The Disinformation Project (DP) is aptly named and, if Chantelle Baker is an indicator of public push-back against Kate Hannah and her posse of disinformation experts, the DP should seriously consider packing up and leaving town because their disinformation days are numbered when they do not survive legal scrutiny.
Chantelle Baker on X 25 September 2024:
I recently sued @nzherald for defamation alongside Kate Hannah, a few weeks ago they offered a significant sum to settle. I accepted and then launched a second suit, this one far bigger, against @NZStuff and Kate Hannah for defaming me in Fire & Fury. The constant lies and…
— Chantelle (@ChantelleBakerr) September 25, 2024
The DP defines disinformation as “false information shared with the intent to cause harm” and then goes on to claim “48 per cent of New Zealanders see false information every day”. This is a misleading statement.
False information encompasses a wide range of information that at the time of publication might be incomplete information, misguided information or simply inaccurate information carelessly collated and shared without any intent to deliberately cause harm.
Does the DP regard political propaganda as false information or disinformation?
Donald Trump uses the term “fake news” when MSM reproduces small clips from his public addresses without the context in which the statements were made or claiming a context Trump to which was not referring.
Who is the perpetrator of disinformation or false information – Trump for making the statements or MSM for reproducing clips out of context?
The subject matter addressed by the DP concerns fringe elements of NZ society – trans and bisexual communities, the Jewish and Muslim communities – but is of little significance to the wider population.
The DP’s latest two reports (which are not recent) on their website are:
“Cancellation of multiple LGBTQ+ library events shows the harmful impact of disinformation” Tuesday 26 March, referencing “online hatred toward LGBTQA communities particularly trans and non-binary people”.
“White Paper: Opportunism and Polarisation” November 2023, referring to “Aotearoa New Zealand’s disinformation ecologies related to violence and conflict in Palestine and Israel between 7–23 October.”
Disregarding the accuracy or otherwise of the content of these two reports, why doesn’t the DP investigate subjects relevant to the wider community, such as climate change and the Covid pandemic?
The DP takes a close look at social media platforms, which they call an “online ecosystem”, but show no interest in MSM platforms. Is this a classic case of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’?
Oxford defines “disinformation ecology” as “a series of studies looking into the situations and reasons why people choose not to obtain information that could be of benefit to them”.
The DP was established during Covid, claiming, “Over the last four years Aotearoa has experienced growth of misleading or harmful information being deliberately spread. This is called disinformation and it’s having serious impacts on our society.”
And that, folks, is the reason the DP has tunnel vision. Appointed during the Ardern regime, presumably to bolster MSM statements with expert opinion from an organisation designed to endorse the government narrative, they are completely useless at unbiased analyses of more relevant subject matter on MSM news platforms.
The DP focus is on social media – the best of which is X because it promotes debate and discussion, which MSM frequently does not and, in fact, prevents public comment on articles.
Both MSM and the DP cannot be relied on for accuracy, and that is surely what disinformation is all about.
