People in the private sector that work in IO gravitate to large publication editorial boards, broadcast networks, and positions of influence in big media. Controlling information is what they do. Generally from a military or governmental background they bring a formidable network of access from military, government (NSA, DOJ, etc) backgrounds as well as peer contacts. They are "our side" in the media regardless of their politics.
Their industry associations and contacts like the Old Crows keep them tight knit and on the same agenda regardless of which "political spectrum" their home publication falls into. While they encourage intramural dissent and debate, information fratricide is forbidden.
Developing
a Containment Strategy for Russian Media
" What would we do? Disrupt, deny, degrade, deceive, corrupt, usurp or destroy the information. The information, please don't forget, is the ultimate objective of cyber. That will directly impact the decision-making process of the adversary's leader who is the ultimate target." - Harding
He developed a cyber containment strategy for Russian media that has to be the most effective ever mounted. Crowd the Russian media out of the world's mainstream and keep them talking amongst themselves while social media, internet, and TV news barriers were being erected to control the news and information Ukrainians see. Because of this Russians have been kept from influencing Ukrainian media, news, or people through social media this entire time. By doing this so effectively news from Donbass for the most part only carries Kiev's official line.
By August the Ukrainians were sufficient enough at it to post their rudimentary strategy openly in English. Now Russian media is sufficiently blocked out, an IO army has been created, mobilized and Ukraine is starting to engage the world.
Birth of the #HardingSuperTroll
" I was in a discussion today about information being used in social media as a possible weapon . The people I was talking with have a tool which scrapes social media sites, gauges their sentiment and gives the user the opportunity to automatically generate a persuasive response. Their tool is called a "Social Networking Influence Engine". No, not related to the SMISC BAA from a few years ago. Better. .. Can this be categorized as a munition ? I looked through and it does not seem to apply. The implications seem to be profound for the information environment.
The implications may have far-reaching impact beyond Department of Defense. The people who own this tool are in the civilian world and don't even remotely touch the defense sector, so getting approval from the US Department of State might not even occur to them. If this does require ITAR approval, the corporate world that deals with information and influence will definitely be affected. ..So" my question is, who at the US Department of State must I coordinate with to get a ruling if this "Social Networking Influence Engine" must receive ITAR approval? "- Joel Harding
Remember the purpose of " Inform and Influence Operations" is not to provide a perspective, opinion, or lay out a policy. It is defined as the ability to make audiences "think and act" in a manner favorable to the mission objectives. This is done through applying perception management techniques which target the audiences emotions, motives, and reasoning.
The reason he is so happy with it is from an IIO perspective he can put his "weapon" into the hands of his i-army and increase their effectiveness exponentially. They will be using it in social media where the "Russian propagandists" are, America. In the US tools like this don't require licensing and lesser ones are used daily by IIO, marketers, SEO, SEM, e tc to form your opinion for you.
For an ex- Green Beret that helped plan the invasion of Haiti, Iraq, and Afghanistan how effective would it need to be for him to call it a weapon? You'll find out soon enough. Smaller less developed versions abound in social media to grab your attention and influence you already. None of this should be legal. Private sector efforts make the NSA intrusions pale by comparison.
Weaponizing Wikipedia
Right now Wikipedia, Human Rights Watch, and others are filing suit against the NSA and DOJ for privacy intrusions. The NSA monitors specific pages in Wikipedia.
What would happen if Wikipedia ( the go to encyclopedia on the internet) was used by an "our side" to change events, outcomes, history, and biography of people your own children need to write about for a school report? Former UCCA State of Arizona president George Masni sheds light on this- Wikidepea, not I, labeled Bandera's new (post OUNb's breakup) organization as being conservative. If by "bringing nationalism across the world"...- This same Bandera that wore a Waffen SS officer Uniform and had SS Divisions under him is now no more a nazi than John McCain.
A few years ago Harding made this observation about Wikipedia. Considering "our side" uses thousands in his profession to clean up events its worth the read.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
14
9
9
