so the puzzle, the question is really, how do these organizations that value discipline, orderly conduct, and also an intelligence collection traditionally values, factual, very factual reporting, and careful language of estimative probabilities. All this runs counter to a culture of forging and running disinformation operations. So it appears that they internally needed to find people who had high risk appetites, as well as the really artistic, almost artistic, the mindset of a creative writer, who really has to study his or her subject first and then understand how a specific culture works, and then start writing and sort of penetrating it, and ultimately publishing something under false pretenses that has a corrosive effect. Well, so there are many contemporary questions to explore in this conversation, but before we do that, I think it might be helpful to actually go through some historical examples, because in fact, the book is a history of disinformation. And actually, that (16/43)
You are viewing a single comment's thread from: