Substitute while the actions of the article are loading
On the morning of 27 April, the Ministry of Homeland Security announced the establishment of the first disinformation management council with the stated aim of “coordinating the fight against disinformation related to internal security”. The Biden administration has elected Nina Jankovic, a prominent figure in the fight against disinformation and extremism, as the board’s executive director.
In appointing 33-year-old Jankovic to head the newly formed council, the administration selected someone with extensive experience in the field of disinformation, which is emerging as an urgent and important issue. The author of How to Be a Woman Online and How to Lose the Information War, her career has included work in a number of non-partisan think tanks and non-profit organizations, and has included work focused on strengthening democratic institutions. Within the small community of disinformation researchers, her work was well appreciated.
But within hours of the news of her appointment, Jankovic was put in the spotlight by the forces to which she dedicated her career. The board itself and DHS have been criticized for both their somewhat sinister name and the scarce details of a specific mission (Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said he “could have done a better job of saying what was and what wasn’t”). but Jankovic was the target of the harshest attacks, and her role was misrepresented as she became a major target on the right-wing internet. She has been the subject of a relentless flurry of harassment and abuse, while unverified misrepresentations of her work continue to go viral.
On May 1st, Interior Minister Alejandro Mayorkas responded to critics who called the department’s new initiative a violation of freedom of expression. (Video: The Washington Post)
Now, just three weeks after its announcement, the Disinformation Management Council has been “paused”, according to many DHS officials, limiting one week to decisions that have changed since the story was reported. On Monday, DHS decided to close the board, according to many people familiar with the situation. By Tuesday morning, Jankovic had prepared a letter of resignation in response to the dismissal of the board.
But on Tuesday night, Jankovic was drawn into an emergency conversation with DHS officials, who gave her the choice to stay, even when the department was suspended due to the reaction she faced, according to many people familiar with the call. DHS working groups focusing on false, misinformation and false information have been discontinued. The board may still be closed pending review by the Internal Security Advisory Board; Jankovic assesses his position in the department.
“Nina Jankovic has been subjected to unjustified and vicious personal attacks and physical threats,” a DHS spokesman told The Post in a statement. “In congressional hearings and media interviews, the secretary has repeatedly defended her as highly qualified and stressed the importance of the department’s disinformation work, and it will continue to do so.
Jankovic has not spoken publicly about her position since the day it was announced.
Jankovic’s experience is an excellent example of how the right-wing Internet works when far-right influencers try to identify a target, present a story, and then repeat misrepresentations on social media and websites in order to discredit and attack anyone who seeks to provoke them. It also shows what happens when institutions do not respond effectively when faced with these attacks.
Those familiar with the board’s internal work, including DHS and Capitol Hill staff, as well as disinformation experts, say Jankovic is set to fail by an administration that is unsure of its communications and unprepared to counter coordinated online campaign against her.
Just hours after Jankovic tweeted about his new job, far-right influencer Jack Posobets posted tweets accusing the Biden administration of creating a “Ministry of Truth.” Posobiec’s 1.7 million followers quickly took action. By the end of the day, there were at least 53,235 Twitter posts mentioning the Disinformation Management Council, many citing Jankovic by name, according to a report by Advance Democracy, a non-profit non-profit organization that conducts research of public interest. In the days that followed, that number skyrocketed.
The board was set up to study best practices in combating the harmful effects of misinformation and to help DHS counter viral lies and propaganda that could threaten internal security. Unlike George Orwell’s 1984 Ministry of Truth, which became a humiliating comparison point, neither the board nor Jankovic had any power or ability to declare what was true or false, or to force ISPs, platforms for social media or public schools to take action against certain types of speech. In fact, the council itself did not have the power or authority to make any operational decisions.
“The purpose of the board is grossly mischaracterized; there will be no police speech, “said a DHS spokesman. “On the contrary, its focus is to ensure that freedom of speech is protected.”
Posobiec’s early tweets shaped the story, and Jankovic was positioned as the main target. Republican lawmakers repeated Posobets’ footage and expanded it in front of their audience. U.S. Senate nominee and Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmidt and attorney Andrew C. Clyde (R-Ga.) Posted similar tweets on Posobiec. Former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabard (D-Hawaii) also posted a video echoing Posobets’ statements.
The week after the announcement, approximately 70 percent of Fox News’s one-hour segments mentioned either Jankovic or the board, with reporters often making fun of the board as the “Ministry of Truth,” according to Advance Democracy. The Fox News report was mentioned in some of the most popular posts on Facebook and Twitter criticizing Jankovic.
Dozens of websites, including Breitbart, Post Millennial, Daily Caller and the New York Post, have begun digging into Jankovic’s previous social media posts and publishing articles to generate controversy. Some simply mocked her, mocking her for parodying a Mary Poppins song to talk about misinformation. In another case, a play in which Jankovic sings a popular song in the musical theater about a man’s desire to become rich and powerful was misrepresented to suggest that Jankovic herself is seeking money and power and will sleep with men to get it. .
As this online campaign unfolded, DHS and the Biden administration struggled to counter repeated attacks.
Over the weekend, after her hiring was announced, Interior Minister Alejandro Mayorkas sought to clarify the board’s mission and defend Jankovic’s credentials. He conducted a series of interviews for television news and testified for the board during hearings in the House and Senate. Jankovic’s strong defense was noticeably lacking online, where attacks against her were concentrated. White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki debunked false allegations about the board during two news briefings, citing Jankovic as an “online disinformation expert,” but that had little effect on the growing campaign against her.
“These slanders, directed by unscrupulous, right-wing actors against a highly qualified expert and against efforts to better combat human trafficking and domestic terrorism, are disgusting,” White House Deputy Spokesman Andrew Bates told The Post on Tuesday.
While she withstood the attacks, Jankovic herself was told to remain silent. After trying to defend herself on Twitter on April 27, DHS officials told her not to make any more public statements, according to many people close to her.
Democrats, lawmakers and other administration officials trying to defend Jankovic were caught outright. Administration officials did not inform the relevant Congress staff and committees before the board began, as well as members of Congress who expressed interest in the disinformation, did not receive a detailed explanation of how it would work. A fact sheet released by DHS on May 2 did nothing to quell the outrage that erupted on the Internet, nor did it clarify much of what the board or Jankovic’s role in it will actually do.
DHS employees were also disappointed. With the department’s termination of interdepartmental working groups focused on misinformation, misinformation and misinformation, some officials said it was an overreaction that gave too much confidence to unscrupulous participants. A 15-year-old veteran of the department, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment publicly, called DHS’s response to the controversy “mind-boggling.” “I have never seen the department react like that before,” he said.
Textbook disinformation campaign
Experts say that right-wing misinformation and defamation campaigns regularly follow the same book, and that it is crucial for the public and institutional leaders, especially in government, media and education, to better understand how these cycles work.
Campaigns invariably begin with identifying a person who is characterized as a villain. Attacking faceless institutions is difficult, so the figure (almost always a colored woman or man) turns out to serve as his face. It is often irrelevant whether that person has actual authority within that institution. By discrediting those who are forced to represent the institutions they seek to overthrow, they discredit the institution itself.
Harassment and damage to reputation are at the heart of an attack strategy. Institutions often treat reputational damage and online attacks as a matter of staff that unfortunate employees simply have to bear quietly.
Jankovic’s case is …
Add Comment