“Journey to the heart of dark information” written by Antoine Bayet is a book-investigation on the different components of disinformation on the Web. If we can salute the effort of the author, he completely misses his target, by his glaring absence of self-criticism.
Attempt at conceptualization
Disinformation, misinformation, active measures of intoxication: how to define what is only partially information, in the service of ideas? In politics, this is called propaganda. In the case that interests Antoine Bayet, this is irrelevant, because there are too many distinct profiles in his book to qualify them as propaganda.
The author therefore created the concept of dark information, based on the model of the dark Web, as he himself claims. In dark information, it integrates the various communication media such as so-called secure messaging services such as Telegram and WhatsApp, the Facebook, YouTube and Odyssey communication platforms, YouTube video channels, but also more traditional websites such as France Soir , without forgetting RT and Sputnik.
We can raise an eyebrow at the use of the word dark attached to information, which has a particular connotation when we do computer science. But the idea has the merit of existing and the conceptualization in itself is interesting. Indeed, the overexposure of certain facts in the public debate cannot be qualified as misinformation. The facts exist, but it is the place given to them that is the subject of media coverage that bears no relation to its real importance.
In this, the author makes an analysis that is not meaningless. But he touches on the subject, without going into it. The fault with a micro point of view which should have been macro and with a certain navel-gazing.
Conceptual tote
What do the fan pages of Professor Raoult, Livre Noir, RT and Papacito have in common? They talk bigger bullshit than them. Once we said that, we did not move forward. Even though misinformation has taken on worrying proportions in recent months, due to the COVID epidemic, it cannot be said to have landed overnight. Besides, the author does not say so. There is a kind of well-established doxa, which is to start conspiracy theories on the web with the 9/11 attacks. It is both true and false. It is above all the convergence between the occurrence of the attacks and the democratization of Internet access that has given substance to this phenomenon. In itself, conspiracy theories have always existed, especially in the press that we found on newsstands.
Do you remember Factor X magazine? Sold on newsstands in the late 90s, this magazine specialized in paranormal phenomena, a kind of X-Files on glossy paper, absolutely fascinating. The author of these lines was a fan and kept his old numbers. Everything was happening: Ebola and AIDS had been created in the laboratory, aliens were among us, JFK was alive and ghosts visited us regularly. There was even an insert where readers brought testimonies of conspiracies, strange facts, etc. We take misinformation as a recent concept when it has always existed. The only nuance is that access to the Internet has made it more accessible, therefore more massive.
If we come back to the book on dark information, the problem is to have put media objects on the same plane, which do not have the same nature or the same goals. A Professor Raoult fanpage does not have the same objective as Russia Today nor the same as France Soir. The first responds to a well-oiled communication plan, the second serves the interests of the Kremlin and the third enriches its heritage. While misinformation may be a separate category, in the realm of media thinking, you can’t put all entities on the same shelf. Furthermore, we cannot economize on the means put on the table.
A Facebook page costs nothing in money to administer while a YouTube channel, depending on the degree of professionalism provided, will require financial, material and human resources. Durability is not the same either. A priori, a media is there to last while a Facebook page can perfectly be abandoned overnight or be transformed for something else.
Navelism
All players in dark information have one thing in common: a fairly clear hatred of journalists and traditional media, BFM TV in mind. Again, among conspiracy theorists, this is nothing new. As a matter of principle, they are convinced that the media lie, distort or gloss over certain things. With the democratization of the Web and tools, everyone can become a journalist.
Beyond the fact that the author puts himself too much forward in the book, without this bringing any interest — unlike William Audureau’s book — there is no critical analysis of the media at all. We all have fun saying that the Internet accelerates disinformation, we can also recognize that the traditional media do nothing to calm the game. Some channels have television programs dedicated to extraterrestrials and present it as something real . Channels invite idiots to comment on current events. We could also talk about the systematic highlighting of certain news stories, which have only taken shape on social networks. There is no self-criticism of the press.
Incidentally, we will note the enormous impasse made by the author: the mechanisms of recognition of the online press. Today, a joint commission decides the future of online sites and when you check the list of sites recognized as press services, you are stunned. Not only was France Soir still on the list at the end of 2021, but there are communication sites, heterogeneous conspiracy sites, sites that no longer exist, etc. There is no transparency on the criteria requested and new types of information carriers are excluded.
Worse still: it happens that journalists use the work of experts or connoisseurs, without crediting them or even inviting them on the air. Let’s also pass on the fact that in many shows, guests can line up nonsense, without being taken up or corrected by the journalists on set. Regulars of political broadcasts will see precisely what it is about.
Before trying to educate citizens about information, we must restore the relationship of trust between people and the media. However, as long as the media world has not done its introspection, it will not work. The conspirators will not disappear, but we can give them less echo if the media review their way of working and stop staring at each other’s navel all the time.