Do Native Advertisements Live Up to The Standards of Transparency?

Brooke Robinette

brobinette66@gmail.com

Social media has changed the way that many people get their news. According to the PEW Research Center, 20% percent of Americans in 2018 used social media as their primary news source. The ease of scrolling, a huge variety of articles, and pervasive questionable content often leave social media users in the dark in terms of content origins. To muddy the waters further, many companies are creating advertisements that are designed to look like news or magazine articles called native advertising.

LinkedIn 2018

Native advertising is used by many different news sources and magazines. One of the entertainment media outlets that feature native advertisements quite often is Buzzfeed. Buzzfeed creates content in conjunction with advertisers to promote products and they are not shy about it. Some of the articles recently listed on the site are entitled “34 Products the Buzzfeed Shopping Team Basically Cannot Live Without” and “39 Things You’ll Basically Be Doing Yourself A Favor For Buying”. These blatant advertisement articles feature disclaimers about Buzzfeed receiving payments if a reader uses their link to purchase. These blatant advertisements are posted on social media sites like Facebook and Instagram and blend in with news and magazine articles, blurring the lines between news, entertainment, and advertisements.

Native advertisements are not always as obvious as the ones by Buzzfeed. The New York Times uses native advertisements through their TBrand Studio department. TBrand Studio has worked with several brands to create journalistic content that features products. These native advertisements are slick and well-written pieces that blend in easily with feature articles by the news outlet. The TBrand Studio website seems to put the practice best with the tagline “Inspired by the journalism and innovation of The New York Times, T Brand crafts stories that help brands make an impact in the world’. These types of native advertisements certainly can make and impact in our world, but is the impact positive and are native advertisements for ethical?

This ethical dilemma is discussed in an article featured on Mediashift. The writer, Ava Sirrah, previously worked at TBrand Studio and assisted in creating native advertisements. Sirrah says that the practice provides much-needed funding to news organizations but she warns that it could disrupt the independence of journalists. She warns that advertisers are seeking to gain more control within news organizations and assist in the creation of the content from the inside:

 “As media critics, academics, and news consumers debate the ethics of native advertising, I fear they’re missing the larger story of how publishers are evolving their business model to secure revenue. Advertisers are asking the New York Times and other news publishers for more. They want to work with the newsroom in deeper and more complex ways. To combat this breakdown of the editorial and advertising wall, media watchdogs need to fight for regulation that demands news publishers disclose which brands they are working with and what they have been asked to produce.”

As Sirrah points out, native advertisements themselves may not be unethical on the surface, but not disclosing partnerships with brands and keeping the goals of advertisers a secret does not mesh well with journalists’ code of ethics in terms of transparency.

TGH 2017

The blurred lines between news, entertainment, and advertisements on social media can be harmful to the public as well. When Facebook newsfeeds are filled with faux editorial content, access to information about important news events can be diluted. Another PEW study from 2020 states that those who get their news from social media “tend to be less likely than other news consumers to closely follow major news stories, such as the coronavirus outbreak and the 2020 presidential election. And, perhaps tied to that, this group also tends to be less knowledgeable about these topics”. Native advertisements could exacerbate this problem by drowning out important news or by frustrating followers and ultimately driving them away from news sources.

Because journalistic institutions have been in dire financial straits for most of the decade, native advertisements will continue to be a source of steady revenue. Sirrah has some advice about holding these institutions accountable that could combat the lack of disclosure, however. She suggests creating policies that disclose how much money was received from each advertiser and what articles are linked to these advertisers. She also suggests quarterly reports that would be made public that contain this information. These suggestions could provide the much-needed transparency that every journalistic institution should strive for.

Weathering the perfect storm: Conspiracy, Astroturfing, and Fake News

By: Tyler Lovelace

tslovelace1@gmail.com / tl915117@ohio.edu

Lately, it seems that it is hard to be hopeful in our current news and political environment.  Between politicians reaching too far, the general public walking itself in circles around any whisper of turmoil that may or may not be true, and the media choose to focus on all the wrong details in order to pull off a certain viewpoint of the events unfolding around the world, we are all feeling a little cynical.  The combination of some of the topics of our discussion the past few weeks have been swirling together to create the perfect storm of doubt and bitterness to put people on edge.

