October 14, 2023

Fixing Disinformation Online

https://prospect.org/culture/books/2023-10-13-fixing-disinformation-online-bradford-stebbins-review/





The online spread of misinformation and deliberate disinformation is worsening. COVID-19 denial and the spread of vaccine rejection, disinformation about the Russia-Ukraine war, the growth of unregulated generative AI, and lies spread by politicians and social media sites make that clear. The 2024 elections in the U.S. and elsewhere have policymakers (or at least Democrats) worried about what is coming next. Any hope that the problem will just go away, or that Big Tech will “clean up the mess they created,” has evaporated.

There is no shortage of initiatives to shore up democracy and clean up the information ecosystem. Nobel laureate Maria Ressa’s ten-point plan for fixing the internet, the 2023 launch of an International Panel on the Information Environment, and multiple recommendations from the Forum on Information and Democracy, organized by Reporters Without Borders, all offer strategies. Many of these initiatives call for enforcement of data privacy rights, together with audits and fines to incentivize social media platforms to stop promoting potentially harmful falsehoods (while still respecting freedom of expression) as well as increased transparency of algorithms and the strengthening of the media ecosystem as a whole. The United Nations Secretary-General’s office has launched consultations on its Code of Conduct for Information Integrity, while UNESCO is already organizing worldwide consultations and gathering comments in an attempt to come up with guidelines for regulating Big Tech while still protecting freedom of expression.

Tracking all the research and policy proposals can feel overwhelming. Two timely books, thankfully, guide us through the thicket. Building Back Truth in an Age of Misinformation, by Leslie F. Stebbins, largely examines the pros and cons of “demand-side” solutions: fixes that focus primarily on individual responsibility. Anu Bradford’s Digital Empires is about “supply-side” solutions: those that are more structural in nature. Bradford’s approach is the more persuasive. Back in 2017, I began writing about what I called “demand- and supply-side solutions” to make sense for my Columbia University students of the universe of fixes that had arisen for the problem of online mis/disinformation. The votes for Trump, Brexit, and Bolsonaro had led to a plethora of forums, papers, conferences, foundation funding, and projects on the subject, and it became necessary to categorize the ideas floating around.



Demand-side solutions, I pointed out, are the solutions that focus on the individual. These emphasize media literacy training, fact-checking, labeling mis/disinformation, and journalists’ efforts to engage with audiences and build trust. Such solutions skirted the problem of how to regulate the tech giants; Google and Facebook even funded some of these initiatives for PR reasons and in an effort to forestall regulation. Demand-side responses are the American way. Instead of a role for government, the onus is on the audience not to be stupid by acting on claims that are obviously untrue. In the same way, instead of authorities researching and regulating chemicals that cause cancer, Americans are encouraged to make individual decisions not to smoke. The rest of the world wasn’t buying it. The European Union called in the social media platforms early on and told them they had to start taking down illegal content. When the companies didn’t do much, the Europeans began regulating. Their “supply-side” approach looks more to the producers, suppliers, and purveyors of information.

snip

October 14, 2023

The Hives - Countdown to Shutdown (Official music video) 2023 (Swedish punks age well) 💙💛

October 14, 2023

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart - We Need to Talk About Israel (the more things change....)

even Ukraine is mentioned

Jul 22, 2014

October 14, 2023

Ohio's Abortion Debate Mired in Misinformation

https://prospect.org/politics/2023-10-13-ohios-abortion-debate-misinformation/



One distinctive feature of the Ohio abortion debate is that doctors and other reproductive rights–minded health care professionals have emerged as a potent coalition, steering public opinion from the moment that the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade. Last year, 1,000 physicians in the state threw down an unambiguous challenge, “A Message to Our Patients on the Loss of Reproductive Rights,” which outlined their objections to political excesses like Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and Ohio’s “heartbeat bill,” and listed some of the key reasons—chemotherapy, unviable pregnancies, rape—that lead women to undergo an abortion. Ohio Physicians for Reproductive Rights (OPRR), the group behind the campaign that had been originally spearheaded by two outraged doctors, also hammered home the “sanctity and privacy of the patient-physician relationship” and labeled the assault on women’s medical freedom of choice and criminalizing doctors “un-American.” Across the country, other statewide, doctor-led organizations have sprung up to protect reproductive rights.

