Samuel Stroud, the British blogger behind GiraffeSocial has posted a column taking a closer look at how TikTok’s algorithm works — at least how he thinks it works. But that isn’t the point of the post for you, dear reader: he has some good advice on how to improve your own social media content, regardless of where it lands, and how it is constructed.

Before I get to his suggestions, I should first turn to why I used the word outrage in my hed. This is because a new Tulane University study shows that people are more likely to interact with online content that challenges their views, rather than agrees with them. In other words, they are driven by outrage. This is especially true when it comes to political engagement, which often stems from anger, and fuels a vicious cycle. I realize that this isn’t news to many of you. But do keep this in mind as you read through some of Stroud’s suggestions.

You might still be using Twitter, for all I know, and are about to witness yet another trolling of the service by turning all user blocks into mutes, which is Yet Another Reason I (continue to) steer clear of the thing. That, and its troller-in-chief. So now is a good time to review your social strategy and make sure all your content creators or social managers are up on the latest research.

Stroud points out several factors to keep track of:

• Likes, shares and comments: the more engagement from others, the higher a post is promoted. And this also means you should respond to the comments too.
• Watch time: Videos that are watched all the way through get boosted
• New followers: posts that generates new followers signing up also get boosted
• More meta is betta: Captions, keywords, hashtags, custom thumbnails — all of these help increase engagement, which means paying attention to these “housekeeping” matters almost as much as the actual content itself.
• Your history matters: if you have had previous interactions with this creator, type of content, or other trackable habits

Now, most of this is common sense, and perhaps something you already knew if you have been using any social media platform anytime over the last couple of decades. But it still is nice to have it all packaged neatly in one place.

But here is the thing. The trick with social media success is being able to balance your verisimilitude with your outrage. It is a delicate balance, particularly if you are trying to promote your business and your brand. And if you are trying to communicate some solid info, and not just fuel the outrage fires, then what Stroud mentions should become second nature to your posting strategy.

I am not a tin-foil-hat kind of person. But last week, I replaced my voice mail greeting (made in my own voice) with a synthetic voice of an actor saying to leave a message. I will explain the reasoning behind this, and you can decide whether I should now accessorize my future outfits with the hat.

Last month, Techcrunch ran a story about the perils of audio deepfakes and mentions how the CEO of Wiz, an Israeli cybersecurity firm that I have both visited and covered in the past, had to deal with a deepfake phone call that was sent out to many of its employees. It sounded like the CEO’s voice on the call. Almost. And fortunately, enough people at Wiz were paying attention and realized it was a scam. The call was assembled from snippets of a recorded conference session. But even the most judicious audio editing still can’t be perfect, and people at Wiz caught the unnaturalness of the assemblage. The reason for the difference had nothing to do with AI, but everything to do with human nature. This is because his speaking voice is somewhat strained, because he is uncomfortable in front of an audience, and that isn’t his conversational voice.

But it is just a matter of time before the AI overlords figure this stuff out.

AI-based voice impersonations — or deepfakes or whatever you want to call them — have been around for some time. I have written about this technology for Avast’s blog in 2022 here. The piece mentioned impersonated phone calls from the mayor of Kyiv to several other European politicians. This deepfake timeline begins in 2017 but only goes up to the summer of 2021. Since then, there have been numerous advances in tech. For example, a team of Microsoft researchers have developed a text-to-speech program called VALL-E that can take a three-second audio sample of your voice and be used in an interactive conversation.

And another research report, written earlier this summer, “involves the automation of phone scams using LLM-powered voice-to-text and text-to-voice systems. Attackers can now craft sophisticated, personalized scams with minimal human oversight, posing an unprecedented challenge to traditional defenses.” One of the paper’s authors, Yisroel Mirsky, wrote that to me recently when I asked about the topic. He posits a “scam automation loop” where this is possible, and his paper shows several ways the guardrails of conversational AI can be easily circumvented, as shown here. I visited his Ben Gurion University lab in Israel back in 2022. There I got to witness a real-time deepfake audio generator. It needed just a sample of a few seconds of my voice, and then I was having a conversation with a synthetic replica of myself. Eerie and creepy, to be sure.

So now you see my paranoia about my voicemail greeting, which is a bit longer than a few seconds. It might be time to do an overall “audio audit” for lack of better words, as just another preventative step, especially for your corporate officers.

Still, you might argue that there is quite a lot of recorded audio of my voice that is available online, given that I am a professional speaker and podcaster. Anyone with even poor searching skills — let alone AI — can find copious samples where I drone on about something to do with technology for hours. So why get all hot and bothered about my voicemail greeting?

