Journalists Do More Than Report: The Covid Determination
October 17, 2020
One of the DarkCyber research team alerted me to “Facebook Greatest Source of Covid-19 Disinformation, Journalists Say.” That’s the factoid, according to the “real” journalists at a British newspaper.
The main point of the write up may be an interesting way to send this message, “Hey, we are not to blame for erroneous Rona info.” I hear the message.
The write up states:
The majority of journalists covering the pandemic say Facebook is the biggest spreader of disinformation, outstripping elected officials who are also a top source, according to an international survey of journalism and Covid-19.
The survey prompted another Guardian article in August 2020.
Let’s assume Facebook and the other social media high pressure data hoses are responsible for bad, weaponized, or just incorrect Rona info. Furthermore, let’s accept these assertions:
Journalism is one of the worst affected industries during the pandemic as hundreds of jobs have been lost and outlets closed in Australia alone. Ninety per cent of journalists surveyed said their media company had implemented austerity measures including job losses, salary cuts and outlet closures.
The impression the write up creates in the malleable Play-doh of my mind is that journalists are no longer reporting the news. “Real” journalists are making the news, and it is about time!
The sample probably reflects the respondents reaction to the questions on the survey, which remain unknown to me. The survey itself may have been structured as a dark pattern. What better way to explain that bad things are happening to “real” journalists.
What’s interesting is that “real” journalists know that Facebook and other social media systems are bad.
One question, “How long has it taken “real” journalists to figure out the harsh realities of digital streams of users unfettered by internal or external constraints.
Maybe the news is: “It is too late.” Maybe the working hypothesis is that “better late than never”?
Stephen E Arnold, October 17, 2020
Work from Home: Stating the Obvious and a Newish Word
October 12, 2020
I read “Organizations Have Accrued Technical Debt in the Shift to Remote Work, and Now They Have to Face the Fallout.” Three facets of the article snagged my attention. The first was this observation attributed to a Security Awareness Advocate at KnowBe4, a information services firm:
“Many organizations have accrued a lot of technical debt, for lack of a better term, to get people working remotely,” said Malik. “They’ve enabled remote access to servers that they traditionally would never have given access to, or they might have relaxed some security rules. I heard of an organization that actually dropped 2FA to allow all of their employees to easily connect into the office, because they didn’t have enough resources to deploy 2FA to everyone, or train them up, or to deal with the number of tickets that would inevitably come in.
Okay, the obvious has been stated.
Second, the use of the phrase “technical debt” indicates that services firms want to make clear that taking one set of technologies and applying them to remote work has risks.
No kidding. News? Hardly. Reports from assorted cyber security companies have been pointing out that phishing has become a go-to mechanism for some time. A useful report is available from Interpol.
The third facet of the article was the use of the portmanteau “websem.” The coinage appears to be a combination of the word “webinar”, itself a modification of “seminar, and the now ubiquitous term “Web.”
Observations:
- Recycling Interpol data does not constitute an insight worthy of a consulting gig
- Whipping up jargon adds some froth to the Reddiwip analysis
Why not cite sources and use words WFH’ers will understand; for example, Zoom-eeting. Mammals braying, excitement, and snacks with toppings? The fallout? Plump targets for phishers.
Stephen E Arnold, October 12, 2020
After Decades of the Online Revolution: The Real Revolution Is Explained
October 9, 2020
Years ago I worked at a fancy, blue chip consulting firm. One of the keys to success in generating the verbiage needed to reassure clients was reading the Economist. The publication, positioned as a newspaper, sure looked like a magazine. I wondered about that marketing angle, and I was usually puzzled by the “insights” about a range of topics. Then an idea struck me: The magazine was a summarizer of data and verbiage for those in the “knowledge” business. I worked through the write ups, tried to recall the mellifluous turns of phrase, and stuff my “Data to Recycle” folder with clips from the publication.
I read “Faith in Government Declines When Mobile Internet Arrives: A New Study Finds That Incumbent Parties Lose Votes after Their Citizens Get Online.” [A paywall or an institutional subscription may be required to read about this obvious “insight.”] Readers of the esteemed publication will be launching Keynote or its equivalent and generating slide decks. These are often slide decks which will remain unfindable by an organization’s enterprise search system or in ineffectual online search systems. That may not be a bad thing.
The “new study” remains deliciously vague: No statistical niceties like who, when, how, etc. Just data and a killer insight:
A central (and disconcerting) implication is that governments that censor offline media could maintain public trust better if they restricted the internet too. But effective digital censorship requires technical expertise that many regimes lack.
