course they are limited by that Act.  It's a stupid question asking the Secretary essentially if he can operate outside of the Act by painiying a new label on the office.

The real concern is to the taxpayer.  How can centralising this task be more efficient?  The Board tells FEMA that people are misinformed about clean water after a natural catastrophe, and that's when FEMA counters public misapprehension.

The correct facts have already been provided.  The examples of the type of work they plan ro do is publicly available; and, easy to find.

This thread is just whingeing that the sky is falling becaise they've read three words.

 

No it's because they think they'll benefit politically from having lies be unquestioned and fed to stupid people. 

[Myles]

4 hours ago, Autochthon1990 said:

No it's because they think they'll benefit politically from having lies be unquestioned and fed to stupid people. 

That is the left for you.   Pushing their lies on their stupid supporters.

[simplybill]

The way that Nina Jancowicz so earnestly jumped on the ‘Russian Disinformation’ bandwagon regarding Hunter Biden’s laptop makes me wonder if her appointment to the Disinformation Governance Board is a reward for her loyalty to Joe Biden. That’s the message it sends when someone who spreads disinformation about Mr. Biden’s political rivals is afterwards given a cushy government job investigating….disinformation.

"We should view it as a Trump campaign product," Jankowicz said…”

https://www.newsweek.com/disinformation-head-nina-jankowicz-hunter-biden-laptop-remarks-1701654

 

[+Paranoid Android]

12 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

He's a lawyer. 

Yes, he is. Nate Broughty is also a former police officer. 

 

12 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

All of what he's about the suppression is entirely his paranoid imagination running wild.

That is your opinion. 

 

12 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

First, two out three people lie that they've read 1984.

True. I don't see how this has ANYTHING at all to do with the topic. I've never read 1984. I've seen a stage production of 1984 by the Sydney Theatre Company, but also not relevant. 

 

12 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

Now, it's stated that will doing the same task that Divisions of DHS have done in the past.  Those task were not suppresion or censorship.  It's countering misinformation with the correct information.

The problem is that no one can seem to define what misinformation is. It was once misinformation to say that covid came from a lab in Wuhan, it was once misinformation to say a certain laptop belonged to a certain president's son.

 

 

[Golden Duck]

1 hour ago, Paranoid Android said:

Yes, he is. Nate Broughty is also a former police officer. 

 

That is your opinion. 

 

True. I don't see how this has ANYTHING at all to do with the topic. I've never read 1984. I've seen a stage production of 1984 by the Sydney Theatre Company, but also not relevant. 

 

The problem is that no one can seem to define what misinformation is. It was once misinformation to say that covid came from a lab in Wuhan, it was once misinformation to say a certain laptop belonged to a certain president's son.

 

 

You posted a video that refers to the Ministry of Truth from 1984.  That's the first red flag of ignorance.  

The second is the paranoia of suppression, when there has been no mention of suppressing false information.  The goal is to counter it.

The third red flag of ignorance is that the DHS has given three examples of the type of work they intend to do.

The example of the "Say No To The Coyote" campaign has been presented in this thread, multiple times.  What's was so wrong with that campaign that justifies the Chicken Little Pox.

[+Paranoid Android]

1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

You posted a video that refers to the Ministry of Truth from 1984.

Yes, I did. You chose to reply by pointing to a useless factoid about how many people may or may not have read 1984. 

 

1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

  That's the first red flag of ignorance.  

Thank you for your opinion.... 

 

 

[Golden Duck]

1 hour ago, Paranoid Android said:

Yes, I did. You chose to reply by pointing to a useless factoid about how many people may or may not have read 1984. 

 

Thank you for your opinion.... 

 

 

It is a fact based on a survey.  Not a factoid.

Call what I've said opinon all you want.  I've backup what I've said with examples.  You've only provided baseless, paranoid, speculation.

Edited May 9, 2022 by Golden Duck

[+Paranoid Android]

16 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

It is a fact based on a survey.  Not a factoid.

Doesn't matter where it came from, it's an irrelevant statistic! 

 

16 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Call what I've said opinon all you want.  I've backup what I've said with examples.  You've only provided baseless, paranoid, speculation.

