[screen 1]
This may seem overly semantic but if we want to make policy surrounding disinformation it is very important to know what it is.
As the field has evolved multiple definitions have emerged of what disinformation is. The most common definition of disinformation is false information deliberately intended to deceive its audience. Misinformation is when false information is spread without the intent to deceive.
So wait how the hell do we know the intent of someone online?
[screen 2]
Unless you are in someone's head or in the room with them when they make a plan to deceive people it is very difficult to establish intent. Guessing the intent of an actor spreading disinformation online is often a matter of guesswork for analysts based on the evidence gathered.
[screen 3]
Based on the content analysts can try to assess what the intent is. As an example if someone says "cereal is made of insects" they might have a variety of incentives. They could have financial motives if they sell a competitive product to breakfast cereal. They may be a state actor trying to create doubt in an adversary state's food safety bureau. They may be just lying for the fun of it!
[screen 4]
For intent analysts need to gave a wealth of evidence about who is trying to spread the false information and what the false information is. Often assigning intent is done as a confidence level (eg. we are reasonably certain X is meant to...)
[screen 5]
Okay, so disinformation is false information spread with the intent to deceive. We've covered how they look at intent but what about the most important part?
How do we say what is false?
[screen 6]
To address whether something is false some public health researchers went with the definition "information that is contrary to the epistemic consensus of the scientific community regarding a phenomenon". This is a fine definition for public health as most health topics have scientists who have weighed in, but what about topics where there is no "epistemic consensus"?
[screen 7]
In general, facts in science are based on events that are repeatable. In other areas of life fact is usually established in reference to a source (eg. a witness, an expert, a piece of evidence). Journalists and Intelligence officers are in the business of trying to tell what is true or false and they both rely extensively on combing through different sources to verify information.
[screen 8]
Defining further what is a fact quickly gets into epistemology and we don't have time for that. What is important is that for most people fact relies on source, and belief in a source requires trust.