The statements raise some interesting questions for experts to explain; for example, “Dictatorships may restore faith in governments.” That’s a topic for a Zoom meeting among one percenters.
Several observations seem to beg for dot pointing:
- The “online revolution” began about 50 years ago with a NASA program. What was the impact of those sluggy and buggy online systems like SDC’s? The answer is that information gatekeepers were eviscerated, slowly at first and then hasta la vista.
- Gatekeepers provided useful functions. One of these was filtering information and providing some aggregation functions. The recipient of information from the early-days online information systems was some speed up in information access but not enough to eliminate the need for old fashioned research and analysis. Real time is, by definition, not friendly to gatekeepers.
- With the development of commercial online infrastructure and commercial providers, the hunger or addiction to ever quicker online systems was evident. The “need for speed” seemed to be hard wired into those who worked in knowledge businesses. At least one online vendor reduces the past to a pattern and then looks at the “now” data to trigger conclusions. So much for time consuming deliberation of verifiable information.
The article cited above has discovered downstream consequences of behaviors (social and economic) which have been part of the online experience for many years.
The secondary consequences of online extend far beyond the mobile devices. TikTok exists for a reason, and that service may be one of the better examples of “knowledge work” today.
One more question: How can institutions, old fashioned knowledge, and prudent decision making survive in today’s datasphere? With Elon Musk’s implants, who will need a mobile phone?
Perhaps the next Economist write up will document that change, hopefully in a more timely manner.
Stephen E Arnold, October 9, 2020
Cyber Threat Intelligence Report
September 24, 2020
DarkCyber finds cyber-centric research interesting. We spotted a new report, current through June 30, 2020. The report costs about $1,600. The publisher / creator identifies 62 vendors, includes contact information, and details about each firm. For the $1,600, the information hungry buyer receives a 34 page report and — hang on to your hats — an Excel spreadsheet. One enthusiastic reviewer reports that vendors included in the report are:
Anomali
DarkOwl
Intsights
LookingGlass Cyber Solutions
Recorded Future acquired by Insight Partners in 2019
Sixgill (named after a type of fish)
SpyCloud
ZeroFOX
Factoids from the report include:
Funded companies had healthy growth despite the headwinds; for example, Sixgill almost doubled in size.
Headcount among the sample grew at an astounding three percent.
And revenue across the 62 companies, more than $500 million by December 31, 2020.
Want more information? Navigate to IT Harvest.
One minor point, DarkCyber could not rely on the firm’s blog posts through September 21, 2020. Here’s what was available in that service:
Yep, nothing. What’s that say about the firm’s attention to detail?
Stephen E Arnold, September 24, 2020
Efficiency: Modern Analytic Techniques Are Logical
September 21, 2020
I don’t pay much attention to writing about motion pictures. The title “Why Christopher Nolan Actually Blew Up A Real Plane For Tenet” was a bit of a baffler. I did not recognize the name “Christopher Nolan.” I knew the meaning of the word “tenet” but I had zero clue it was entertainment. When I looked him up, I did not recognize his cinematic masterpieces. Nevertheless, the premise of the essay was interesting:
Skip using a computer to fake blowing up a large airplane. But a 747 and just blow it up.
Interesting. Were there environmental costs? Were their additional safety related costs? Were there clean up costs? Were there additional legal costs associated with making sure that someone would have to pay if the whole deal went south? Maybe a post explosion maintenance worker catching on fire or just getting sick from breathing fumes?
Hey, breathing. What’s the big deal?
The write up does not address these questions, and my hunch is that expert cinema professionals think much about these problems even if some bright young sprout asked, “What happens if we screw up, kill a bunch of people, and maybe pollute the creek running next to the shoot?”
Hey, ducks and fish. Who cares? These folks are creating art for real people. Ducks? Or, “Hey, don’t rain on my parade” could well have been the response.
Thinking and acting efficiently is the way of the world among a certain cohort of professionals. If movie makers cannot ask, “How much will it cost if we screw this up?”, what other intellectual shortcuts have been taking place.
My hunch is a lot. Efficiency? Love it. Do large technology companies think in the manner of an esteemed, powerful creator of motion pictures? Yeah, good question.
