Read the original article here.

---

Digital Manipulation: How Information Warfare Uses Data to Control You

In the modern age, information is a battleground. Beyond the physical clashes of traditional warfare, a silent conflict wages in the digital realm, manipulating perceptions, influencing decisions, and ultimately seeking control. This conflict is known as Information Warfare, and it leverages data and communication technologies to gain a strategic advantage over opponents. This resource explores the nature, methods, and implications of Information Warfare, focusing on how it represents a form of digital manipulation used to exert control.

Understanding Information Warfare

Information Warfare (IW) is a strategic concept that recognizes the critical role of information in conflict and competition. It's not just about disrupting systems, but about manipulating the information environment itself to achieve objectives.

Information Warfare (IW): The battlespace use and management of information and communication technology (ICT) in pursuit of a competitive advantage over an opponent. It specifically involves the manipulation of information trusted by a target without their awareness, leading them to make decisions against their own interests but in the interest of the party conducting the warfare.

It is crucial to distinguish Information Warfare from a related concept:

Cyberwarfare: This focuses specifically on attacking, damaging, or disrupting computer networks, software, and command control systems. While often a tool used within Information Warfare, cyberwarfare primarily targets the infrastructure of information, whereas Information Warfare targets the information itself and the perceptions derived from it.

The core purpose of Information Warfare is to gain an "information advantage" over an opponent. This means influencing their understanding of reality, disrupting their decision-making processes, or swaying public opinion – all without the target necessarily realizing they are being manipulated. Because of this hidden nature, it is often difficult to determine precisely when Information Warfare begins, ends, or its full extent and impact.

Information Warfare encompasses a broad range of activities, closely linked to psychological warfare, aiming to:

• Collect tactical intelligence.
• Ensure the integrity of one's own information.
• Spread propaganda or disinformation to demoralize or manipulate the enemy and the public.
• Degrade the quality of the opponent's information.
• Prevent opponents from collecting information.

While the term is often used by military forces (like the U.S. Air Force which includes cyberspace in its mission), different nations may use broader terms like "Information Operations," which encompass not just technology but also human-centric aspects like social network analysis, decision analysis, and the human factors of command and control.

Techniques of Digital Manipulation in Information Warfare

Information Warfare employs diverse methods, leveraging digital technologies to manipulate and control information flow and perception. These techniques can disrupt, deceive, and influence targets, from military forces to civilian populations.

Examples of how Information Warfare is conducted include:

1. Disrupting Communication Channels:

   • Jamming television, internet, and radio transmissions to prevent the target population or military from receiving trusted information.
   • Hijacking these channels to broadcast propaganda or disinformation.
   • Disabling critical networks, such as logistics systems, to impede an opponent's operations or a nation's infrastructure.

2. Compromising or Manipulating Networks:

   • Disabling or spoofing enemy communication networks.
   • Spoofing online social communities: This is particularly relevant in the digital age. It involves creating fake profiles, groups, or content to mimic legitimate online activity, thereby spreading false narratives or collecting information discreetly. For example, creating fake accounts on social media platforms that appear to belong to citizens of a target country to spread specific messages or gauge reactions.

3. Economic Manipulation:

   • Sabotaging stock exchange transactions. This can be done through electronic interference (cyberattack) or by manipulating market information through leaks of sensitive data or the strategic placement of disinformation designed to cause panic or artificial trends.

4. Surveillance and Intelligence Gathering:

   • The use of drones, surveillance robots, and even compromised webcams to collect tactical information and monitor targets. This data collection is a fundamental prerequisite for effective information warfare, allowing manipulators to understand the target audience, identify vulnerabilities, and tailor their messages.

5. Communication Management:

   • Controlling the flow of information within one's own forces or limiting the information available to the enemy. This includes ensuring secure communications for oneself while seeking to intercept or disrupt the opponent's communications.

6. Synthetic Media (Deepfakes):

   • The creation of highly realistic, yet entirely fabricated, audio, video, or images. Synthetic media can be used to create convincing but false portrayals of events or statements by individuals, sowing distrust, spreading lies, or manufacturing scandals. While not explicitly detailed in the source text, its mention highlights a modern, potent tool for digital manipulation.

7. Organized Social Media Influence:

   • The systematic use of social media and other online platforms (forums, comment sections, content-sharing sites) to generate content, spread narratives, and influence public perception. This often involves coordinated campaigns using networks of fake accounts (bots or trolls), genuine but ideologically aligned users, or paid influencers. The goal is to shape online discourse, amplify specific messages, suppress opposing views, or create a false sense of consensus or division.

