by Paula Stenström

We travel instantaneously all over the world in an enlightened nothingness. And yet we are never alone. Sometimes one almost feels that time has stood still. But of course it does not stand still. Time is really the only limitation. We are too slow. Much too slow.

REPORT

There is an indistinct murmuring in the back yard of the information society. A number of IT police stand there in a huddle whispering to each other about the latest bugging methods. We live in a fragile society. So we need to seize the moment. In a corner they are discussing concepts: Is it informational warfare or an information operation? Operation sounds nicer but it is still too military. This applies to everyone. We have to find a common language. Psychological activities; how does that sound? Millennial speculators paste up their posters: don’t travel, take out your savings, better to flee than to fight badly: but there are alternatives… A cry of joy from men in suits: hurry, a megaphone: Hello everyone! Report of a hacker attack against NATO. Suddenly things are happening. Is there anyone who knows any more? A number of reporters turn up, may we interview you, truth or falsehoods — what do the experts say? Out with the powder and glittering tiaras for the ladies: a film on the art of influence. But look out, behind the searchlights there is an army of gnomes that have found something new to live for in the shadow of the cold war.

NOW

Now in this flickering instant, bombs are raining down upon the Balkans and people are running about the corridors here on Riddarholmen. ‘True, there is an unequalled propaganda war going on. That’s perfectly obvious.’ One must be careful not to draw any overly hasty conclusions. From Berlin to Baghdad to Belgrade: truth is probably the first victim of war; that is something that we have learnt. But are the media better prepared this time? Judging by reporting in Sweden this would seem to be the case. Sources are quoted more frequently both in news-papers and on television. Sources that are frequently other media, which, if one is fortunate, also indicate their contacts. It should be the norm, a minimum demand that the public should have an opportunity to judge the information themselves. On the other hand: the news will not perhaps be as vital, not as direct nor as marketable. And how initiated can we be expected to be when all the parties continually package their stories and their pictures.

When politics are transmitted on the TV screen?

When the independent media are closed down?

When critical voices are silenced and embarrassing facts are drowned in the flow of the media?

When media warfare is in earnest?

UPDATE

Take it.

The development of IT influences society at all levels. When the authorities, organizations, business corporations and private people are linked to Intranet and Internet we all have the same access to the same information at the same time and are therefore linked together. The reverse side is our sensitivity to interruptions in the flow of information. Mutual dependence can create a domino effect: if information in a network is altered, falsified or eradicated at any level this is spread more widely and society as a whole risks being affected. The new technology is also of importance to the media which have become faster, more mobile and more wide-ranging. With satellites and global transmissions, news and information is transmitted in real time across all boundaries — mental as well as geographical. This gives rise to new possibilities and new vulnerabilities. Weaknesses that can be exploited. In Sweden so-called informational warfare has come to the fore on account of its technological aspects: computer hacking, viruses, Trojan horses, bugging, logic bombs, cracking, cyber warfare…

What is this information warfare? Isn’t war a special phenomenon? Or has it become a normal state of affairs? When does the information war break out in that case? I would rather ask about the reasons for war than about why peace occurs. Battles of the minds are by no means new. It is technology that has changed the face of this struggle. And it is certain that the information-technology revolution has not only led to a greater amount of information on offer, more choice and ‘direct democracy’ but also weak points which, in due course, may create problems for democracy. People are in general agreement thus far. But the technology also has consequences for the appearance of the information and its content. It would seem reasonable to suppose, for example, that the increased amount of information has even increased the extent of attempts to influence people’s opinions and behaviour through words, sounds and images.

FAVOURITE REPETED

Even if people complain about the flood of information and despite innumerable digs at the capitalistic media society, many people, strangely enough, equate propaganda with the mass manipulation of the dictatorships — which is something that seems exaggerated, undemocratic and unthink-able today (now that we understand the consequences). Such direction from above is surely no longer a possibility? One likes to suppose that one would never be influenced and fooled in the same way. Not people like us who live in the information society, in the done-to-death information society. When it comes to it, we have access to all the world’s information. This is not just true of those of us who have access to independent media and freedom of political activity and the right to wide-ranging factual and impartial information. Those foundations of democracy. We can say what we like, without thinking, to whom we like, in every conceivable manner. Just like that.

No, propaganda is hardly something new. For this reason it seems a little like a poor repeat to remind us of the fact that there are forces in the world that want to influence the way in which we eat, shop and vote. In a conflict these things become more obvious: whom shall we love and whom shall we hate? Probably there are many such forces at work today when everyone can make their voice heard. And it is certain that they have more and better channels for disseminating their message. It is now possible to spread propaganda in a new way at all levels of society — organizations and corporations, just as private persons can direct themselves to an entire nation or to chosen parts of it with propaganda. The waves of persuasion roll over us. It is my guess that there is more propaganda in the world than ever — a propaganda very carefully suited to its time and to its object. Now as then. (Will one get paid for a repeat performance?)