This past week, in addition to revisiting astroturfing from when I watched John Oliver cover it when he originally aired that segment, I also caught up on his recent deep-dive into conspiracy theories and how our current situations have created the ideal environment for these beliefs to spread like wildfires.  Their debasement on social media and in some accredited news has done nothing but fan the flame, as a positive or negative response to these theories reinforces their belief in the owners all the same.  Simultaneously, you have news entities like Fox News claiming that the disasters in Portland, Oregon are an impending doom on the liberties of Americans, but the protests still occurring are only happening within one city block (CNN). 

With politicians insisting that matters and opinions are factual and discounting anything that shows the contrary, news outlets intentionally ratcheting up tension where it need not be, and the public driving itself crazy with conspiratorial ideas, we all need to take a step back and look at things critically.  It is prudent that we speak to each other calmly and rationally to help thwart off the overbearing negativity surrounding us on all sides.  It seems as though, as prevalent as astroturfing is, it takes almost no effort to have the public create these movements themselves with little to no push from the corporations or politicians.

My employer gave out custom-made reusable masks today for all employees and continues to provide surgical masks for everyone as well.  When handed a new, well-made mask, one employee stated that they should be handing out masks like these that have filters and are actually efficient at protecting against the virus, then going on a thirty-minute lecture on how the necessitation of masks is a hoax and just the government trying to mold us into following every order they give with no question or hesitation.  Another employee all together refuses to wear a mask at all – despite it being company policy and State mandated.  I had to keep myself from becoming agitated and engaging in a conversation that would have only exacerbated the issue and decided to adjust my approach for the next time these issues come up.

Through all the confusion and bitterness going on in the world, it is our duty to handle every conversation like an ethical journalist – speak civilly, listen openly, seek truth dutifully, and handle misinformation responsibly.  Regardless of how hopeless it may seem, there will always be those to face it boldly and help change and influence where they can for the good.  I know this blog post has been kind of all over the place, but I want to drive this message home with this short video.  A friend shared it with me yesterday and I found myself angry after watching it, nearly fuming by the time it was finished.  When thinking about this blog post today and lingering on this video, I realized that the point of this video was perhaps not to emphasize the hatred and anger portrayed throughout, but to show that in spite of all of that, the anonymous passerby encouraged and elevated the proper discourse and showed the hope left in humanity. 

Source: https://youtu.be/ltmlvk9GAto

Astroturfing Enables Class Exploitation

Zachariah Konieczny

zachkonieczny1243@gmail.com

    Astroturfing is a term that has been experiencing an uprising in social conscience that can be easily simplified as the practice of a company, political group or otherwise powerful entity disguising themselves as grassroots organizations and "everyday" participants. This allows the elite to push their agenda while remaining anonymous or hiding their true ties to the average American. I personally see astroturfing as an incredibly unethical, untrustworthy way of creating false support for something, but that is only the beginning of the issue that astroturfing brings to the table. The focus of this post is going to be on the undeniable way in which astroturfing is used to exploit the lower class, and turn them against themselves. 

Money Talks

    And it talks very loudly for those who struggle to stay afloat in the lower class. One way in which astroturfing is achieved is through gathering people to demonstrate or speak publicly for, or against, something, usually a bill, law or other legal decision. As should be obvious, there is one foolproof way to gather people together inorganically, but in a way that seems organic - you pay them money and make them sign documents stating that they would lose that money if they told anyone about it. This is exactly what happened when the PR company working for the company Entergy hired people from a company called Crowds on Demand to speak in favor of a power plant. On paper, this might not seem like a huge issue. After all, the company needed this done, and these people needed money right? The issue arrives when astroturfing exploits their paid activists - those who are likely struggling to afford rent, raise their child, or just looking for a big breakthrough - to act against themselves and each other in exchange for what is, to the elite, at least, absolute chump change.

People are Profit, and Profit Resides Above People

    America, much like most countries in the world, exists where a small minority of people both own most of the money and hold most of the power. As the top 1% own almost as much wealth as the entire middle class, and as the elite are not the personal majority, they must take extra, precise steps to protect their wealth without exposing themselves. Wealth inequality is a big problem in America, and the elite know this just as much as the rest of us - although, they know this in much more of a business scope. Think of the elite's use of paid demonstrators as they do - nothing more than a cheap business expense. Let's look at a hypothetical. A grocery store corporation earning millions, perhaps even billions a year, is one public hearing away from closing a deal that will allow them to expand their business into new ventures - gardening. The corporation sees that they will need some public support to make this happen, so they find some people willing to support them - for a price. 50 local citizens show up to the hearing, and 15 of them speak in favor of the business move - mostly reiterating one another. They were each paid $100, with the speakers earning an additional $50. While those in the middle class may be fortunate enough to have a job paying them this much for a day of work, this is simply not a reality for the lower class. $100 could be the difference between eviction for a struggling single mother, or it could be the chance for that poor family to finally, finally afford to eat out together - just once. 

