Duval Times

Vice Chairman Marco Rubio (R-FL) of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence delivered opening remarks during a hearing on the responsibilities of U.S. technology companies to help secure the nation from foreign influence operations in the 2024 elections.

“I think it’s important to understand what our policies are today in terms of identifying what is disinformation—what is actually generated by foreign adversary—versus the amplification of a pre-existing belief in America, which has left a lot of people in a position of being labeled collaborators when, in fact, they just hold views that on that one issue happen to align with what some other country hopes we believe as well. I’m very interested to learn what our internal policies are—and our companies’—because I think it’s a minefield…” said Senator Rubio.

“This is a tricky and difficult topic because I think there are two kinds of things we’re trying to address.

“The first is generated disinformation. I think you’re going to describe some of those efforts today. That is some foreign adversary—Iran, China, Russia—creating or making something up and then amplifying it. They push it out there, and they hope people believe it. It’s actually something I remember giving a speech about back in 2018 or 2019, warning about AI-generated videos that were going to be the wave of the future in terms of trying to influence what people think and see. We’ve seen some of that already play out. That’s pretty straightforward.

“Let me tell you where it gets complicated. I use this as an example not because I generally agree with it but because I think it’s an important example—there are people in the United States who believe that perhaps we shouldn’t have gotten involved with Ukraine or shouldn’t have gotten involved in the conflict in Europe. Vladimir Putin also happens to believe that and hopes that we will conclude that. There is someone out there saying something that, whether you agree with them or not, is a legitimate political view that’s pre-existing. Now some Russian bot decides to amplify the views of an American citizen who happens to hold those views. The question becomes, is that disinformation? Or misinformation? Is that an influence operation because an existing view is being amplified?

“It’s easy to say just take down the amplifiers. But the problem is, it stigmatizes the person whose view it is. The accusation is that that person isn’t simply holding a view; they’re holding the same view that Vladimir Putin happens to have on that one topic or something similar to what he has. As a result, they themselves must be an asset. That’s problematic.

“It’s complicated. Recall that in 2020—this is now well-known—there was Hunter Biden’s laptop story [about it] in The New York Post, and 51 former—I say former because I have people calling me all the time saying ‘intelligence officers,’ these are former[s]—intelligence officials went out and said ‘This has all of the attributes of a Russian disinformation campaign.’ As a result, The New York Post who posted the original story had their story censored and taken down, their account locked. There was a concerted effort on the basis of that letter to silence a media outlet in the United States on something that actually turned out not to be Russian disinformation even though I imagine the Russians wanted to spread that story—they might have amplified it—but it also happened to be factual.

“We know based on the letter from Meta's CEO Mark Zuckerberg during COVID-19 pandemic government pressured him into censoring certain views he later expressed regret about agreeing with some requests . There are people here whose accounts got locked or canceled for questioning mask efficacy . Dr Fauci agreed masks weren't full solution .

“The lab leak theory , at one time considered conspiracy flat-out lie , now intelligence agencies say it's likely natural occurring equally possible

“This tricky minefield trickier now Russia still leading others pursuing such actions . We should expect Iran getting into this business already active Chinese similarly active North Korea friendly states influencing US public opinion preferences

“I think understanding current policies crucial distinguishing genuine foreign adversary-created disinformation versus amplifying pre-existing beliefs labeling innocent individuals collaborators aligning certain issues coincidentally shared by foreign entities interests dangerous sowing discord flirting.”