CYNICAL TRUTH

Surely it is more transparent nowadays. So it is not surprising that people make their apologies, faced with the millennium and all that. ‘Truth’ is an in thing. If you lose your credibility that is the end. So it is appropriate that the current information policy of NATO, both in the UK and the USA, is to keep as far as possible to ‘the truth and nothing but the truth’. But truth can hardly be other than truth with modifications. It is as diverse as the people on our earth. Back in the Second World War, the British consciously confessed to defeats in order to raise their credibility. And the technique is still used when necessity demands it. The murder of named Kosovan Albanian intellectuals that caught people’s attention was denied afterwards both in the international and Swedish media. No, no, OK we happened to bomb civilians. But this was not our fault. Even the journalists live off their reliability. For example, they now openly state that they have never previously had to rely so much on second-hand information in their reports.

Truth is, indeed, relative. A journalist who reported from Bosnia over a long period once explained to me: one has a cynical approach, which means, for example, that when you hear that there is a mass grave you react as follows: 1. Fly the flag, you have a story; 2. Flag at half-mast because how do you get there? And 3. Fly plague flag because this may be a fabrication. In spite of such raw cynicism many people were not aware of the sophisticated methods that were used to persuade journalists to persuade the public. Just as with Kuwait during the Gulf War, all the parties involved hired American public relations companies which were primarily directed at the international media. I wonder whether the cynicism is still as great.

PICTORIAL EVIDENCE

Reporters let themselves be fooled.

Journalists in the hands of the propaganda machine.

Media agitation — enemy of peace.

True, the self-righteous tone has been criticized but it re-emerges. ‘Surely you do not believe information emanating from Belgrade? Don’t you watch TV? Don’t you know anything? Certainly it is regrettable, but what precision…’

The powerful influence of pictures is well known. But it seems not to matter much that pictures are no longer (if they ever were) truer than words. That the photograph has played out its role as evidence that something really happened, has long been a fact in art. With digitalisation and the possibilities this affords for retouching and manipulating images there has been increasing discussion of such matters in journalistic circles. What happens when the photo lifts off from reality and starts to tell its own story? It is the picture editor’s, the photographer’s and the computer technician’s picture, their truth. But are we always aware that we are listening to their words? Even the choice of place and motif and, not least, the photographer’s own presence, affect the picture. And what photographer has not, at some time, said a word or two in order to arrange the photograph. ‘That’s right.’ ‘Thank you very much.’ ‘You’re a killer.’ ‘You really know how to act in front of a camera.’ The lighting, focus and flashes. Stories are coming in afterwards from the war in Bosnia about staged battles with the film cameras already in position in advance. Not to mention the invasion of Somalia. ‘This was not news, this was the simulation of news.’

NOW, AGAIN

And now? Have the media become more cautious with regard to the reliability of pictures? The supply is bigger than ever, the pressures greater and even Swedish television sends news 24 hours a day. Hours that have to be filled with moving pictures. With such competition it may not always be possible to say no thank you to finished material from public relations agencies and military sources. In the reporting from Kosovo we can see a regrettable repetition of the Gulf War: sketchily vague reports except as to the types of weapons employed. Detailed descriptions of military technology with Top Gun-inspired take-offs against the light that are edited together with something burning in what is claimed to be a strategic target with no civilians at risk. Colourful little maps with stars to mark the night’s bombings. These are pictorial compositions that serve their purpose for several parties: the media get their dose of drama and action, and the West, its show of strength; not exactly an accident. The newspapers are not necessarily better: the same photo is published with different picture credits: (picture of a bombed building) ‘Serbian aeroplane factory bombed, Serbian military base bombed’ or (picture of refugees): ‘look what the Serbs are doing’, ‘look what NATO is doing’.

BACKSTREET BOYS ARE BACK

And if the careful wordings at the right moment in the right channel together with the arranged picture say more about the real event? Is the information necessarily worse because it is directed or manipulated? Perhaps one should ask for substance. Whether there is substantial evidence. Whether the picture accords with reality. Do we have time for this? Or will this be something for the historians to tell the next generation?

Laying the foundations of a more meaningful democracy in the information society requires training in intellectual self-defence in order to protect oneself from manipulation and control. Blasé, passé. A public demonstration calmly cries: don’t trust anybody. Who even has time to notice? People will tell you whatever you’re going to listen to.

Cracker, hacker, cyber… the murmuring rises to a rapid exchange. Information warfare has become sought-after news and the commentators twitter delightedly on their media perches. Don’t wave your hands about so much. Time is running out — Camera — Action:

‘It was like this.’

‘No, it was like this.’

Translation William Jewson