(22) Redefined concepts
By Onno Hansen-Staszyński | Last Updated: 23 December 2024
Based on blog post nineteen the concepts of misinformation, disinformation, and FIMI can be redefined:
• Disinformation equals (a) proven inaccurate factual statements that are also (b) proven to deliberately misrepresent a person’s inner states and (c) that are being disseminated nonetheless.
• Misinformation equals (a) proven inaccurate factual statements or (b) messages that misrepresent a person’s inner states (c) that are being disseminated nonetheless.
• FIMI equals (a) misinformation or (b) disinformation that is (c) being created and/ or (d) being disseminated by a foreign actor.
Implications
What are the implications of this proposed redefinition? Firstly, messages that represent a person’s inner state are in principle protected under legal provisions safeguarding freedom of speech. The key word here is ‘person’. Bots and synthetic entities are no persons and thus cannot enjoy freedom of speech. So, the criterion for non-humans for disinformation is merely disseminating proven inaccurate statements. Next, by definition sock puppets and astroturfers misrepresent a person’s inner states – when proven to be sock puppets and astroturfers. Therefore, also for those proven imposters, the criterion for disinformation is merely disseminating proven inaccurate statements. On the other hand, even if individuals spread proven inaccurate factual statements but these statements represent their inner states or are not proven to misrepresent these states deliberately, they cannot be labeled as spreading disinformation. And, if people consciously misrepresent their inner state but do so by disseminating statements that are not proven to be inaccurate, they do not spread disinformation.
Secondly, fact-checking, debunking, and similar instruments that might come up with proof that a factual statement is inaccurate in this proposal start to have legal implications. The instruments now go beyond providing mere corrections; they are part of a process to hold a person or entity disseminating these untruths accountable – for natural persons naturally under the precondition that they can be proven to misrepresent their inner state deliberately.
Thirdly, since the lowest threshold for the proposed concept of FIMI is the dissemination of misinformation, FIMI equals the dissemination of proven inaccurate information by a foreign actor. In the case of people acting under the protection of freedom of speech, also statements that are proven to misrepresent a person’s inner states deliberately are FIMI. This interpretation of FIMI significantly lowers the bar to hold foreign actors accountable. Naturally, foreign actors could install domestic sock puppets, astroturfers, bots, or synthetic entities to disseminate their messages. Still, for those entities, when it is proven that they fall under one of these categories, the bar is identically low.
Disclaimer
The proposed redefinitions only concern dealing with misinformation, disinformation, and FIMI as such. The content of these types of information threats might also fall under legal and moral categories beyond this narrow view, such as illegal content or libel. My proposal does not exclude following alternative paths to deal with these types of information.
Subscribe now &
Get the latest updates
Subscribe