Mirsky said to me, “I don’t believe any vendors are leading the pack in terms of robust defenses against these kinds of LLM-driven threats. Many are still focusing on detecting deepfake or audio defects, which, in my opinion, is increasingly a losing battle as the generative AI models improve.” So maybe changing my voicemail greeting is like putting one’s finger in a very leaky dike. Or perhaps it is a reminder that we need alternative strategies (dare I say a better CAPTCHA? He has one such proposal in another paper here.) So maybe a change of headgear is called for after all.

Social media personalization has turned the public sphere into an insane asylum, where every person can have their own reality. So says Maria Ressa recently, describing the results of a report from a group of data scientists about the US information ecosystem. The authors are from a group called The Nerve that she founded.

I wrote about Ressa when she won the Nobel Peace prize back in 2021, for her work running the Philippine online news site Rappler. She continues to innovate and afflict the comfortable, as the saying goes. She spoke earlier this month at an event at Columbia University where she covered the report’s findings. The irony of the location wasn’t lost on me: this is the same place where students camped out, driven by various misinformation campaigns.

One of the more interesting elements of the report is the crafting of a new seven layer model (no, not that OSI one). This tracks how the online world manipulates us. And starts off with social media incentives which are designed around promoting more outrage and less actual news. This in turn fuels real-world violence, then amplified by efforts of authoritarian-run nations who target Americans and polarize the public sphere even further. The next layer changes info ops into info warfare, feeding more outrage and conflict. The final layer is our elections, aided by the lack of real news and no general agreement on facts.

Their report is a chilling account of the state of things today, to be sure. And thanks to fewer “trust and safety” staff watching the feeds, greater use of AI in online searches by Google and Microsoft, and Facebook truncating actual news in its social feeds and as a result referring less traffic to online news sites, we have a mess on our hands. News media now shares a shrinking piece of the attention pie with independent creators. The result is that “Americans will have fewer facts to go by, less news on their social media feeds, and more outrage, fear, and hate.” This week it has reached a fever pitch, and I wish I could just turn it all off.

The report focuses on three issues that have divided us, both generationally and politically: immigration, abortion, and the Israel/Hamas war. It takes a very data-driven approach. For example, the number of #FreePalestine hashtag views on TikTok outnumber #StandWithIsrael by 446M to 16M and on Facebook and Twitter the ratio is 18 and 32 times respectively. The measurement periods for each network varies, but you get the point.

The report has several conclusions. First, personalized social media content has formed echo chambers that are fed by hyper-partisan sources which blurs news and propaganda, Journalism and source vetting is becoming rarer, and local TV news is being remade as they compete with cable outrage channels. As more of our youth engage further in social media, they become more vulnerable to purpose-fed disinformation and manipulation, and less able to distinguish between news and propaganda too. And this generational divide continues to widen as the years pass.

Remember when the saying went, if you aren’t paying for the service, you are the product? That seems so naïve now. Social media is now a tool of geopolitics, and gone are the trust and safety teams that once tried to filter the most egregious posts. And as more websites deploy AI-based chatbots, you don’t even know if you are talking to humans. This just continues a trend about the worsening of internet platforms that Cory Doctorow wrote about almost two years ago (he used a more colorful term).

In her address to the Nobel committee back in 2021, Ressa said, “Without facts, you can’t have truth. Without truth, you can’t have trust. Without trust, we have no shared reality and no democracy.”

If you have concerns about whether our elections will be free and fair, I suggest you take some time and visit your local elections board and see for yourself how they operate and ask your questions and air your concerns. That is what I did, and I will tell you about my field trip in a moment. I came away thinking the folks that staff this office are the kind of public servants that demand our respect for doing a very difficult job, and doing it with humor, grace, and a sense of professionalism that usually doesn’t get recognized. Instead, these folks are vilified and targeted by conspiracies that have no place in our society.

First, some background. I wrote in August 2020 about the various election security technologies that were being planned for the 2020 election here. And followed up with another blog in December 2020 with the results that those elections were carried out successfully and accurately, along with another blog written last August about further insights about election security gleaned from the Black Hat trade show.

A few weeks ago, I was attending a local infosec conference in town and got to hear Eric Fey, who is one of the directors of the St. Louis County election board. He spoke about ways they are securing the upcoming election. The county is the largest by population in the state, home to close to a million people.

He offered to give anyone at the conference a tour of his offices to see firsthand how they work and what they do to run a safe, secure and accurate election.

So naturally I took him up on it, and we spent an hour walking around the office and answering my numerous questions. Now he is a very busy man, especially this time of year, but I was impressed that a) he made good on his offer, and b) was so generous with his time with just an interested citizen who didn’t even live in his jurisdiction. (I live in nearby St. Louis City, which has its own government and elections board.)

