Renée DiResta: Navigating the Murky Waters of Online Propaganda and Disinformation
Renée DiResta, a researcher at Georgetown University and formerly of Stanford University’s Internet Observatory, has spent years studying the intricate web of online manipulation and harassment. Her work took a deeply personal turn when she found herself targeted by the very disinformation campaigns she diligently investigated. This experience culminated in the closure of the Internet Observatory and spurred DiResta to write Invisible Rulers: The People Who Turn Lies Into Reality, a book that exposes the power of anonymous online propagandists in shaping public opinion. Drawing on her firsthand experience, DiResta details how a complex interplay of influencers, algorithms, and devoted audiences fuels the spread of these often-damaging narratives. Her book also recounts her earlier battles against anti-vaccine misinformation in 2014, highlighting the deeply entrenched nature of such beliefs.
In a candid interview, DiResta discussed the disconcerting experience of being a target of baseless legal attacks by allies of a prominent political figure. She described the two-year ordeal as a waste of time and resources, lamenting the drain on finances and energy as she and her colleagues fought to defend themselves against unsubstantiated claims. DiResta expressed concern about the chilling effect such tactics might have on other institutions combating disinformation, emphasizing the importance of academic freedom and the need for Congress to protect research centers from politically motivated attacks. She expressed skepticism about Silicon Valley leaders’ attempts to cultivate relationships with influential figures, seeing it as a predictable business strategy aimed at protecting their investments and ensuring favorable regulatory environments.
DiResta’s work emphasizes the insidious nature of online propaganda, which she argues goes beyond simple misinformation. She prefers the term “propaganda” because it acknowledges that these campaigns exploit existing biases and cater to pre-existing identities rather than simply presenting false information. DiResta points to the anti-vaccine movement as a prime example, explaining how these messages resonate with specific groups not through factual arguments but by tying vaccination to political identity. This, she argues, makes it resistant to factual correction. Simply providing accurate information is often ineffective, as the belief is rooted in identity and belonging rather than objective truth.
The internet’s structure, according to DiResta, contributes significantly to this problem. Online platforms have become increasingly niche-oriented, fostering communities based on shared identities and creating fertile ground for influencers to thrive. These influencers, often presenting themselves as ordinary people, build trust within their communities and disseminate narratives that reinforce existing beliefs. This blurring of the lines between news, entertainment, and opinion, DiResta contends, makes it difficult for individuals to discern credible information from manipulative propaganda.
The declining transparency of social media platforms has further complicated the fight against disinformation, DiResta notes. She argues that the spread of conspiracy theories around censorship has led platforms to reduce the amount of data they share with researchers and journalists, hindering efforts to understand and counter these campaigns. The reliance on regulations like the European Digital Services Act underscores the challenges faced by researchers in accessing crucial data. The paradox of platform owners engaging in close relationships with government figures while decrying censorship highlights the hypocrisy and strategic use of such narratives, DiResta asserts. These figures, she argues, are unconcerned with accusations of hypocrisy because their actions ultimately serve their interests.
DiResta describes the current information landscape as a "cinematic universe" of heroes and villains, where narratives are carefully crafted to reinforce predetermined roles. She recounts her own experience as a target of such a campaign, highlighting how shifting goalposts and complicit media outlets perpetuate false accusations even after they are debunked. This dynamic, she explains, makes it incredibly difficult to escape the assigned role of “villain” once targeted.
DiResta observes a stark contrast between the right and left in their approaches to online communication. She points to the right-wing media’s adeptness at coordinated messaging and repetition, creating a powerful echo chamber that reinforces narratives and builds a strong sense of shared identity. The left, she argues, lacks this level of coordination and often finds itself competing within its own ecosystem, hindering its ability to counter right-wing propaganda effectively.
DiResta emphasizes the need for left-leaning institutions to adopt more effective strategies, such as networked counter-speech, which involves coordinated messaging across multiple platforms and influencers. She notes that while the left certainly engages in propaganda, its methods are less structured and less effective than those of the right. She highlights the challenges faced by left-leaning figures navigating the fragmented online landscape and the complexities of engaging with niche audiences whose trust is paramount to influencers.
The attraction of contrarian and often inflammatory rhetoric is also a central theme in DiResta’s analysis. She notes how certain topics, particularly those that generate controversy and resonate with specific groups, can be exploited for attention and influence. The rise of anti-“woke” sentiment, discussions about cultural wars, and even the appropriation of topics like UFOs demonstrate how certain narratives are strategically deployed to appeal to specific audiences.
DiResta concludes with the unsettling question of how to break the cycle of disinformation and return to a more reality-based political discourse. She cites examples of prominent figures questioning the anti-vaccine rhetoric, offering a glimmer of hope. However, she also acknowledges the deep entrenchment of these beliefs within certain groups, making it uncertain when or how this "fever" will break. The challenge, as DiResta articulates, is to find a path back to a political discourse grounded in facts and evidence, rather than one driven by conspiracy theories and manufactured outrage.