And I'm sure you'd be saying the exact same thing if this was an initiative created by Donald Trump and headed up by a right wing activist who sings songs (a la Mary Poppins) on Tik Tok aimed at disparaging democrat politicians.....  

[el midgetron]

The left needs to continue to control the discussion. That’s why they are freaking out over Twitter and doing loony things like this. If they lose they control they’ve had, they’re F’d because their narrative is garbage.

[+DieChecker]

30 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

You've only provided baseless, paranoid, speculation.

While this is true of a lot of people. The shear number of people, many very intelligent and well educated... including lawyers and career politicians. Should make anyone stop and consider if there's anything to this, rather then dismiss with a hand wave.

When CNN is trying to find out what the board really means, and how it will operate, you know that the Conservatives aren't just being paranoid.

Edited May 9, 2022 by DieChecker

[Golden Duck]

3 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

Doesn't matter where it came from, it's an irrelevant statistic! 

 

And I'm sure you'd be saying the exact same thing if this was an initiative created by Donald Trump and headed up by a right wing activist who sings songs (a la Mary Poppins) on Tik Tok aimed at disparaging democrat politicians.....  

To start waving a fictitious analogy is meaningless.  If two-thirds of the people using the simile haven't even read the work of fiction, it raises the apprehension of ignorant opinion.

If you are sure about your second sentence, well you are wrong!  It's always good when a government release statements and other information because you get analyse what comes straight from the horses mouth; and, hold them to account.

You've unwittingly raised a valid criticism.  You've pulled a Homer!  If the DHS.DGB will be carrying or more campaigns on cybersecurity, is TikTok a risk-free app fit for that purpose?

[+DieChecker]

On 5/7/2022 at 9:10 AM, Golden Duck said:

Isn’t that your bias coming through?  They cited examples of the work they will do.  Is that how "Say No To The Coyote" was run?

Mayorkas has already said everything to the Homeland Security Advisory Committee for recommendation.  There's 33 names on that committee.

Double insurance.  It's counter information, not censorship.  A governement committee that big won't get anything done at all  let alone by the next election.

Say, I'm curious to read up on, "Say no to the Coyote", please post a link so I can learn more about it.

Seeing as how it's basically the lynch pin of your defense.

[Golden Duck]

7 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

While this is true of a lot of people. The shear number of people, many very intelligent and well educated... including lawyers and career politicians. Should make anyone stop and consider if there's anything to this, rather then dismiss with a hand wave.

When CNN is trying to find out what the board really means, and how it will operate, you know that the Conservatives aren't just being paranoid.

Where's one fact that justifies the paranoia?

You deftly avoided revealing your objections to "Say No To The Coyote".

[+DieChecker]

3 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Where's one fact that justifies the paranoia?

You deftly avoided revealing your objections to "Say No To The Coyote".

I dont know anything about it. Please post a government link on how it operated. For all I know it was a complete failure. Illegal immigration is off the charts, right?

Edited May 9, 2022 by DieChecker

[Golden Duck]

Just now, DieChecker said:

Say, I'm curious to read up on, "Say no to the Coyote", please post a link so I can learn more about it.

Seeing as how it's basically the lynch pin of your defense.

Strange, based on your objections to your posts characterised as baseless, one would think you were well informed.

Here, are the examples of what the work the board supposed to do.

Quote

For nearly 10 years, different agencies across DHS have worked to address disinformation that threatens our homeland security. Here are some examples:

• U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) counters disinformation that cartels and human smugglers spread to migrants to persuade them to cross our southwest border illegally. CBP’s work includes its “Say No to the Coyote” campaign, making clear that entering the United States illegally is a crime. 
• In 2012, during Hurricane Sandy, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) corrected false information about the safety of drinking water and the location of shelters, to protect and serve the hurricane’s victims. FEMA has since built capacity to identify and respond to false information during major disaster responses, including Hurricanes Maria and Ida, during which FEMA provided critical information to protect disaster survivors from targeted scams. FEMA also ensures that disinformation campaigns do not prevent Americans from accessing federal aid during and after disasters.
• The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) works with private sector stakeholders to mitigate the risk of disinformation to U.S. critical infrastructure, work that has continued in light of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2022/05/02/fact-sheet-dhs-internal-working-group-protects-free-speech-other-fundamental-rights

I've already explained this.

