It is no secret that foreign actors (including Russian and Chinese military intelligence) are employing “active measures” to influence political changes in Western countries. Additionally, information operations are now a part or modern warfare, in much of the current conflicts.
The US military is interested in mapping these activities and developing countermeasures.
>...information operations are now a part or modern warfare...
Information/disinformation operations have been a part of warfare since... ...forever it seems. It is - certainly - nothing new. The medium has merely changed and that's what important to the staging of the front[s], as it were.
You should pick up a copy of Eric Frank Russell's WASP[0], if you haven't read it before. It's a very good read in this area.
It is their main business. It has always been the first step before war against other country to support revolts and popular movements.
Sometimes, countries protect themselves using revolution in other countries. For example Lenin wanted to make the revolution in Germany, as they believed Russia was not prepared for revolution. Lenin was captured in Germany and released with the condition of not trying it again on Germany(or he would be shooted and killed) and sent to Russia, where he started the Soviet revolution.
For example, United States wanted to control the Panama channel, so they supported an "independence" movement against Colombia, so a new "free" country was created, that by "coincidence" gave the US the total control of it for a long time. Even today, the US is in control of it.
Before that, when the US felt the Spanish Empire was weak, they supported the "Cuba(and Philippines) libre" movement. People in Cuba and Philippines were very happy for the help until they realized the helpers army did not go away after the "independence". In Philippines the US exterminated over a million people, forcing everybody to speak English.
After Panama, the US continued supporting coups in other America's countries and around the world.
One of the most important movements the US supported was the popular movement in Persia, now Iran, because they wanted the British Empire to leave(so their own companies could enter and control the oil).
In the end, this movement converted Iran from secular country to a radical Islam one, and the Americans were ousted.
For the US it is routine creating havoc around the world, as the hegemonic power in the world that they are. All empires before had done that too.
They would love to be able to support popular movements in China or Russia as it is a threat for US hegemonic power in the future. Getting united China to disintegrate in several smaller countries would be a great victory.
Social media is at the very core of 4th generation warfare. Social media is more powerful than nukes because he who controls the discourse of the public is more powerful than he who destroys the public. He who controls the social network can make people believe whatever he wants them to believe to achieve his goals. Vastly more powerful, invisible, and humane than nuclear weapons, especially in terms of reach. What we are already witnessing online is an information war which hijacks and disrupts our social connections and thought processes to replace them with highly engineered stimuli which steer the people to think and act in a certain way. Neural networks are in development which will provide a positive feedback loop to continually evolve puppet account discourse in a way which maximally achieves the goals of a behavioral campaign. Phrases which maximize psychological impact for each campaign will be identified and automatically evolved based on replies and related discourse to always maintain maximum engagement as the overton windows shifts. These experiments are already well underway.
Is your comment meant to be sarcastic? If not, can you elaborate on why - of all possible options for the department who's primary purview in practice (in contemporary times) is the destabilization and/or destruction of other nations, you think this would be the most probable explanation for a mass scale analysis of 350 billion social media posts?
If that message comes off abrasive it's only because I am genuinely confused, but would like to know where you're coming from. There's always a risk of us living in our little bubbles and so I make every effort to try to see things through the eyes of others, especially when I simply cannot otherwise empathize with their views on any level.
I wasn't being sarcastic, they care a lot about situational awareness so have an interest in 'checking the weather' local to their operations, whatever those may be.
Government aid is a proxy for soft power through population pacification, political subversion, intelligence gathering operations, and proselytization. They know exactly who they want to target at all times.
As always, propaganda. For instance we recently made made major efforts to try to overthrow the government of Venezuela that included, directly or indirectly, digital propaganda efforts. These efforts are ongoing but seem to have failed. Why? It can also be used internally. For instance in the 60s see things such as COINTELPRO [1] or the FBI's efforts to attempts to blackmail and push MLK to suicide. [2]. COINTELPRO is probably where you can draw the most analogs relevant to today - planting fake stories in the media, subverting groups through internal infiltration, compelling 'private' media to prohibit access to targeted groups, character assassination, etc. What are the effects of these actions on digital media, and how can it be used to pursue our interests? The same is true of MLK. The FBI's primary goal was simply to destroy him as a leader. What causes leaders of online movements to disappear in ways that help splinter groups rather than turning them into martyrs?
Bigger question is why in the world this would be made public. I think it's a 100% safe bet to say that the military/intelligence has been engaged in this research for many years already. I see no positive benefit to making this information public aside from preempting 'leaks' / creating preemptive PR.