OPRR helped launch the citizen-backed reproductive rights constitutional amendment (known as “Issue 1”) that appeared on the general-election ballot. It is one of only two issues up for statewide consideration this year in Ohio, vastly eclipsing what otherwise might be the main event, a ballot initiative legalizing recreational marijuana. The pathway to the ballot has been long and complicated, punctuated by a six-week trigger ban that has been blocked by the courts twice. The biggest confrontations erupted over how the wording of the proposed amendment would appear on the general-election ballot. This high-profile struggle between abortion supporters and opponents over the politicized language, and the efforts by Ohio media outlets to introduce important context, is a master class in the misinformation campaigns that have been unleashed in conservative states.

In August, the five-member Ohio Ballot Board, which has a Republican majority, decided that instead of using the actual text of the proposed amendment, it would provide a summary, a not-so-unusual move in these kinds of elections. The first paragraph of the official summary on the secretary of state’s website begins, “The proposed amendment would: Establish in the Constitution of the State of Ohio an individual right to one’s own reproductive medical treatment, including but not limited to abortion.” The actual text of the proposed amendment, which is not on the ballot, provides examples of reproductive care that the summary omits, namely “including but not limited to contraception [access]; fertility treatment; continuing one’s own pregnancy; miscarriage care; and abortion,” which abortion rights supporters wanted included to show the other reproductive health matters that deserved constitutional protections. In particular, they sought the inclusion of contraception access, which some lawmakers have identified as a possible next target of state reproductive prohibitions.

What is more unusual is that the ballot summary uses charged phrases like “unborn child” instead of medical terms like “fetus.” It uses the term “viability” but fails to explain it, even though the full text of the amendment does provide a definition for “fetal viability.” The Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights coalition (the physicians’ group is a member) argued in its lawsuit seeking to correct these and other major mischaracterizations in a summary that was “irrevocably flawed.” The Ohio Supreme Court, which has a Republican majority of elected justices, agreed to one small technical change. But the justices let other disputed elements stand. Media outlets like Signal Cleveland, a local community site, doubled down on explainers with interactive features contrasting the current summary language with issues raised by the coalition, while others like the Ohio Capital Journal launched a series specifically devoted to the amendment’s language and the rights it would affect.

snip

October 14, 2023

Wisconsin's Legislative Islands: It faces a new high-court battle over extreme partisan gerrymanders

https://prospect.org/politics/2023-10-13-wisconsins-legislative-islands-voters-stranded/



Last week, the Wisconsin Supreme Court decided to hear Clarke v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, a case challenging the state’s gerrymandered legislative maps. The decision is the culmination of a monthslong battle between the state’s highest court and the Republican-controlled legislature. Liberals gained a majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court in April for the first time in 15 years with the election of Justice Janet Protasiewicz. After Protasiewicz joined the court in August, a coalition that includes the Campaign Legal Center (CLC), a democracy and voting rights watchdog group, filed a lawsuit arguing that the current legislative maps are an extreme partisan gerrymander that violates the Wisconsin Constitution. Republicans in the state legislature then called on Protasiewicz to recuse herself from any case regarding redistricting or abortion, citing her comments on the campaign trail in which she called Wisconsin’s legislative maps “rigged” and voiced her support for abortion rights.

Republicans even floated the idea of impeaching Protasiewicz, who was elected by 11 percentage points, arguing that she has “prejudged” cases. Though they have backed off after a barrage of bad press—this week, two conservative judges asked by the legislature to weigh in on the effort have advised against impeachment—the Republicans’ efforts underscore how the state once known for pioneering progressive reforms has taken a toxic turn in the last decade and a half. Since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering was beyond the reach of federal courts in 2019, the fight for fair state and federal legislative district maps has in large part turned into 50 state-by-state battles. In no state legislature has the fight been more contentious—and the results more anti-majoritarian—than Wisconsin.