[+DieChecker]

13 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Strange, based on your objections to your posts characterised as baseless, one would think you were well informed.

Here, are the examples of what the work the board supposed to do.

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2022/05/02/fact-sheet-dhs-internal-working-group-protects-free-speech-other-fundamental-rights

I've already explained this.

Yeah. I read those a while back. Doesn't prove anything. 

Also you didn't provide a link for "Coyotes", why is that? Because you couldn't find one? Why would they use as an example something we can't find on the internet? And as proof of success, when the success can't be shown??

I am objecting based on the very concept. And as I look into it, more and more, the more it appears to be shady and possibly badly developed.

EDIT: Almost as if the "say no to the coyotes" didn't even really exist.

Edited May 9, 2022 by DieChecker

[Golden Duck]

5 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

I dont know anything about it. Please post a government link on how it operated. For all I know it was a complete failure. Illegal immigration is off the charts, right?

"Say No To The Coyote" is the metonym use by Mayorkas.

The three current initiatives are:

• Blue Campaign - Blue Campaign is a national public awareness campaign designed to educate the public, law enforcement, and other industry partners to recognize the indicators of human trafficking, and how to appropriately respond to possible cases. 
• Blue Lightning - an element of the DHS Blue Campaign. The BLI trains airline personnel to identify potential traffickers and human trafficking victims, and to report their suspicions to federal law enforcement.
• No Te Enganes - The main objective of No Te Engañes for the International audience is to raise awareness amongst potential migrants, informing them of the dangers of human trafficking and help them avoid becoming a victim.

This took me longer to format that to find.

To find out the success you should go the agency's annual reports.  But, we aren't talking about the success of the initiatives.  We're talking about a baseless apprehension censorship and suppression compared to published mission statement.

[+Paranoid Android]

3 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

To start waving a fictitious analogy is meaningless.  If two-thirds of the people using the simile haven't even read the work of fiction, it raises the apprehension of ignorant opinion.

I don't need to have seen Star Wars to know Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father - it's common knowledge by now. 1984 is a well known text with ideas that are as relevant today as they were in 1949. The ideas are mainstream to the point that many could tell you what it's about without ever seeing it. Star Trek has even put out episodes where 1984 plot lines are central (if you've ever seen Captain Picard yell "THERE. ARE. FOUR. LIGHTS" [a particularly powerful episode of Trek, in my opinion] you'll know what I'm talking about).  

Fantastic writing, and when Picard is debriefing at the end of this video (last 60 seconds) this is straight out of 1984.

I've not read 1984 either, but I've also seen a stage production - do I get a pass to talk about it because I've seen a stage show, or do I need to have read the book too in order to cite 1984. And if I hadn't seen that stage show, what information would I be missing from my understanding of 1984?  And would I not be allowed to make comparisons between 1984 and Star Trek? 

What if I've seen the movie? 

 

3 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

If you are sure about your second sentence, well you are wrong!  It's always good when a government release statements and other information because you get analyse what comes straight from the horses mouth; and, hold them to account.

You've unwittingly raised a valid criticism.  You've pulled a Homer!  If the DHS.DGB will be carrying or more campaigns on cybersecurity, is TikTok a risk-free app fit for that purpose?

That's the thing about hypothetical stories like this, I'll just have to take your word for it. I'll honestly try and take you at face value, but quite frankly, I"m not sure I believe you. Thanks for the chat  

For the record, if the situation was reversed and Donald Trump wanted to institute a disinformation governance board like this, I'd be against it. I don't think we need the government to dictate truth to us. 

[Golden Duck]

5 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

I don't need to have seen Star Wars to know Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father - it's common knowledge by now. 1984 is a well known text with ideas that are as relevant today as they were in 1949. The ideas are mainstream to the point that many could tell you what it's about without ever seeing it. Star Trek has even put out episodes where 1984 plot lines are central (if you've ever seen Captain Picard yell "THERE. ARE. FOUR. LIGHTS" [a particularly powerful episode of Trek, in my opinion] you'll know what I'm talking about).  

