"Fake News" says it all -- but then there is so much more to say.
I am reading through a soon-to-be-published book, Disinformation: Soviet Political Warfare 1917-1992, by Natalie Grant. Besides becoming one of the pre-eminent experts in communist political warfare of the 20th century, Grant, who died in 2002, was born and raised in pre-revolutionary Russia and witnessed the revolution and civil war that followed. I will likely have something to say about the book as a whole, but for now I am busy underlining definitions and observations, a couple of which I will copy here.
"An extensive disinformation operation of the Soviet type requires the strictest censorship, a smothered press, and a people downgraded to the `masses' and unable to take part in active politics."
Does anything better describe the state of our nation in 2020? Here in the Land of the Free we chafe under the strictest censorship across the public square with the the smothered press itself doing much of the smothering. It is Grant's final criterion, however, that is most painful to read because she has named something that is new and terrifying in our society. In the re-engineering of our lives and society around the corona tyranny, We, the People have indeed been "downgraded to the `masses'" and are all but "unable to take part in active politics."
Grant takes pains to distinguish among the various types of "fake news." There is propaganda, which, she says, is crude enough for "discerning persons" to recognize (although what to do when "persons" are not "discerning"?), and there is disinformation, which differs in its skillful concealment and presentation "in a manner to inspire full confidence ... in a climate of trust."
Dr. Fauci, call your office (at the Gates Foundation).
What's it all about?
"The overall purpose of disinformation is to cause damage to the target through deception. The recipient of the disinformer's message must be led to inflict harm upon himself, directly or indirectly, either by acting against his own interests as a result of the false information he receives or by remaining passive when action is needed." (Italics added.)
There is also "misinformation" passed by unconsious dupe. But, say, you have a genuinely gullible, misinforming journalist who passes along a report (or "dossier") at face value from the Soviet Union or China:
"If a Western publication experienced in Soviet affairs and conscious of Soviet censorship carries the report without appropriate comment, this Western organ of the press comes close to acting as a disinformer."
Comes close? I'd say they get the brass ring.
More to come.