AI-driven “disinformation” platform enables UK government to track social media posts, including political opinions.
CINDY HARPER
The UK government is pressing forward with an AI-driven mass surveillance initiative, expanding the reach of its controversial disinformation-monitoring apparatus. The National Security Online Information Team (NSOIT), formerly the Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU), is behind the development of the Counter Disinformation Data Platform (CDDP), a system designed to scan social media for what it deems “concerning” content. The project, just like much of what the current UK government is doing, raises serious concerns about the encroachment of state censorship and surveillance on lawful speech.
NSOIT gained notoriety for its role in monitoring and flagging critics of government pandemic policies as sources of “misinformation.” Now, with the CDDP, this effort is being supercharged with AI, granting the government an unprecedented capability to sift through vast amounts of public discourse and take “action” against flagged content.
A government-issued privacy notice from 2023 acknowledged that the CDDP would collect and analyze social media posts, including usernames, political opinions, and other personal data. It stated, “To help us analyze the disinformation threats online, we collect content from publicly available social media platforms… the content we review may include the names and opinions of individuals.” This level of scrutiny, even into “special categories” of personal data, highlights the potential for overreach.
According to The Telegraph, the Department for Science, Innovation, and Technology (DSIT) recently allocated £2.3 million to Faculty AI to construct the monitoring software, which is purportedly intended to detect “foreign interference” and analyze online narratives.
However, concerns have been raised that the AI tool’s remit could be expanded beyond national security matters. Documents obtained through Freedom of Information (FOI) requests suggest the government has left the door open to using the platform for a broad range of issues beyond its stated purpose. An executive summary of the project explicitly states: “While the CDDP has a current national security focus, the tool has the ability to be pivoted to focus on any priority area.”
This move signifies the entrenchment of a surveillance infrastructure capable of targeting dissent under the guise of combating “disinformation.”
Over the past three years, the government has spent more than £5.3 million on disinformation-monitoring initiatives, including efforts to counter so-called “anti-vax rhetoric” and posts questioning COVID-19 policies.
Among the flagged content were discussions on alternative cancer treatments, mask mandates, and the 5G network. Additionally, government documents revealed concern over social media posts supporting the use of hydroxychloroquine as a COVID-19 treatment, despite an Oxford University study later confirming its effectiveness in reducing symptoms.
The CDDP’s development has attracted criticism from free speech advocates, who argue that it represents an escalation in state-backed censorship. US Vice President JD Vance recently condemned European governments at the Munich Security Conference, warning that fundamental liberties, including free expression, were under threat. Lord Young of the Free Speech Union also expressed alarm, calling the expansion of this surveillance apparatus “politically unwise.”
He pointed out that the AI system would be scrutinizing content on American-owned platforms, making it likely to provoke a backlash from the US, particularly given the pro-free speech stance of figures like Elon Musk and the Trump-Vance administration.
The government insists that the AI-driven surveillance tool does not monitor individuals but instead tracks overarching “themes and trends.”
However, previous FoI requests have revealed that reports were compiled on individual commentators, including mainstream academics and journalists who merely questioned official policies.
Figures such as Dr. Alex de Figueiredo and Prof. Carl Heneghan were identified in government files for expressing concerns about vaccine policies and pandemic responses.
This article (Britain’s AI Spy Machine Gears Up for the Next Wave of Censorship) was created and published by Reclaim the Net and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Cindy Harper
See Related Article Below
Labour will use AI to snoop on social media
Government team developing programme that could trawl through posts to identify ‘public safety risk’
SARAH KNAPTON
The Government’s controversial disinformation team is developing a secretive AI programme to trawl through social media looking for “concerning” posts it deems problematic so it can take “action”.
Records show the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) recently awarded a £2.3 million contract to Faculty AI to build monitoring software which can search for “foreign interference”, detect deepfakes and “analyse social media narratives”.
The platform is part of the Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU) which was set up in 2019 and sparked widespread criticism for amassing files on journalists, academics and MPs who challenged the Government’s narrative during the pandemic.