Source: The Lens New Orleans

    This small boost of financial gain is wonderful in the short term for these citizens, and the corporation only had to shell out less than $6000 to make it happen. Unfortunately, though, this move ultimately destroys the community. After the store expands into gardening, offering cheaper prices, locally owned and operated greenhouses, gardening stores and flower shops are forced to close up shop as they no longer make enough money to sustain. As these small businesses close, so do the jobs of all the local residents they employed. Suddenly, the community sees a strong upswing in unemployment, and as unemployment rises, so does illegal employment. More drugs appear on the streets, more youth turn to gang activity as they have no other direction in life - the consequences go on. It is a long, slow, methodical process in which there truly is only one winner - the corporation who used astroturfing to achieve their own corporate success. Some may say this is simply just intelligent business. I say it is complete exploitation of those who are desperate, those who truly have no other choice. Astroturfing is, seemingly, simply another cog in the wheel which serves to line the pockets of the top, and deplete those of the bottom. 

Astroturfing Methods: How Astroturfing Has Evolved Beyond Lobbying

By: Adam Subotin

as921212@ohio.edu

What is Astroturfing?

Astroturfing is the practice of masking the sponsors of a message or organization to make it appear as though it originates from and is supported by grassroots participants, A now commonplace dilemma that is hard to spot unless you're looking for it. 

There have been plenty of examples in which major corporations have been outed for astroturfing, but astroturfing goes far beyond the corporate world. Within the past few years, astroturfing has gone so far as to affect the general consumer's source of entertainment as well.

Issac Provatia & The Fidelity Communications Outting

While some sources of entertainment have been affected by astroturfing, some sources of entertainment have also notified the public of astroturfing campaigns. While many campaigns are found and discussed via networks like Twitter, Reddit, YouTube, filmmaker/designer Issac Provatia, uncovered an astroturfing campaign being conducted by corporate cable and internet provider Fidelity Communications in 2018. 

In the video, Provatia uncovers a campaign "Stop City-Funded Internet" was promoted and sponsored by Fidelity, who was being challenged by the city of West Plains, Missouri who wanted to implement a project to provide internet as a city utility. 

Fidelity Communications essentially controlled the city's entire Internet supply, and when the project initially came about, the radical "Stop City-Funded Internet" campaign appeared out of almost nowhere. The marketing company hired by Fidelity made a crucial error in developing the campaign, which was spotted by the YouTuber. 

Initially projected as a grassroots project, the tell-tale that linked back to Fidelity were two images among the campaign's website and their file names. The file names included "Fidelity" within the image source, revealing Fidelity as the sponsor and main client behind the initiative. 

Fidelity under scrutiny from the city eventually came out and admitted their attachment to the campaign but did little to admit wrongdoing. Instead, they adjusted their tone continuing to come off as simply a concerned member of the community rather than a business whose worry, in reality, was losing out on revenue to the city.

Even Your Favorite Artists Are Involved In Astroturfing?

As mentioned earlier, the entertainment industry is also guilty when it comes to different forms of astroturfing. 

In this case, your favorite artists may be among those that have participated in astroturfing whether they knew it or not. Justin Beiber is a prime example. 

Upon the release of Beiber's 'Yummy' back in January, the song was heavily criticized online as one of Beiber's worst released songs, however, the song has still ended up as one of Beiber's most-streamed recent releases, and popular songs on Spotify. How you may ask? 

Beiber openly promoted and publicized how to fake streams so the song would push on to number one on the charts. 

Beiber made a slide of photos which he posted to Instagram (since deleted) asking fans to buy the song multiple times on iTunes, and also instructed his fans to create a Spotify playlist consisting of only his song “Yummy” repeatedly, specifically requesting the playlist be played on a low volume, not on mute consistently. Even more intriguing, Beiber instructed fans to use a US-based VPN (virtual private network–that is, by downloading a VPN app and setting it to the United States) because if the listener was listening non-domestically, the charts only consider steaming within the United States.

Since this fiasco, other artists including Selena Gomez have also been accused of faking streams or employing streaming farms to artificially inflate their streaming numbers on outlets like Spotify and Apple Music and insure significant payouts. 