Early applications of these techniques in a military context included the Gulf War, where Iraqi communications networks were electronically disabled. Attempts were even made by hackers to steal and sell U.S. troop movement data, demonstrating the information-gathering and potential manipulation aspects. The "Moonlight Maze" incident involving suspected attacks on U.S. Air Intelligence computers further highlighted the challenges of attribution in the digital realm.

The Digital Battlefield: Cyberspace and Control

Cyberspace has become a primary domain for Information Warfare, offering new tools and tactics for manipulation and control. Within this realm, key concepts emerge:

Network-Centric Warfare: A military doctrine or theory that aims to translate information superiority into a competitive advantage through the effective linking of sensors, decision-makers, and effectors (weapons or response systems). In the context of Information Warfare, it emphasizes the importance of controlling and leveraging the flow of information across interconnected systems.

C4ISR: An acronym standing for Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance. This integrated system is vital for modern military operations, but it also represents a key target for Information Warfare, as disrupting any part of this chain can blind or paralyze an opponent.

A core goal of cyberattacks initiated by one nation against another is to gain information superiority by disrupting or denying the victim's ability to gather and distribute information. This directly relates to control, as controlling information flow inherently gives power over decision-making and operations.

Real-World Impact: The potential dangers are illustrated by the 2007 incident where, alongside a physical strike, Israeli forces reportedly conducted a cyberattack on Syria's air defenses, effectively blinding them and allowing the physical attack to succeed. This shows how digital manipulation (of radar/defense systems) can enable physical control.

A more basic, but common, cyberattack used in Information Warfare is a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack.

Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) Attack: An attempt to disrupt the normal traffic of a targeted server, service, or network by overwhelming the target or its surrounding infrastructure with a flood of internet traffic from multiple compromised computer systems. This makes the target site or service unavailable to legitimate users, disrupting communication, access to information, or critical services.

DDoS attacks can be used to silence critical websites, disrupt communication platforms, or create chaos, thereby controlling the flow of information and potentially causing panic or confusion.

Impact on Civilians: Because daily life is increasingly integrated into networks, cyberattacks within Information Warfare can significantly affect civilian populations. Targeting a nation's power grid servers, for example, might disrupt military communications but also cause widespread blackouts for civilians and businesses, leading to economic disruption. This illustrates how digital manipulation intended for a military target can have devastating consequences, exerting pressure and control over the broader society.

Beyond purely digital attacks, Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) have transformed physical capabilities, with implications for information gathering and control. Unmanned drones, for instance, provide persistent surveillance capabilities (information gathering) and can even be used for autonomous actions, relying heavily on data streams and automated decision-making.

Modern ICTs also enhance communication management within forces (e.g., using data-enabled devices like modified smartphones to quickly share drone data), enabling faster reaction times and more coordinated actions based on rapidly disseminated information – an important aspect of maintaining one's own information advantage.

Notable Examples of Information Warfare and Digital Manipulation

Historical and recent events provide stark examples of how Information Warfare and digital manipulation are employed.

• Russo-Ukrainian War (2022 onwards): Information has been a critical weapon on both sides. Ukrainian forces have reportedly exploited deficiencies in Russian communications, sometimes even allowing Russian forces to use Ukrainian networks to then eavesdrop and cut off communications at critical moments. More significantly, before the invasion, Russia actively perpetuated a narrative claiming violence against Russian-speaking populations in Ukraine. This was achieved by publishing large volumes of disinformation online, designed to appear in search results (like Google News) and influence international and domestic opinion, justifying military action. This is a clear case of using digital platforms to manipulate the narrative and control perceptions ahead of a physical conflict.

• Russian Interference in Foreign Elections: This has been widely described as Information Warfare. The alleged interference in the 2016 United States elections is a prominent example, where digital platforms were used to spread disinformation, amplify divisive content, and target specific voter groups. Reports suggest similar efforts continue, including against the 2024 US presidential elections, using disinformation campaigns targeting specific candidates. The goal is to sow discord, undermine democratic processes, and influence election outcomes by manipulating public opinion and trust in institutions.

• Russia vs. The West: Research suggests an ongoing information war between Russia and Western nations. Russia reportedly perceives the West as using information to undermine its leadership and promote liberal values. In response, Russian information operations promote anti-liberal sentiments, including racism, antisemitism, homophobia, and misogyny, and push narratives suggesting the failure of Western democracies like the United States. This is a strategic effort to control domestic narratives, influence perceptions in target countries, and undermine the appeal of opposing political systems and values through consistent messaging and online content dissemination.

