Thanks Barrack, appreciated. So just to be clear, other than the policy briefs, there is no data that shows what nationwide public awareness programs have been run to sensitize the country on fake news, in which counties, when, number of people reached, the demographic groupings of recipients, perceived effectiveness, and follow up / continuity plans?
I am not knocking what has already been done – its really good efforts by stakeholders and deserves to be applauded, just saying that the *stakes are rising exponentially* – thanks to increased sophistication of fake news (via AI / deep fakes) – hence the need to push for a more strategic and coordinated approach.
What do you think?
On Tuesday, January 29, 2019, 9:38:25 AM GMT+3, Barrack Otieno <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Hi Patrick ,
Let me correct you first, there is no defensiveness and there is
nothing sensitive the problem is your approach which i find wanting
and i will explain why:
1. A lot of efforts have been made my different stakeholders. What
appears disjointed to you might be \’jointed to someone else\’. In a a
multistakeholder forum the cardinal rule is to respect other peoples
efforts whether they measure up to your expectations or not.
2. There are Policy Briefs on this subject on the KICTANET website on
this subject please read the documents. Please check out websites of
the partner organizations that i referred to for more content.
3. With regard to the National Strategy or any other areas where there
are gaps, feel free to initiate a proposal, you can crowdsource ideas
from the listserve.
Again in a multi stakeholder environment , every opinion or suggestion
should be respected.
For avoidance of doubt this are my own views.
On 1/29/19, Patrick A. M. Maina <email@example.com> wrote:
> Barrack, Is there data / reports that shows what public awareness programs
> were implemented, their cumulative reach, the perceived effectiveness and
> recommendations for follow up / continued action plans? Where can it be
> accessed pleased?
> What you are listing looks like disjointed efforts that don\’t seem to be
> strategically coordinated. Is there a national strategy for handling the
> risk of fake news?
> I seem to have accidentally touched a sensitive area… why am I sensing
> On Tuesday, January 29, 2019, 8:59:39 AM GMT+3, Barrack Otieno
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
> It appears to me that your feedback is based on assumptions. As i
> indicated , KICTANet has been working with a number of local and
> International Stakeholders to address the issues you have raised. If
> you dig through the list archives you will rich conversations on the
> subject matter in the last two years . Locally KICTANet has worked
> with the NCIC (Kaparo Commission) which has the mandate of dealing
> with hatespeech, fake news etc. Other stakeholders thenetwork has
> worked with include BAKE (Bloggers Association of Kenya), CIPIT
> (Centre for Intellectual Property and IT based at Strathmore
> University, Parliamentrary Commitee on ICT and Innovation under the
> leadership of Hon Kisang to name but a few (LAst year during the Kenya
> IGF the parliamentary commitee and the Senate sent more than 5
> legislators to participate in Internet Governance deliberations).
> Internationally KICTAnet has partnered with Paradigm Initiative which
> hosts the annual Digital Inclusion Forum, CIPESA which hosts the
> annual Internet Freedom Forum and Association of Progressive
> Communications. We have a number of Policy briefs on this subject
> matter. A number of listers have also been involved in this efforts
> which have been impactfull even though they appear small. I hope they
> can chip in.
> On 1/29/19, Patrick A. M. Maina <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Thanks Barrack,
>> That is a good start but I am afraid it sounds woefully inadequate.
>> Fake news has greatest impact in \”mashinani\” (grassroots) i.e. low income
>> areas, informal settlements, remote villages, and upcountry as they are
>> highly volatile and prone to ethnic/political mobilisation.
>> What percentage of the 45 Million Kenyans were reached? Was data
>> in all counties on the state of fake-news awareness (before / after) to
>> gauge program effectiveness?
>> Then there are the new developments… What percentage of Kenyans know
>> deep fakes (AI synthesised fake videos)?
>> Public awareness needs a coordinated *mass media* and *grassroots*
>> It has to be sustained for several years until fully absorbed into the
>> education curriculum.
>> KICTANET cannot afford to do this and should not be the driver. Public
>> awareness for National Security is squarely a *Government responsibility*
>> with KICTANET role being to push/lobby for meaningful approach / action
>> The other area that KICTANET can push is for the legislation of technical
>> measures to reduce virality potential of fake news. Platforms must be
>> partially responsible for damages/losses caused by fake news just as
>> publishers are held responsible for publishing libel, for example.
>> Let\’s remember most of these global platforms have very little stake in
>> security or stability (they don\’t have significant physical ties to
>> Kenya/Africa that would truly make them care e.g. how many of the top
>> FB/Telegram/Twitter shareholders live in Kenya with their families?). If
>> Kenya burns, they will simply relocate their skeleton team to another
>> country in Africa and continue business as usual.
>> Worse, multinational Big tech are notorious tax avoiders, profit
>> repatriators and economic disruptors (they *steal* valuable attention
>> our paid workers – diverting millions if not BILLIONS of shillings away
>> our economy – it\’s amazing employers haven\’t sued social media platforms
>> yet!) and , so the risks some of them add to society is grossly
>> disproportionate to their economic contribution. This is why EU
>> UK), India, Singapore, China and Russia are getting tough on them!
>> On Tuesday, January 29, 2019, 7:51:26 AM GMT+3, Barrack Otieno
>> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Hi Patrick,
>> You may not have joined the list but KICTANet and other local partners
>> as CIPIT , BAKE and the NCIC have made efforts to sensitize the Public on
>> Fake News. KICTANet in partnership with NCIC actually hosted a workshop
>> the Stanley Hotel on Fake news in September 2017. Another policy brief
>> touching on information controls was produced just before the
>> can find the Policy briefs on the KICTAnet website.
>> On 29 Jan 2019 06:11, \”Patrick A. M. Maina via kictanet\”
>> <email@example.com> wrote:
>> I pray that Government officials on this list will take the AFP article
>> below seriously. The technologies described in the article are real and
>> could be used to radicalize ignorant youth or to spark chaos e.g. during
>> political transition events.
>> These are REAL RISKS I believe that need to be addressed PROACTIVELY –
>> before we get into the election (or even referendum cycle).
>> \”A well-timed and thoughtfully scripted deepfake or series of deepfakes
>> could tip an election, spark violence in a city primed for civil unrest,
>> bolster insurgent narratives about an enemy\’s supposed atrocities, or
>> exacerbate political divisions in a society. With believable fake videos
>> circulation, people can choose to believe whatever version or narrative
>> they want, and that\’s a real concern.\”
>> – Professors Danielle Citron – University of Maryland and Robert Chesney
>> University of Texas
>> Scientists are working on technologies to detect deep fakes – but it may
>> be reliable (or available in Africa). Detection may also not be a
>> solution after a video goes viral and leads to chaos.
>> \”It\’s more important to disrupt the process than to analyse the videos.
>> important way to deal with deepfakes is to INCREASE PUBLIC AWARENESS,
>> people more skeptical of what used to be considered incontrovertible
>> – Professor Siwei Lyu – State University of New York at Albany
>> TECH BREAK: Misinformation woes could multiply with \’deepfake\’
>> | | |
>> | |
>> TECH BREAK: Misinformation woes could multiply with \’deepfake\’
>> Deepfake videos are becoming more sophisticated due to advances in
>> artificial intelligence.
>> kictanet mailing list
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet
>> Facebook: www.facebook.com/KICTANet/
>> Unsubscribe or change your options at
>> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform
>> people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and
>> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT
>> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and
>> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors
>> online that you follow in real life: respect people\’s times and
>> share knowledge, don\’t flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do
>> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
> Barrack O. Otieno
> Skype: barrack.otieno
> PGP ID: 0x2611D86A