Several Android devices connected to a server that farms streams.

What's even more alarming according to a Rolling Stone article written by Elias Leight, is the amount of money fraudulently paid out by streaming platforms. Artists currently receive between $0.0045 and $0.0084 per stream, but according to Leight, Louis Posen, founder of California based punk-pop and rock label Hopeless Records, “think[s] that three to four percent of global streams are illegitimate streams," and "...around $300 million in potential lost revenue [has] moved from legitimate streams to illegitimate, illegal streams." 

So, astroturfing is proving to be a real issue, which comes in many shapes and sizes. 

Astroturfing and Why It's Wrong

Samantha Damico

samantha.n.damico@gmail.com

Astroturfing is defined as the practice of masking sponsors of a message or organization by making it appear as though it stems and is supported by grassroots participants. In journalism, we unfortunately see this more often than we should. 

Image courtesy of Google

According to The Guardian, Exxon is one of the most successful companies. However, due to the fact that gasoline is a harm to the environment, Exxon teams up and collaborates with many environmentally friendly companies to appear as though they care greatly about climate change. One of the organizations Exxon works closely with is the Centre of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change. By working with them, Exxon is creating an illusion that doubts the idea of climate change throughout the world. Exxon has figured out that by working with environmentally friendly companies such as the Centre of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, it will take the attention off of the fact that their gasoline is part of the climate change problem. People will see that Exxon pairs themselves with a good cause that tries to save our planet, all while deceiving us at the same time by continuing to drill oil for their gasoline which is actually doing the opposite of good. 

This is a prime example of astroturfing. In journalism, we see it frequently and I believe it's wrong. Referring back to the code of ethics, a journalist's role is to report truth and accuracy for its' audience. Astroturfing is just another way of manipulating the audience into believing what the media is trying to tell them. 

In a different article on The Guardian's website, it states that astroturfing is most likely to occur where the interests of companies or the government come into a disagreement with the public. Therefore, the company or government will astroturf to deceive the public into believing they are actually doing the ethical thing when in actuality, they're causing more harm than good.

Unfortunately like I stated before, in journalism this is not an uncommon tactic. The biggest problem it creates is that it bands together groups of people to support a cause when they don't actually know that what they're supporting, is something they'd actually be against. It's a complete deception to the media's audience and it's been around for more than 100 years. I'm not quite sure how it can be stopped, but there definitely needs to be a solution.

Evolution of Astroturfing

Dawn Bilinovich
Dawnwct@gmail.com

pinterest.com

It all began with a little cup...a Dixie Cup!

Between 1909-1910 a precursor to the "grassroots" movements of today emerged; the goal, to ban the "public drinking cup." However, later a conflict of interest surfaced. The person initiating the movement was none other than Hugh Moore--founder of The Dixie Cup Company.  

 

                 

                                                   Lafayette.com                 UrbanRemainsChicago.com

So, what is Astroturfing?

The term Astroturfing was first coined in 1985 by Texas Senator Lloyd Bentsen. He used the term in connecting with a movement designed by a company or person "under the guise of a grassroots movement." 

As the term astroturf suggests, the movement is not what it appears to be; its fake. Those involved in the movement's construction stand to gain from its success. This unethical behavior creates myriad conflicts of interest.

Examples of Astroturfing 

According to BigCommerce.com "while astroturfing has been a factor in public outreach for decades, usually through public advocacy groups with hidden funding, it is especially prolific on the Internet."

Company-employed bloggers

According to BigCommerce.com, company-employed bloggers pretend to be unbiased while posting product reviews.

Have you ever noticed the caveat attached to reviews stating the purchase was verified? This addition is meant to put the buyer's mind at ease while promoting trust. 

However, what's to stop a company from providing its employees with funds to purchase the company's products and then construct positive reviews on the company's behalf?

Amazon is notorious for these types of reviews. Prior to 2016, Amazon companies were known to gift products in exchange for hyped-up reviews. Today's strict rules have forced unethical reviewing underground. This makes offenses harder to detect but still ever-present.

Fake personas

Another popular form of astroturfing employs the use of fake personas. Companies create fake personas "to create the illusion of a populist idea," according to BigCommerce.com. 

Fake personas can be very complex and carry a rich history of (mis)information. According to The Guardian, fake personas can be created and continuously updated by computers. Sometimes fake personas are assigned to a person (or people). The persona is then used to unethically distribute information in favor of a company.  

