When “Fact-Checking” Fails: FEMA’s Political Fallout Puts Misinformation Police Under the Microscope

Dan Frieth — Mon, 11 Nov 2024 02:11:53 +0000

(Reclaim The Net)—The revelation that a FEMA employee instructed relief workers to bypass homes displaying support for Donald Trump during the aftermath of Hurricane Milton has substantiated at least some concerns that were initially dismissed as “misinformation” by several Democratic lawmakers and mainstream media outlets, including the New York Times who described suggestions that relief workers were “neglecting areas that had voted for Republicans” as “false” in a fact check.

This incident sheds light on the broader implications of the fight against online “misinformation,” particularly how premature labeling of claims can potentially suppress legitimate grievances and criticisms that later prove to have been based on some truth, something that happened often in 2020 and the Covid era.

The controversy surrounding a FEMA employee who allegedly directed a relief team to ignore homes displaying support for then-Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has sparked outrage and demands for a thorough investigation by legislators. As first reported by The Daily Wire, the employee, who has now been fired, instructed team members to bypass these homes, an action condemned by FEMA administrator Deanne Criswell as a “clear violation of FEMA’s core values & principles to help people regardless of their political affiliation.”

Criswell’s confirmation of the dismissal came through a post on X, following online reports about the employee’s conduct. While she didn’t specify which hurricane’s relief efforts were affected, ABC News and The New York Times reported it was during the aftermath of Hurricane Milton in Florida. This hurricane struck shortly after the catastrophic Hurricane Helene.

The rush to curb the spread of misinformation online is a top priority for many pro-censorship platforms and legacy institutions claiming to protect public discourse from false narratives. However, this incident exemplifies the complexities and risks inherent in these efforts. Initially, the claims regarding any of FEMA’s discriminatory practices were quickly categorized as baseless and part of an online misinformation campaign. This not only stifled debate but potentially delayed the scrutiny necessary to uncover and address any wrongdoing.

Inside the Push for Police-Run “Misinformation” Units

Didi Rankovic, Reclaim The Net — Mon, 04 Nov 2024 09:16:00 +0000

(Reclaim The Net)—Lexipol, a private consultancy geared towards providing services to law enforcement in the US, has come up with a recommendation to law enforcement to set up a “Misinformation/Disinformation Unit.”

A piece published on the company’s platform, Police1.com, asks its client police departments whether they are “prepared (for) the battle against mis/disinformation.”

Coming from Lexipol, this is no ordinary question, as the firm is said to have contracts with more than 8,000 law enforcement agencies, and is consequently considered to be a key player in what is known as “privatized police policymaking.”

According to Lexipol’s own statements, its reach in March 2020 extended to 8,100 agencies that used the company’s services and manuals (a year earlier, reports said that these agencies were located across 35 US states).

From that position, Lexipol is now making recommendations to its “subscribers” in the law enforcement community to establish a unit that would not only tackle supposed misinformation and disinformation, but also “collaborate with tech companies and civil society organizations to develop early-warning systems and identify harmful content in real time.”

This can be read as brazen defiance of the ongoing efforts, including in the US Congress, to put an end to just such “collaboration” between private and government (here, law enforcement) entities – investigated in one instance as government-Big Tech collusion.

But Lexipol’s write-up plays on fears that it is “disinformation” that might increase public hostility toward police officers and put them at greater risk.

The kind of disinformation breeding hostility Lexipol has in mind may not be exactly the same as that of many police officers, however. The company mentions what are at this point “soft targets,” at least to a certain brand of political and media thinking in the US – Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea – as somehow an example of that domestic law enforcement, too, might be harmed by disinformation, and what to do about it.

With the scaremongering in place, Police1 promotes the well-established narratives: online speech needs to be “protected” from the dangers of AI, and this should be done by the police employing “proactive strategies.”

What is recommended to these state entities is not really different from what the current US authorities ask of social media, and media in general: in this case, it would be a unit, one “charged with identifying false information, fact-checking claims, and creating counter-narratives.”

If you’re tired of censorship and surveillance, subscribe to Reclaim The Net.

Misinformation – Freer Report

When “Fact-Checking” Fails: FEMA’s Political Fallout Puts Misinformation Police Under the Microscope

Inside the Push for Police-Run “Misinformation” Units