Stephen E Arnold, September 21, 2020
Thought Leaders Thought Lead: Better Late Than Never
September 8, 2020
I read “Scale Digital Technologies to Thrive in New Reality: KPMG.” This document is what I would characterize as a “thought leader piece.” The idea is that consulting firms have to give the impression that their sales pitches are in step with most business thought just a tiny bit ahead. Then the thought leader becomes an expert on the subject and can use that perception to sell consulting work. The method has worked since the efficiency studies of Frederick Winslow Taylor and the Gnostic message of the buggy whip case study.
This particular blue chip consulting firm output tackles the importance of being digital by Oscar Obvious Wilde, who wears upscale casual clothing, has a family confident in its wealth and connections, and a day time TV star smile. What’s not to like?
The write up states:
Improved decision-making is the top criteria for investments in emerging technologies…More than 90 per cent of companies are investing across emerging technologies as enterprises believe more in combined use of emerging technologies.
I think this means invest to make better decisions. Don’t worry about silver bullet technologies. Combine technologies.
Let’s go back to “what’s not to like”.
Sticking or combining technologies together is not magnetic. Two magnets will either snap together or push one another away. Now dump 12 magnets on the table and push them together. What happens? That’s tough to predict, so one has to be prepared to run tests, then fit the data to a pattern.
Does that sound like a sure fire way to spend a lot of time without having a result on which one can depend?
Yep, that’s the purpose of being a thought leader. Sell time and services. Does the approach create improved decision making. Sometimes. The client learns to be less accepting of some experts’ pronouncements.
Transformation can be hard and digital ones can be harder if we are not bold to question the status quo. It is a reboot/reset moment for all of us. We either ride the wave or get drowned.
There is an alternative, particularly for firms which embraced digital solutions years ago. Another option is to stay out of the water. Not everyone wants to be a surfer writing big checks.
Stephen E Arnold, September 8, 2020
Windows and Its Fan Boys: Sound Problems Plague Podcast
September 4, 2020
At the gym yesterday, I was listening to a new to me podcast called Windows Central. The program focused on the two phones stuck together. About 15 mintues into the podcast, one of the experts on the program could not turn off sound from another program running on his Windows 10 computer. There was muttering; there were unhelpful suggestions from a co-host; and there was the sound of clicks and sighing. Most amusing was the fact that the expert could not figure out from whence the unwanted sound was coming. Ah, Windows 10.
But there is a fix for our intrepid Windows’ cheerleader. “PowerToys Now Lets You Mute Your Webcam or Microphone on Windows 10” provides a link to a free but experimental control that allegedly may have solved the expert’s quite shallow mastery of Windows 10. (I mean an expert who cannot mute sound communicates a great deal about “experts” and, of course, about the Byzantine, increasingly exciting Windows 10 operating system.)
I want to point out that the $0.99 codec for HEVC which I downloaded from the Windows Store (!) did not install. But that was a minor problem compared to forced updates that killed my printer not long ago. Yes, Microsoft is a JEDI knight, but the fancy engineering powering the system has some — how shall I phrase it — issues. What happens in a battle when the sound does not work on a JEDI powered laptop? Telepathy? Luke Skywalker suddenly appears?
And for experts who cannot figure out why two sound streams are playing on a podcast? That will be a boost for these wizards’ credibility. No, I don’t understand why I want two phones held together with a hinge.
And, no, I did not listen to the entire program. I mean an expert who cannot control his machine’s audio. Amazing stuff.
Stephen E Arnold, September 4, 2020
Blue Chip Black Eye?
September 2, 2020
DarkCyber spotted “Accenture India Staff to Face Brunt of Layoffs.” The write up reports:
Technology major Accenture is expected to lay off around 25,000 people or least 5% of its global workforce…
Interesting. The received wisdom in the consulting world of blue-chip firms is that when the economy goes down, consulting revenues go up.
Is this a black eye for Accenture’s sales executives or a signal that “received wisdom” may not work in the Rona Era?
Stephen E Arnold, September 2, 2020
McKinsey? Not Wonderful? What?
September 1, 2020
Our esteemed leader (who is now Lord Stephen E Arnold. Believe it or not.) used to be a management consultant. Although I have worked on his research team for more than eight years, I have no idea what he did or does. Every time we meet, he’s playing with his computers. Helpful, right?
What do management consultants do? Slate knows and reports that management consultants “sell what you’re buying, as opposed to what they’re selling” in the article “How McKinsey Helps Companies Avoid Responsibility.” At least the only management company that is following this modus operandi is McKinsey and Company. McKinsey and Company is a top blue chip management company and has been in business for almost a century.