One Hundred Years & Counting

For more than 100 years, astroturfing has been altering consumer opinion, often without their knowledge. Unlike the easily revealed misdeeds of The Dixie Cup Company of yesterday, today's astroturfing is much harder to detect and increasingly gaining popularity. 

And so readers, I revisit a line from a previous blog...Caveat Emptor! Be smart consumers of products, services, and information. Tread carefully, and acknowledge the need to safeguard your interests; sometimes its all we can do in our ever-evolving, tech-savvy world.

Astroturfing...Ethical v. Unethical?

Kelsey Lauriel
kl343216@ohio.edu

Astroturfing is the practice of masking the sponsors of a message or organization to make it appear as though it originates from and is supported by grassroots participation. Astroturfing is very common in modern journalism and has created many issues in the media.

The issue with this is that it brings together supportive crowds and allows them to give their full support to a business or person even if they don't truly support a message.

Fake Activism

In a recent TEDTALK, Sharyl Attkisson discussed the negatives that come along with Astroturfing. She describes astroturfing as fake grassroots activism.

"Companies create non-profits, Facebook pages, social media persona, write letters to the editor, and essentially exploit social and traditional media to create the false impression that there is a grassroots movement supporting some issue," Attkisson said about astroturfing.

Digital Media and Print

While astroturfing has been very common in the digital media due to the fact that it is so easy to believe, in the past, it was also very popular in newspapers, especially around the time of an election.

"Pick up any local paper around the time of an election and you will find multiple letters from "concerned residents of X" objecting to the disastrous policies of Y. Similarly, concerned residents often turn up on talk shows and even in campaign literature, although the latter can prove more dangerous, as Labour party activists posing as residents in Greenwich discovered a few years back," TheGuardian said about astroturfing being in newspapers.

Astroturfing becomes especially popular in printed media around the time of an election.

Between digital print and newspapers, digital print is most likely more popular in todays time. By using a fake identity it can be very easy to promote and support a campaign that you do not really support.

To gain support, people, businesses, and campaigns try to get the support of a celebrity, even if the celebrity does not support, to gain a crowd.

Are Fake Crowds Ethical?

At the end of the day, someone can look like they have a large group of followers, but if it a group that is following blindly and are following someone who is not being truthful, is that ethical to the group who is supporting?

While lying to people who have given you their trust is already bad enough, when the astroturfing comes to light and the lies are shown, it creates a negative space in the media as people do not want to trust the media anymore.

Astroturfing makes it much more difficult to be able to tell real news from fake, and it was already hard to tell the difference to begin with.

Pyramid example of the dirty side of internet marketing, including astroturfing

The Phenomenon of Fake Crowds

Laura Rose Tinkler

lauratinkler@gmail.com

In recent years, the phenomenon of astroturfing has polluted American public relations. Astroturfing gives the illusion that an organization has grassroots origins while concealing its real financial supporters. This concept has grown further into businesses that now provide supportive crowds for political campaigns and protests.

Crowds on Demand 

In 2012, Adam Swart created the company Crowds on Demand to provide crowds for parties and celebrities. Since its conception, the company has branched into the political arena. 

Swart says in the article The Lucrative Business of Crowds for Hire, "we started fielding political requests -- to provide crowds for world leaders and US political candidates at federal, state, and local level, or to conduct rallies and protests in support or opposition to an issue."

Crowds on Demand often look to actors to supply their crowds. An old casting call from the website Backstage, a site specifically for performers, states "Crowds on Demand, a Los Angeles-based PR firm, is looking for enthusiastic people in New York to participate in our Public Relations stunts including flash mobs, corporate events, and rallies. We have been profiled all over the media including Good Morning America, GQ, NPR, and others for our unique and fun concept." 

"The Lucrative Business of Crowds for Hire"

CNN

The Business of Crowds

Crowds on Demand has pioneered a new field and the concept is spreading internationally. For CEO Swart, he hopes to expand his company to the UK, Dubai, and India according to "The Lucrative Business of Crowds for Hire." Swart also claims the company has "more than doubled" yearly since its opening. 

Crowds on Demand is not just a worthy investment for its creator but also its clients. The overall return is often greater than the cost of the crowd. 

In "The Lucrative Business of Crowds for Hire" Swart states "When a client spends $10,000 on a protest and wins a $20 million settlement, that's a clear return on investment." In reference to political campaigns, he says "Before this you could spend $100,000 to put an ad in the Washington Post. Now you can spend a tenth of that to get right in front of people."