Fantastic writing, and when Picard is debriefing at the end of this video (last 60 seconds) this is straight out of 1984.

I've not read 1984 either, but I've also seen a stage production - do I get a pass to talk about it because I've seen a stage show, or do I need to have read the book too in order to cite 1984. And if I hadn't seen that stage show, what information would I be missing from my understanding of 1984?  And would I not be allowed to make comparisons between 1984 and Star Trek? 

What if I've seen the movie? 

 

That's the thing about hypothetical stories like this, I'll just have to take your word for it. I'll honestly try and take you at face value, but quite frankly, I"m not sure I believe you. Thanks for the chat  

For the record, if the situation was reversed and Donald Trump wanted to institute a disinformation governance board like this, I'd be against it. I don't think we need the government to dictate truth to us. 

Did you not listen to official information during the recent Lismore floods?

[+Paranoid Android]

Just now, Golden Duck said:

Did you not listen to official information during the recent Lismore floods?

Pretend I'm not operating on your level and need more information to understand your point - elaborate, because I really don't know what you are getting at. 

[Golden Duck]

25 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

Pretend I'm not operating on your level and need more information to understand your point - elaborate, because I really don't know what you are getting at. 

It is was question?  Was there official information, from any level government, given during the recent floods?

Even on a simpler level, if someone tells you it's OK to travel as fast as you like in the NT, but the NT authorities say that it's not?  Who do you take notice of?

[+Paranoid Android]

1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

It is was question?  Was there official information, from any level government, given during the recent floods?

Even on a simpler level, if someone tells you it's OK to travel as fast as you like in the NT, but the NT authorities say that it's not?  Who do you take notice of?

I don't get the relevance to this discussion. How does information on the floods relate to whether there is a disinformation governance board or not? 

[Golden Duck]

15 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

I don't get the relevance to this discussion. How does information on the floods relate to whether there is a disinformation governance board or not? 

It is the type of work they said they will do.  See dot point two in the fact sheet.  There is no reason to believe they will engage in suppression or censorship.  The actual concern is whether, or not it will be more efficient to centralise this task.

Even if the relevance is hard for you to grasp, did you, or did you not listen to the authorities for information during the recent catastrophe?

[Golden Duck]

3 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

That's the thing about hypothetical stories like this, I'll just have to take your word for it. I'll honestly try and take you at face value, but quite frankly, I"m not sure I believe you. Thanks for the chat  

If you want to going making baseless pre-judgements, like the one below, than you're going to have to accept the answer without whingeing.

3 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

And I'm sure you'd be saying the exact same thing if ... [counterfactual identity politics drivel]

 

[Buzz_Light_Year]

https://www.thecentersquare.com/national/hagerty-dhs-disinformation-board-likely-illegal/article_8957c990-ce12-11ec-81b3-ab38b32c017c.html
 

Quote

 

U.S. Sen. Bill Hagerty says the creation of a board within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) tasked with combating "disinformation" is likely illegal.

Creating the board and hiring its new director without Congressional authorization violates several federal laws, Hagerty, R-Tenn., argues. Knowingly and willfully violating one of them carries a $5,000 fine and up to two years in prison, he adds.

Hagerty sent a letter to DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas saying his “actions merit review by Congress, both as a general matter, as well as under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) and because the actions may be in violation of provisions of the Antideficiency Act.”

 

https://www.thecentersquare.com/national/20-ags-demand-mayorkas-disband-disinformation-board-threaten-legal-action/article_c9ee1b92-cd33-11ec-b0ad-675b1ebc0b24.html

Quote

 

Twenty attorneys general are demanding that Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas “immediately disband” the agency’s newly created Disinformation Governance Board and “cease all efforts to police Americans’ protected speech.”

In a letter dated May 5, they argue the board is unconstitutional, illegal and un-American. If Mayorkas doesn’t shut it down, the AGs say they will sue.

Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares led the coalition of attorneys general from Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah and West Virginia.