• Russia, China, and Pro-Palestinian Protests: Recent reports suggest state actors like China and Russia are promoting specific narratives via influencers and online content, particularly concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The goal is to manipulate public opinion in countries like the UK and the US, potentially to serve their own interests (e.g., diverting attention from the war in Ukraine, causing internal division in the US, shifting foreign policy stances). The reported increase in Russian media activity following the October 7th attack on Israel indicates a rapid adaptation of information operations to leverage unfolding events for strategic manipulation.

• United States COVID-19 Disinformation Campaign: A report detailed a U.S. military propaganda campaign using fake social media accounts during the COVID-19 pandemic. The campaign spread disinformation about the Chinese Sinovac vaccine, including falsely claiming it contained pork ingredients, making it haram (forbidden) under Islamic law. This campaign primarily targeted populations in the Philippines, using hashtags like "China is the virus" in Tagalog. Described as "payback" for Chinese disinformation, this example shows how states can use digital platforms for overt disinformation campaigns against foreign populations, leveraging cultural or religious sensitivities to manipulate public health decisions and perceptions of rival nations.

These examples highlight the diverse targets (military, civilian, economic systems, public opinion, political processes) and methods (disinformation, narrative shaping, network manipulation, identity spoofing) employed in modern Information Warfare, all centered around the strategic use of information to gain an advantage and exert influence or control.

Legal and Ethical Concerns

The evolution of warfare into the information domain, heavily reliant on digital technologies, raises significant legal and ethical questions that traditional "just war theory" struggles to fully address. Information Warfare presents unique challenges compared to conventional conflict:

1. Lower Risk for Attackers: Conducting cyberattacks or launching disinformation campaigns often involves significantly lower physical risk to the initiating party compared to traditional military engagements. This reduced barrier to entry makes digital manipulation a more attractive and potentially more frequent tool not only for governments but also for non-state actors like terrorist groups or criminal organizations. The ease of launching attacks increases the scale and frequency of potential manipulation efforts.

2. Targeting Civilian Infrastructure: Modern Information Communication Technologies (ICTs) are deeply embedded in civilian life – powering hospitals, financial systems, communication networks, and personal devices. This makes a vast range of civilian technologies vulnerable to cyberattacks or manipulation tactics. Attacks can even be routed through civilian computers or websites without the owners' knowledge. This raises profound ethical dilemmas about proportionality and non-combatant immunity when the lines between military and civilian digital space are blurred. Controlling access to or the integrity of civilian infrastructure can be a powerful means of exerting pressure and control over a population.

3. Difficulty in Accountability: The increasing use of automated systems (like some advanced drones) and the inherent anonymity or obfuscation possible in cyberspace make it exceptionally difficult to determine who is responsible for an attack or incident. Tracing the origin of a cyberattack can be complex, sometimes virtually impossible. This lack of clear accountability complicates legal responses, deters retaliation, and can potentially embolden malicious actors, allowing digital manipulation campaigns to proceed with greater impunity.

These issues have led to concerns about the gap between technological capabilities and existing legal frameworks. Experts note a "mismatch between our technical capabilities to conduct operations and the governing laws and policies." The potential for civilian impact is a particular concern, as military operations in cyberspace, even if aimed at strategic targets, can have widespread consequences due to interconnectedness. While there may be stated intentions to limit impact on civilians, the nature of the digital environment makes this incredibly challenging, further blurring ethical boundaries in the pursuit of control through digital means.

Conclusion

Information Warfare, leveraging the power of digital data and communication technologies, represents a modern evolution of conflict focused on manipulation and control. Unlike traditional warfare centered on physical destruction, Information Warfare seeks to achieve objectives by influencing perceptions, disrupting decision-making, and degrading the information environment of an opponent.

Through techniques ranging from network disruption and surveillance to sophisticated disinformation campaigns and the strategic use of social media, state and non-state actors alike seek to gain an "information advantage." This advantage is used not just for military gain, but to shape political outcomes, influence public opinion, sow discord, and ultimately make targets act in ways that serve the manipulator's interests.

The integration of cyberspace as a battleground means that the tools and targets of Information Warfare are deeply intertwined with civilian life, raising complex legal and ethical challenges regarding accountability, civilian impact, and privacy. As our societies become ever more reliant on digital information and interconnected systems, understanding Information Warfare and its methods of digital manipulation is crucial to recognizing the hidden ways in which data can be used as a tool of control.