The Ethics of Fake Crowds

The idea of fake crowds and crowds to hire presents new ethical questions in the world of public relations. Typically, the roots of these crowds are hidden from the public. Is the deception and covering of the truth ethical?

When these fake crowds have been exposed, the backlash is typically negative. For example, Donald Trump's hiring of supporters for a campaign rally was met with major criticism. 

Ultimately, similar to fake news and images, astroturfing and fake crowds breed a sense of distrust throughout the nation. It is seemingly impossible to decipher the truth behind important political and ethical discourse. 

PR Professionals: Persuading Attitudes or Conveying Information?

Madison McClary

mm326315@ohio.edu

It seems like whenever PR and journalism are discussed in the same conversation, there is a tension that is apparent. The reality is that these jobs are actually closely related and rely on each other for specific information. PR professionals are able to target specific audiences which, ultimately, could be beneficial in some ways to journalists’ stories. PR professionals are the bridge between the individual and the organization. 

PR professionals are often known for their efforts in creating a positive public perception. In the article Public Relations vs. Journalism: What’s the Difference?, Gillian Evans defines PR as a “deliberate, planned and sustained effort aimed at persuading the public’s attitudes and opinions towards a person, product or idea.” (2016). In the same article, she later goes on to say that, although they get a bad rap, PR professionals are necessary in our world of information: “With easy access to so much information, companies need professionals to convey a consistent, streamlined message to the public.” (2016). 

What could cause PR professionals to be seen in a better light today? Well, PR has become an important term specifically with COVID-19 happening in our world right now. In the article Seeking relevance: PR and media during the COVID-19 pandemic, Aaron Perlut discusses how important PR professionals are in covering COVID-19 information. He states, “For PR practitioners, it requires a measure of understanding the audience you rely upon to help tell your story. . .” (2020). COVID-19 is something unlike anyone (journalists and PR professionals alike) has ever seen. There is an opportunity for everyone to cover this story, but PR professionals specifically have an interesting door that has opened for them. Public relations is huge right now because this pandemic impacts everyone in some way or another. They are able to give the people consistent messages from the companies they most want to hear from at this point in time. Brands across the board are looking to their PR professionals for guidance on how to convey their COVID-19 guidelines and information to their consumers. 

"America's Views of the News Media During the COVID-19 Outbreak", Survey of U.S. Adults, 2020.

"Americans Immersed in COVID-19 News; Most Think Media Are Doing Fairly Well Covering It", Survey of U.S. Adults, 2020.

This pandemic has had a huge impact on the PR world. PR professionals have had to shift gears when it comes to their creativity and come up with campaigns that will cut through all of the others surrounding the same subject. After all, how does one cut through the crowd to have their work seen at a time like this? Although PR professionals have a chance to improve their reputation, this is still a difficult time for everyone.  

Deep Fakes, Dire Consequences

Lorraine Stone 

Ls304319@ohio.edu 

Truth is the core of ethical values when it comes to the journalism and media discourse communities. The press is critical to upholding and maintaining democracy, therefore, the truth is the primary priority of journalists to hold government officials accountable and report the truth to the citizens of the democracy. However, what would be at stake if society no longer had the ability to distinguish fact from fallacy? What could possibly have the capacity to undermine societies shared sense of reality on a global scale? The answer, ultimately, is deepfakes. 

CNBC A comparison of an original and deepfake video of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Elyse Samuels | The Washington Post | Getty Images

Deep fakes are a combination of two words, deep learning, and fake. Deep learning allows artificial intelligence to understand things about someone, for instance, their body or their face, all from promptly available pictures and videos. Deep fakes utilize Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) in which case two mechanism models are in combat with one another. Model A directs the data set and then creates the fakes while model b tries to detect the fakes. Model A continues to manufacture fakes until model b is no longer capable of recognizing them as such. The ability of deep fakes to generate is proceeding at a far more amplified rate than the ability to recognize them. 

Essentially, deep fakes are fake videos that appear real and make viewers dismiss their initial caution by questioning the story as deep fakes utilize two critical senses: hearing and seeing. When seeing is believing, deep fakes are not just a threat to democracy, they are a threat to society's shared sense of reality. 