Accounting professor James McKinsey founded his namesake company on basic accounting principles: use financial records to project future revenue and costs. This concept is standard today, but no one practiced it in 1926. McKinsey was selective about his client list and become legendary among top-tier clients. When Marvin Bower took over the company he added another mantra to the company: always putting clients’ interests above McKinsey’s.
In the 1950s, a new slew of problems arrived with the postwar economic boom and McKinsey took it upon themselves to help companies succeed even more, This included wading through middle management and telling companies to fire people if needed. McKinsey consultants are happy to be scapegoats for downsizing:
“‘And the McKinsey consultant who gives the manager that advice also gets to avoid having to feel responsible for putting people out of work. ‘If I’m working at McKinsey, when I decide to give the best professional advice I can, following the principles of integrity that McKinsey insists on for its workers, I don’t characterize myself as having fired 50,000 people,’ [Yale professor Daniel] Markovits explains. ‘What I’ve done is give the best professional advice that I can. And that’s a perfectly apt way to think about your life, but from a systematic or a structural perspective, it insulates everybody from responsibility for terrible outcomes.’”
This led to massive layoffs from the 1970s-1990s, but it did keep companies afloat and cemented the concept that a company’s only responsibility is to maximize the value of shares. McKinsey expanded into government and public sector work, including the Trump Administration, and foreign countries: China, Turkey, Russia, and South Africa, Saudi Arabia. McKinsey consultants advised corrupt regimes about “better business practices” that resulted in harming humans and quality of life.
McKinsey is always interested in serving their clients’ best interests, but it has dirtied their hands to the detriment of harming others. How evil is DarkCyber own Lord Stephen? He pays for lunch, but that may be his sole saving grace. (Yes, he wants to be called Lord Stephen. Maybe he will tell the team how he went from rural Kentucky to “lord”?
Whitney Grace, September 1, 2020
Silicon Valley Style Journalists Want to Be Digital Peter Druckers
August 27, 2020
I wrote about the New York Times’ journalists who wrote about one another. I suggested that these “real” news professionals were taking a short cut. Boy, I mischaracterized what was happening. The problem is escalating because Silicon Valley-style journalists want to be like Peter Drucker. The management guru had a Ph.D. and a knack for nailing trends. Perhaps his most timely today is the phrase “knowledge worker.” Today’s “real” journalists want to skip the Drucker trajectory of management by objectives and thought leadership over decades. The Silicon Valley journalists want to get right to it: Stories about technology to grand statements about the way life should be. Not just tech life, but life in general.
The most recent example, in my opinion, is “Why People Can’t Stand Tech Journalists: An Interview with Casey Newton.” Mr. Newton lit up my radar when he suggested that Jeff Bezos give a weekly speech to explain Amazon. After viewing the Congressional hearings, I am not confident Mr. Bezos knows what is going on at Amazon, but I know that a “real” journalist telling the world’s richest man is the journalistic equivalent of Google’s sense of entitlement.
Once again we have two “real” journalists talking to one another. And what do we learn?
The spine of the “real” journalists’ baseline assumption is, “People don’t like us.” Once again a big generalization created to make “real” journalists into underdogs. I noted this statement:
The tech press, I think, has done probably the best work of its life collectively over the past four years.
Let’s do a quick show of hands. Who thinks that this statement from the “real” journalist pundit person will resonate like Dr. Drucker’s knowledge worker or management by objectives phrases? Here’s the Sillycon Valley statement:
I’ve been thinking about what we’ve lost because everything is so noisy and spicy.
Memorable. Noisy and spicy. Like a budget quasi ethnic restaurant and its comidas?
Several observations:
- The merging of entitlement, social justice, and inside baseball produces information that in some ways is as destructive as the output of nation states seeking to influence behavior in the US
- The laziness of talking to someone in the next cubicle or while standing on line at Philz Coffee is evidence of a serious problem. Thought leadership does not flow from unsubstantiated opinions.
- Journalism, whether at the New York Times, the Murdoch outfits, or zippy Silicon Valley-type “real” news producers is becoming indistinguishable from the yammerings of mid-tier consulting firms and student who couldn’t get an “A” from Dr. Drucker.
That’s a less-than-positive situation in my view. Has Mr. Bezos attended to the demand that he give a weekly speech? The answer is, “No.”
Stephen E Arnold, August 27, 2020
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
