There was initial criticism of all-news cable channels such as CNN for less-than-expected coverage of the Iranian election aftermath that poured into the streets of Tehran. When you tout wall-to-wall reporting on virtually any topic, you invite criticism.
The outpouring of information from Iran is a test of Internet-based communication systems -- Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, for example. From the Iranian test will come early signs as to the reliability of information and whether disinformation will seep into social networks.
Time magazine in its June 19 edition described the moment in Iran as "fast, free, chaotic. Twitter becomes the medium of Iran's movement."
The coming of age for tools used by millions of wired people to share tidbits on their every move, their latest video escapade or their daily/weekend/weekly travails took on an international flavor.
In the process, these social connecting methods shifted to the innards of the Pentagon and the ruling authorities in Iran, not so much to marvel at the technology but to figure out how to use it.
Appreciating the spontaneous combustion that can be generated on the social platforms, the governmental research appears to be focused as much on disinformation as on offering quick commands and simple, declarative news releases. That is where the problem begins, whether it is tweets from the streets of Tehran (supposedly) or some bureaucrat sitting in a basement office sending out bogus information.
How do an unknowing public and skeptical media determine truth vs. manipulation?
There were reports that Internet speeds slowed in Iran. Technology experts expressed concern that the slowness could assist the Iranian authorities in tracking the computer being used to transmit information.
The Wall Street Journal published a story that European contractors, who assisted in building the Iranian telecommunications backbone, also supplied the means to monitor digital transmissions. In a June 22 report, the newspaper quoted a spokesman with the joint venture that provided support to Iran as saying, "If you sell networks, you also, intrinsically, sell the capability to intercept any communication that runs over them."
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stated that the military must learn more about the new Internet-based communication. In congressional testimony, he cited the need to recruit more cyber-security personnel, essential for "the success of any war waged across cyberspace."
The newfound interest in and use of social networks means
they will never be the same. It also is a wake-up call for anyone who believes that simple postings on these systems are private
communications viewed only by those who are invited into the conversation. Whether the information was shared with an advertiser or monitored by the government, the Iranian election and the use of social networks are not-so-subtle reminders that many eyes are reading and watching.
And there has been little mention of whether the postings -- words and pictures -- are real or somewhat manipulated.
When the mainstream gatekeepers, the media, are removed or censored, the measure of accuracy falls into questionable hands. That is not to say that everyone is out for control, but it may suggest that framing of the messages and images does influence the public discussion and reaction.
Welcome to the cyber-world where everyone is watching, listening, reading, sharing and possibly eavesdropping.
To reach Tom Griscom, call (423) 757-6472 or e-mail tgriscom@timesfreepress.com.
Or login with:
New Account