Typically, human beings are known to seek out information that will support their existing beliefs while disregarding any other information that may say otherwise. Deep fakes exploit this human weakness and carry the potential to become a dangerous weapon if wielded in the wrong hands. Essentially, if something is not done to enhance technology and detect the real from the deepfakes, the world will be gaslighted, and inevitably, society will lose touch with their sense of reality. 

Deep fakes carry dire consequences; they have the potential to corrupt elections and destroy political figures reputations. Government aside, deep fakes also carry the potential to destroy personal reputations, bully, destroy marriages, relationships, and deteriorate society's faith in institutions. Deepfakes also provide a scapegoat for accused criminals who are up against video evidence. 

In situations such as these, all the defense attorneys will have to say is that the video is a deep fake, and without the technology to detect real from fake, the claim may very well be enough to cause reasonable doubt. Therefore, potentially allowing a legitimately guilty offender to go free. It is absolutely critical government officials and society address this issue promptly by either providing the technology to determine the authentic from the fake, or by  implementing some sort of legislation to put a stop to this as it is no laughing matter. 

Deep Fakes To Wreak Havoc On So
ciety We Are Not Prepared

Deep Fakes 

Faked photos, really?

Sadly, it's not even bizzar or far fetched that there are so many manipulated images used to tell stories. In this age where social media is dominating, its easier now than it was 20 years ago to manipulate and fake photos. Adobe photoshop and even Instagram filters allow us to distort, dismember and even virtually enhance pieces and parts of images to gain a certain reaction from the viewer.

Masterminds, or Sicko?


"tourist guy"

A lot of the fake photos that are used are to pull at our heartstrings. I say some are even really creative. It takes a lot of hard work and dedicated to fake images. Unless you know the details in and out of the location where an image is being taken, most likely, you'll fall for the faux set up as well.

 The image of the Tourist Guy post 911 terror attacks in New York was (for me) an all-time low. At a time where the world is mourning, together, who would even think to manipulate such an image. So many questions about this photo, but the most important to me is why? Though there were many flaws with this fake image, I still want to know why anyone would want to send such a sad, sick message? Well, this happens quite often. Images are faked, staged, and altered to send various messages via the media.


Bleached-out & Photoshopped

When it comes to Black people on magazine covers, often the media will manipulate or photoshop images to gain a "better" response from their audiences. But most times, this causes controversy and backlash. The term "whitewashing" is when photos of black people are lightened A LOT to make them appear to have brighter skin. This has been done multiple times, on various covers of magazines such as Bazaar Magazine with Halle Berry, and with Kerry Washington for Instyle Magazine. This is outrageous, but in the world of fashion, it's not abnormal to have images altered and photoshopped.


Kerry Washington for InStyle Magazine 


Another popular thing to do with fake photos is using celebrities to pretend they're for or against a cause. Kendall Jenner was accused of posting this image of herself holding a Black Lives Matter sign, but fans quickly recognized the image and began to bash her for photoshopping an image of herself. Come to find out, Jenner had no idea the media had even done that, but, in the end, the celebrity faced a lot of backlash and scrutiny because it circulated. Jenner cleared the air via her social media "I did not post that image..." Fake images can be a horror.


Kendall Jenner - BLM photoshopped image.

Deepfakes, What They Are and How to Spot Them

Bobby Urse

bobbyurse2@gmail.com

We seem to be on a tipping point between future technology and life as we know it. Every year it feels as if the "next big thing" will occur and change the world for the better. But not all of these new inventions are exactly as exciting and comforting as others. What if one of these potentially scary new technological breakthroughs is already here, it just needs to be perfected for us to truly see its influence? 

image by spectrum.ieee.org

                           

Deepfakes are audio or video manipulations that utilize artificial intelligence deep learning. Usually when people use the word "deepfake", they are referring to a video that has been altered to make someone resemble someone else. This technology matches pictures of two different people, frame by frame until they are indistinguishable from each other. The more quality pictures there are of that person, like a celebrity or public figure, the better quality the deepfake can be.

This technology poses a new problem in the fight against misinformation. Ian Bogost's article for the Verge Stop Trusting Viral Videos  Bogost highlights how viral videos can be biased in their one-sidedness or not truly show the full scope of the scene. Soon enough will videos of our own politicians be involved in this umbrella of not trusting viral videos? Yes and no.

Back in 2018, the Flemish Socialist Party of Belgium commissioned a deepfake video of U.S. President Donald Trump to urge the country to exit the Paris Climate Agreement. The video, which was clearly fake, still convinced viewers that it was genuine despite its poor quality. This is scary as non-English speakers unfamiliar to our politics may be more easily swayed to believe deepfakes of this nature, as we might be just as suspectable to an unfamiliar Belgian Politician. 