When Wisconsin Republicans won both the governorship and the state legislature in 2010, they also gained total control over redistricting and produced some of the most discriminatory gerrymanders in American history. The maps worked as intended, resulting in a Republican stranglehold on the legislature even as the state has trended blue in recent years. In Wisconsin, the legislative mapmaking process mirrors the path of a typical piece of legislation: State lawmakers draft the maps, secure passage in both chambers, and send them on to the governor for a signature or a veto. The redistricting process following the 2020 census produced the latest set of state legislative maps, which went into effect this year after a lengthy court battle. These maps are an even more extreme partisan gerrymander. The Princeton Gerrymandering Project gives both the Wisconsin Senate and Assembly maps failing grades for political fairness, citing “significant Republican advantage.” Despite the state’s battleground status in presidential elections, Republicans now control 22 of 33 Senate seats and 64 of 99 Assembly seats.



The 2022 maps so heavily favor the Republicans that Sam Wang, a professor of neuroscience at Princeton University and director of the Princeton Gerrymandering Project, has estimated that if Republicans win only 47.5 percent of the statewide popular vote, they still would maintain a supermajority in Wisconsin’s Senate. While gerrymandering has produced jigsaw-piece shaped legislative districts all over the country, Wisconsin’s Senate and Assembly districts stand out from the rest because they go beyond traditional “cracking and packing.” The majority of them, 55 of 99 Assembly districts and 21 of 33 Senate districts, are noncontiguous, creating legislative “islands.” Legislators in these areas need to leave their own districts and travel through another district to reach their constituents who have been relegated to these islands. Wisconsin’s maps could be gerrymandered without creating any islands, yet non-contiguous districts have proliferated throughout the last two redistricting cycles. In 2011, 42 of the 99 Assembly districts were noncontiguous. The latest maps added 13 more. “Wisconsin remains gerrymandered to within an inch of its life,” says Kenneth Mayer, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin–Madison.

snip

October 14, 2023

John Hopkins School of Public Health: The Rules of War and Human Rights in the Israel-Hamas War

https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2023/the-rules-of-war-and-human-rights-in-the-israel-hamas-war



Published October 12, 2023

First, what are the rules of war in terms of health care?

The rules, known as international humanitarian law, are designed to limit harm to non-combatants in war; they are distinct from the law regarding the legitimacy of going to war. The rules aim to protect civilians, wounded and sick soldiers, health and humanitarian workers, and prisoners of war. Civilians may not be attacked or taken hostage. In their targeting, combatants must distinguish between civilian and military objects and take precautions to avoid hitting hospitals and other civilian structures. Even when the target is a military one, combatants must take precautions to avoid or at least limit harm to civilians. The rules also prohibit attacks on objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population. Conflicts in densely populated areas do not obviate these duties. The rules apply to both state military forces and non-state armed groups, such as Hamas. The fact that one side violates the rules does not permit the other side to deviate from them. Grave violations of the rules, such as targeting civilians or civilian infrastructure, taking hostages, or starving the population, are war crimes.

What specific rules apply to health and humanitarian needs?

The foundational requirement of the rules is to respect and protect the wounded and sick, health providers, hospitals and other health facilities, and ambulances and other medical transports. The law also includes a duty not to interfere with or obstruct health care, such as blocking the passage of ambulances seeking to evacuate the wounded and sick. In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the International Committee of the Red Cross has a system to liaise with Israeli military authorities and Palestinian ambulance services to ensure safe movement of ambulances and prevent their misuse. Occupying powers have additional obligations to ensure that populations living in occupied territory have adequate access to health services and public health measures. International authorities as well as the State Department consider Gaza to be occupied because of Israel’s control of airspace, territorial waters, entry and exit of people, and water and electricity.

How do the rules apply in this conflict to date?