There are about fifty people in the elections board offices, split evenly between Democrats and Republicans. Wait, what? You must declare your affiliation? Yes. That is the way the Missouri elections boards are run. Not every county is big enough to have an elections board: some of the smaller counties have a single county clerk running things. And Fey is the Democratic director. He introduced me to his Republican counterpart.

Part of the “fairness” aspect of our elections is that both parties must collaborate on how they are run, how the votes are tabulated, and how ballots are processed. And doing this within the various and ever-changing election laws in each state. We went into the tabulation room, which wasn’t being used. There were about a dozen computers that would be fired up a few days before the election, when they are allowed to start tabulating the absentee and mail ballots. These computers are not connected to the internet. They run special software from Hart InterCivic, one of the  election providers that the state has approved. These machines are never connected online. Okay, but what about the results?  Fey says, “We us brand new USB’s for a single transaction. We generate a report from the tabulation software and then load that report on the USB. That USB is then taken to an internet connected computer and the results are uploaded. That particular USB is then never used again in the tabulation room.”

Speaking of which, when the room is filled with workers, the door is secured by two digital locks and must be opened in coordination. Think of how nuclear missile silos are manned: in this case though, as you can see in the above photo, a Democrat must enter their passcode on their lock, and a Republican must enter their different passcode on their lock.

The Hart PCs have a hardware MFA key and are also password protected and have separate passwords for the two parties. What happens when they need new software? The county must then drive them to their Austin offices, where they are updated, in one of their vehicles, with both parties present at all times. This establishes a chain of custody and ensures they aren’t tampered with.

The elections board office is attached to a huge warehouse filled to the brim with several items: The voting machines that will be deployed to each polling place of course. The tablets that are used by poll workers (as shown here) to scan voters’ IDs (typically drivers licenses) and identify which ballot they need to use. These ballots are printed on demand, which is a good thing because that process eliminated a lot of human error in the past when voters got the wrong ballots. And loads of paper: the board is required to keep the last election’s ballots stored there. And commercial batteries spare parts for all the hardware too: because on election day, they travel around to keep everything up and running. Why batteries? In case of power failure in the polling place. Don’t laugh – it has happened.

Getting the right combination of polling places is more art than science, because the county has limited control over private buildings. One Y decided they didn’t want to be a polling place this year, and Fey’s staff found a nearby elementary school. Public buildings can’t decline their selection.

One thing Fey mentioned that I hadn’t thought about is how complex our ballots typically are. We vote for dozens of down-ballot races, propositions, and the like. In many countries, voters are just picking one or two candidates. We have a lot of democracy to deal with, and we shouldn’t take it for granted.

So how about ensuring that everyone who votes is legally entitled to vote? They have this covered, but basically it boils down to checking a new registration against a series of federal and other databases that indicate whether someone is a citizen, whether they live where they say they live, whether they are a felon, and whether they are deceased. These various checks convinced me that there aren’t groups of people who are trying to cast illegal votes, or bad actors who are harvesting dead voters. Fey and I spent some time going through potential edge cases and I was impressed that he has this covered. After all, he has been doing this for years and knows stuff. There have been instances where green card holders registered by mistake (they are allowed to vote in some Maryland and California local elections, but not here in Missouri) and then called the elections board to remove themselves from the voting rolls. They realize that a false registration can get them imprisoned or deported, so the stakes are high.

Let’s talk for a minute about accuracy. How are the votes tabulated? There are several ways. In Missouri, everyone votes using paper ballots. This isn’t typically a problem to process them, because as I said they are freshly printed out at the polling place and then immediately scanned in. This is how we can report our results within an hour of the polls closing. The ballots are collected and bagged, along with a cell phone to track their location, and then a pair drivers (D + R) head back to the office. Fey said there was one case where a car was in an accident, and the central war room that was tracking them called them before they had a chance to dial 911. They take their chain of custody seriously on election night.

If you opt for mail-in ballots, though, the ballot quality becomes an issue. Out of the hundreds of thousands of ballots the county office received in 2020, about four thousand or so looked like someone tried to light them on fire. Each of these crispy ballots had to be copied on to new paper forms so they could be scanned. Why so many? Well, it wasn’t some bizarre protest — it turns out that many folks were microwaving their ballots, because of Covid and sanitation worries. It was just another day of challenges for the elections board, but they took it in stride.

The paper ballots are then put through a series of audits. First the actual number of ballots are counted by machine to make sure the totals match up. They had one ballot that was marked with two votes, with one crossed out. So the team located the ballot and saw that the voter changed their mind, and corrected their totals. That is the level of detail that the elections board brings to the final count. They also pick random groups of ballots to ensure that the votes match what was recorded.

As you can see, they do their job, and I think they do it very well. If you are thinking about your own field trip, ballotpedia.org is a great resource if you want more details about how your state runs its elections, where and how to vote, and contacts at your local election agency.