Videos like this are so dangerous as they could spread misinformation in a myriad of ways. They could circulate to people who do not have internet so they cannot fact check its legitimacy or not.  Communist governments that give their citizens news could intentionally or unintentionally distribute deepfake videos. Even educated free people with access to the internet could still fall into the allure of a seemingly real video.

Deepfakes are a new technology that we all must familiarize ourselves with as they will only get better over time. Knowing how to spot one will get harder as they get more advanced, but the techniques should essentially stay the same. 

 

The video How to Spot A Deep Fake by CNA Insider suggests multiple ways to spot a deepfake. The most promising solution is to look up surrounding media on that video to see what has been said about it. Have other media outlets reported on this story? Also one can look for distortions in the video itself but as deepfake technology gets more advanced this will become harder to discern.  That is why they recommend reverse image searching a frame from the video to see If there is an original video from an earlier time that has been manipulated.

We all must be better at fact-checking the news we consume. Multiple sources and perspectives can only help. Especially in an election year and even more so with the advent of new technology. As Donald Miller said, "In the age of information, ignorance is a choice."

Faked Photos and Manipulated Emotions

Jeff Wunderly

jwunderly@gmail.com

Manipulated photo of Seattle Seahawks players. IR.net

Pushing buttons and first impressions:

When the image on the left side above went viral in 2017 public outcry was instant and vehement. Demands for retribution ranged from calls for the offending player, Michael Bennett, to be barred from the league to expulsion of the Seattle franchise altogether. When the untouched photo to the right made the rounds a short time later, some seemed so overcome by their initial outrage that the reality of the deception was an anticlimax, to say the least. I witnessed this emotional entropy first-hand after posting an image identical to the one above on a relative's Facebook page. Several puzzling comments like, 'They damn-well better not be burning a flag!' and 'Well, I won't be watching the Seahawks anyway,' showed the negative connotations already formed. 

A revolution of lowered expectations: 

In her 2012 article for The New York Times, Who Can Improve On Nature? Magazine Editors, author Christine Haughney argues that driven largely by the influence of technology, media consumers no longer expect accuracy in photographic images. People have come to expect a more heightened, or intensified version of the truth, she says. Again I recall personally following a Facebook thread where someone was dismissing images of local acid mine damaged waterways as manipulated. The person steadfastly disparaged the integrity of the photographer, the watershed restoration organization , and the important work that is being done, all without any evidence, or even ever having set foot in the region. It is much easier to dismiss anything that does not fit one's world-view than to spend the time and energy required to confirm the legitimacy of a story or image. 

                                             Sunday Creek, Athens County. Photo By:The Post

The Brain Has a Mind of Its Own:

The manipulated image of the Seahawks players was effective for several reasons. It appealed to socially acceptable ideals of patriotism and respect, as well as deeper, usually unacknowledged or even sometimes unperceived racial fears and stereotypes that lie at at the very root of our culture. Ian Bogost wrote an article for the Atlantic in 2019 titled, Stop Trusting Viral Videos, where he explains that videos can take on a life of their own in which truth can become irrelevant. Popular videos, he says, often reproduce conflict viewers are already primed to seek out. The perceived image of black men violently disregarding the morals and standards of society struck chords of fear that were burned into the American psyche with D.W. Griffith's film, Birth of a Nation, in 1915 and exist to this day. As tools to divide the masses, racism, fear, and disinformation are as effective as any in human history. 

                                                Lilian Gish in Birth of a Nation. By: bbc.com

 Responsible Reporters and Consumers: 

The digital terrain is so nuanced and still relatively new that traditional concepts and approaches are often found inadequate. When the desire for truth is the core concern, tools can be developed to help navigate uncharted waters. Author Victoria Kwan, writing for firstdraftnews.org in 2019, presented new guides for this "tricky ethical terrain" in an article titled, How journalists can responsibly report on manipulated pictures and videos. Kwan discussed the challenges of interpreting a polluted information ecosystem filled with manipulated content and fakes, both shallow and deep. She stressed that her guide was less deigned to provide answers than to provide consistent questions to help navigate the online landscape for reporters, but the same skills are certainly needed to be an informed and independent consumer as well. Our social and mental health may depend upon it just as much as our democracy itself.