Hamas’ atrocities, including its horrific massacres of civilians, taking of hostages, and indiscriminate rocket attacks throughout Israel, are war crimes. The latest reports state that Hamas killed 1,200 Israelis, the vast majority of them civilians, and has taken more than 150 hostages. Hamas fighters also attacked a hospital and its staff in Israel, killing a paramedic and injuring others. According to Gaza Health Ministry, more than 1,400 Palestinians have been killed and more than 6,000 wounded in Gaza (and these numbers continue to rise), though to date there is no reliable information on how many of them are civilians. There have been reports of damage to health facilities from airstrikes and health workers killed. Whether these deaths are a result of violations of the laws of war requires investigation of each case, including consideration of patterns of conduct regarding whether Israel has distinguished between military objects and civilian ones and taken measures to minimize harm to civilians.

What are other immediate concerns?

Gaza’s health infrastructure and its capacity to treat traumatic injuries were weak before the war because of Israel’s blockade and the impact of past conflicts in this century. Apart from the impact of lack of electricity and more limited access to clean water and the import of food for the population, a lack of fuel prevents hospitals from running generators needed to keep them functioning. Israel’s new and total blockage of food, water, electricity, and fuel to Gaza, along with damage to health infrastructure, have created a health crisis. The United Nations has warned that Gaza is on the brink of running out of critical supplies. The prevalence of psychological trauma from the Hamas attacks in Israel and from the experience of airstrikes in Gaza is likely to be very high, including among children, who compose almost half the population of Gaza.

snip

October 14, 2023

Jerusalem Post: 86% of Israelis blame gov't for Hamas massacre, majority say Netanyahu must resign

An overwhelming majority of 86% of respondents, including 79% of coalition supporters, said the surprise attack from Gaza is a failure of the country's leadership.

https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-767880

Four out of five Jewish Israelis believe the government and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are to blame for the mass infiltration of Hamas terrorists into Israel and the massacre that followed, a new Dialog Center poll released on Thursday found. An overwhelming majority – 86% of respondents, including 79% of coalition supporters, said the surprise attack from Gaza is a failure of the country’s leadership, while a staggering 92% said the war is causing anxiety.

Furthermore, almost all the respondents (94%) believe the government must bear some responsibility for the lack of security preparedness that led to the assault, with over 75% saying the government holds most of the responsibility.

Netanyahu must resign after war's conclusion, Israelis say

The survey, which polled 620 Israeli Jews from across the country, also found that a majority of respondents believed Netanyahu should resign following the conclusion of Operation Swords of Iron. A slim majority of 56% said Netanyahu must resign at the end of the war, with 28% of coalition voters agreeing with this view, and 52% of respondents also expect Defense Minister Yoav Gallant to resign.

In addition, most respondents said they do not trust the government to lead the war on Gaza, though the poll was conducted before former defense minister Benny Gantz joined an emergency unity government on Wednesday evening.

snip

October 14, 2023

K-studio buries stepped visitor centre in 100-year-old vineyard on the Aegean island of Samos

https://www.dezeen.com/2023/10/12/k-studio-liknon-metaxa-vineyard-greece/













Greek architecture practice K-studio has completed a visitor space for drinks company Metaxa, carving an experiential route out of the stepped stone terraces of a century-year-old vineyard. Located on the island of Samos, the project, called Liknon, nestles into a large terraced vineyard that is home to one of Metaxa's key ingredients, the Muscat grape.









Instead of placing a building on the site, K-studio looked to tell the story of Metaxa's production through the landscape itself, inserting a sequence of display and tasting rooms connected by stone steps and pathways. "We realised that Metaxa didn't need anything more than what they already had – they have the vineyard and that basically it, they just need to make sure that this vineyard is telling their story and invite people to experience it," founder Dimitris Karampatakis told Dezeen.













"So the brief became creating a walk through the vineyard and embedding in it ways to explore it further, rather than the more passive, one-way interaction that one might have with a museum," he added. Liknon is organised loosely around a three-part journey, which begins at the top of the site and works its way down via narrow stone stairways.