The unit, which has since been rebranded the National Security Online Information Team (NSOIT), has links to the intelligence agencies, which has allowed it to avoid public scrutiny.
DSIT said the new AI tool, called the Counter Disinformation Data Platform (CDDP), is looking solely for posts “which pose a threat to national security and public safety risk”.
The current focus of beta testing is the influence of foreign states during elections.
However, heavily redacted documents obtained by Big Brother Watch through Freedom of Information (FoI) requests show that the Government is reserving the right to also use the platform for other issues.
An executive summary for the project states: “While the CDDP has a current national security focus the tool has the ability to be pivoted to focus on any priority area.”
Need for transparency
Jake Hurfurt, head of research and investigations at Big Brother Watch, warned that the Government was still refusing to publish “huge swathes of information” about the platform while dodging questions from Parliament and the Intelligence and Security Committee.
“Whitehall must be transparent about how its ‘Counter Disinformation Unit’ plans to use AI to monitor social media, when millions of pounds of public money have been poured into its operation,” he said.
“NSOIT’s predecessor, the Counter Disinformation Unit, was caught tracking criticism from journalists, activists and even MPs in an assault on free speech, but the Government is still trying to hide this unit in the shadows. There is a risk that the Ministry of Truth lives on.
“Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and with vast amounts of taxpayers’ cash on the line, it is time for the Government to be clear on how it monitors social media, and whether it is pressuring social media companies to censor the public’s lawful speech.”
Since 2021, contracts show the Government has spent more than £5.3 million on developing the CDDP and other disinformation projects including “detecting coronavirus disinformation” and “analysing climate related mis/disinformation on social media”.
FoI documents reveal counter-disinformation teams are concerned about “anti-vaxx rhetoric” and have taken an interest in social media posts “criticising Covid-19 vaccines”.
The teams are also looking into those posting about cancer treatments, mask wearing, and the 5G phone network.
Documents also show officials were concerned about Elon Musk and Donald Trump’s endorsement of the lupus drug hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for Covid – a drug that in September was proven by Oxford University to reduce symptoms of the virus.
A recent report on the CDDP – disclosed via FoI – shows the platform would be used by analysts to “find the most concerning posts” so they can be reported to “policymakers and ops teams on what may require action”.
It comes after JD Vance, the US vice-president, launched a scathing attack on the British Government and its European counterparts at the Munich Security Conference last week, warning that “basic liberties” such as free speech, were under threat.
Lord Young of the Free Speech Union said: “To scale up the British arm of the censorship-industrial complex at a time when it’s being dismantled on the other side of the Atlantic is politically unwise, to put it mildly.
“It’s particularly tin-eared given that the social media platforms that will be targeted by this new robo-censor are all American-owned.
“To the Trump-Vance administration this will look like another attempt to ‘kill Musk’s Twitter’, the self-professed agenda of a pro-censorship lobby group founded by Keir Starmer’s chief of staff.”
DSIT said that once content was flagged, officials would refer posts back to major platforms who could decide what action to take about the content.
The Government said that it respected freedom of expression and would only monitor “themes and trends”, not individuals.
However past Subject Access Requests have revealed that the CDU and their contractors produced reports on mainstream commentators and experts for criticising government policy.
Dr Alex de Figueiredo, of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, was identified as a potential source of misinformation for querying whether all children needed to be vaccinated against Covid-19.
The activities of Prof Carl Heneghan, the Oxford epidemiologist who advised Boris Johnson, were also monitored by the unit, as well as Molly Kingsley, who set up a campaign to keep schools open during the pandemic.
A Department of Science, Innovation and Technology spokesman said: “This tool assists officials working to tackle online disinformation that poses a risk to national security and public safety – a strictly limited remit set by ministers – by monitoring broad patterns in publicly available content, not individuals.
“We make no apologies for safely, legally and transparently using the latest technology to track the sort of disinformation which can result in violent disorder on our streets, as we saw in the wake of the horrific Southport attack.”
The Telegraph: continue reading
Featured image: eff.org
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply