Four-D Disinformation

I am taking an on-line course from the University of Michigan on a hot topic that recently causes a lot of disruption in American (as well as world-wide) society: the problem of misinformation or worse, disinformation, that finds its way into and plagues society's functioning. Social media too often serve as platforms that disseminate disinformation that citizens see on their Facebook or Twitter accounts and unthinkingly spread across the internet.

The course draws a distinction between misinformation and disinformation. The former is fake messages that people pass on through their countless online connections, in an innocent or naive manner. They usually do not understand that the news is phony. Disinformation, however, is messages intentionally planted on the internet—deliberately meant to cause disruption. Some disinformation is created by state actors, such as what Russian hackers did during the US 2016 elections. Other kinds of disinformation are created by individuals who simply get a kick out of causing trouble. A third type is created by those who wish to make money by attracting people to their websites or Facebook platform, and get paid by the number of clicks they manage to capture.

Ben Nimmo is Director of Investigations for the network analysis firm Graphica. He has for several years investigated disinformation, in an attempt to shed some light on its practice and to help those who wish to counter its disruptions. He has developed an analysis tool that helps to understand how disinformation actors respond, when confronted by accusations that they have intentionally created false or fake information, and then predict what their next action might be. His tool is called the “4D Response.” He developed it when he worked for NATO, to understand Russia's response to critiques of their annexation of Crimea in 2014.

Nimmo's tool describes how a disinformation actor may respond to an accusation in one of four ways: (1) Dismiss, (2) Distort, (3) Distract, and (4) Dismay. The Dismiss response is most common. The bad actor says, “Don't listen to them, because...” Then he throws out an insult to try and discredit the accuser. The Distort response is to twist the facts in an attempt to verify his own false story. The Distract response is to accuse the accuser of the same lie, or to change the subject. And the Dismiss response is to warn the accuser of dire consequences, in an attempt to scare them off.

This 4D model, which was developed for state actors like Russia and China, has recently been useful in explaining and understanding bad actors who spread disinformation and fake news on the internet. As I thought about the 4Ds, it occurred to me that they also can describe Donald Trump's responses to accusations that he often is a source of disinformation. He attempts to (1) Dismiss the allegations by insulting the person or news organization. He (2) Distorts by making up his own facts to fit his story. He (3) Distracts by denouncing the person for doing the same thing (“Fake News!”) And he is (4) Dismaying when he tries to scare off the opposition—such as warning North Korea that his nuclear button is bigger, or sending federal troops into cities to intimidate and assault civilian protestors. 

Presidential Powers

In the aftermath of the US succeeding in its revolution that cast off the colonial oppression of England in 1783, leaders of the former colonies met in Philadelphia, to thrash out a constitution for the new country. They were fully aware of the fact that they were creating a new state and hoping that its governing process would be robust and unprecedented. They wished to forge a democracy that was modeled on a republic created some 2200 years earlier in Greece.

Having just shaken off the heavy-handed rule of King George, they were determined to avoid setting up a form of government that would again control the American populace with monarchical powers. In their minds, the new country would need an executive who had the power to manage its affairs, but who would also be restrained by two complementary branches of government: the legislative and judicial branches.

The country's founders, besides being concerned about limiting presidential powers, were also wary of establishing too much democracy. They were chary of setting up a “tyranny of the majority,” wherein the ignorant and uninformed masses would become influenced by emotional and feverish ideas and vote for foolish programs and compelling ideas put forth by a charismatic person or cabal.

The founders were, after all, prosperous and educated men. They possessed ideals of how a democracy should behave, but had elitist biases about preventing the mob from taking over. Plato held similar apprehensions about democracy in ancient Athens—that uninformed commoners would force unwise actions. These concerns of the framers of the US Constitution in 1787 resulted in establishing the Electoral College, which would correct for a possible foolish popular vote for a president.

The constitutional fathers debated long and passionately on how to create a constitution that would prevent any one individual (the president) or group (the masses) from seizing too much power and sending the country off into chaotic behavior. They did a remarkable job of it. For over 200 years the checks and balances they built into the document have kept the US from careening out of control, when imbalance threatened.

After the Constitution was drafted and sent to the 13 states for ratification (which occurred two years later), many people expressed concerns about some of its provisions. For one specific example, George Mason of Virginia was disturbed that it allowed the president to pardon convicted criminals. He could foresee the possibility that an unscrupulous president would encourage his faithful minions to commit illegal acts on his behalf and then pardon them, after they were convicted. Mason thought that this provision of the Constitution would allow a deceitful president to become an autocrat who would then take control, not unlike King George.

Mason was vocal about his fears, and threatened to stop Virginia from ratifying the proposed Constitution. Virginia's approval was crucial. During the state's debates, John Madison convinced George Mason to relax, by telling him that surely if ever a president went that far, he would quickly be impeached and removed from office. 

The founding fathers wrote a constitution that successfully guided the country for over two centuries, yet Donald Trump has utilized both the Electoral College intervention and presidential pardon power to indeed establish himself as a would-be autocrat. The Electoral College process awarded him the presidency, despite his losing the popular vote. That constitutional process of the forefathers backfired.

In addition, Trump has currently pardoned two of his convicted henchmen, who broke laws on his behalf. George Mason surely must be agitatedly rolling in his grave.