The first space visitors come across focuses on "topos", place, entering an underground space with a soil floor where a four-metre-high glass wall creates a cross-section through the ground to reveal the root system of the vines. The second space is dedicated to "chronos", time, where visitors have the opportunity to sample drinks and understand how the ageing of spirits affects their taste.

snip

October 13, 2023

Dion & Arles creates "salon in which you can dine" for Il Gattopardo restaurant in Mayfair, London

https://www.dezeen.com/2023/10/06/dion-arles-creates-salon-in-which-you-can-dine-for-il-gattopardo-restaurant/





French design and interiors studio Dion & Arles drew on the work of 20th-century Italian designers Carlo Mollino and Gio Ponti for the interior of Mayfair restaurant Il Gattopardo in London. "We envisioned Il Gattopardo to be a salon in which you can dine – not just a restaurant," the designers told Dezeen. The studio looked to Mollino's apartment in Turin for its balance between modernity and heritage.





"Modernity, heritage and sophistication are the three elements we think together define the Italian sensibility, which we tried to translate into the interiors," Dion & Arles said. Il Gattopardo – which is Italian for leopard – is located in Mayfair in central London and aims to "celebrate the golden era of mid-century Italian design in an intimate setting" across five dining spaces, the studio said. The main dining room and crudo bar lead through to an inner dining area and second bar, which in turn reveals the intimate "salon", or living room, which seats 10 people in soft-upholstered armchairs.





There is a separate private dining room on the lower ground level. The salon room is characterised by crushed-velvet curved seating and a substantial fireplace featuring a bas-relief on its canopy. Tables are topped with sepia drawings after artist Piero Fornasetti, which complement the muted amber seating.





In the main dining room, banquette seating has been kept to a minimum, with tables and chairs otherwise arranged in close groupings. A signature leopard print motif appears on rugs, cushions and artworks in various tones ranging from amber to blue. "Each project should belong to its specific location," the studio said. "We do not believe in cloning, as it gives the feeling of being everywhere, anywhere. We are trying to make people feel they are in a unique space that cannot be found anywhere else; 'somewhere' that belongs to 'someone."

snip

October 13, 2023

Saving Vulnerable Banking Customers Billions

https://prospect.org/economy/2023-10-13-saving-vulnerable-banking-customers-billions/



On Wednesday, the Biden-Harris administration introduced new guidance and restrictions for “junk fees,” the excess fees charged by companies that are often hidden or undisclosed. My colleague Robert Kuttner has covered the overall details, including the Federal Trade Commission’s proposal to ban all hidden junk fees that aren’t revealed to consumers until after they commit to purchasing the product or service. But part of the announcement included a new CFPB guidance that would require banks to provide consumers with basic account information without being charged.

This guidance has been years in the making. In 2010, when Congress passed the Consumer Financial Protection Act as part of the Dodd-Frank reform, banks with more than $10 billion in assets were required to provide account information when asked, but no further guidance or enforcement has been issued in the decade since the law was passed. Last year, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau asked for public comment on the quality of customer service at big banks, noting a trend in which large banks are moving “toward algorithmic banking and away from relationship banking.” The announcement asked for public comment regarding what information is useful to a consumer and how easy it is to access that information, among other things.

Customers complained about struggling to obtain information, dealing with customer service agents that bounced them around, and being charged fees to ultimately access what they needed. Some of this information is available on the bank’s website or mobile app or through a chatbot, but customers have to know how to navigate that process and find what they need. As the CFPB pointed out in June, chatbots often do not have answers for individual accounts and often create a dead end.

Of course, customers can eventually find the information, but they often must pay a price to access the basics about their own money. “When large financial institutions charge fees to respond to those requests, they impede customers from obtaining the essential information they are entitled to under federal law,” the CFPB wrote in the official announcement, which was also released Wednesday. The agency is planning to release a separate rule that would force banks to make switching institutions easier, by requiring the sharing of information at the request of the consumer.

snip