Case Studies
Roundtable discussion: How can we manage the risk from AI to spread Information Disorder?
Overview
This summary report captures the insights from a two-day roundtable hosted by Cranfield University and the Network for Security Excellence and Collaboration (NSEC), exploring the intersection of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Information Disorder (ID). The event brought together policymakers, academics, and industry experts to assess the risks posed by AI-driven disinformation and to propose actionable strategies for mitigation.
Key Findings
The Threat Landscape
- AI democratises disinformation: Tools once exclusive to state actors are now accessible to individuals and criminal groups.
- Deepfakes and generative content: AI can create highly realistic fake content (text, video, audio), making it harder to discern truth.
- Agentic AI: Capable of refining disinformation campaigns in real-time, mimicking legitimate marketing strategies.
- Intent is hard to prove: Disinformation may stem from hostile states, pranksters, or even accidental sources.
- Harms are universal: Regardless of intent, ID can cause societal unrest, economic damage, and erosion of public trust.
Targets of AI-Driven ID
- Events: Elections, pandemics, and disasters are prime targets.
- Relationships: Domestic trust (e.g., in media, police) and international diplomacy can be undermined.
- Industry: AI-generated smear campaigns can damage reputations and disrupt supply chains.
- Finance: Stock markets and economic stability are vulnerable to AI-fuelled rumours.
- Public trust: The general population may become increasingly sceptical of all information sources.
Systemic Vulnerabilities
- Lack of media literacy: The UK population is underprepared to critically assess digital content.
- No central authority: There is no dedicated body to lead on AI-ID risk management.
- Measurement gap: There is no framework to quantify the harms of ID.
- Communication breakdown: Government struggles to maintain authoritative communication amidst growing “noise pollution”.
- Reactive posture: Current strategies are not proactive or pre-emptive enough to counter evolving threats.
Recommendations
R1: Establish an Office for Media Literacy
- Promote critical thinking and media literacy through education and public campaigns
- Develop a Risk Management Framework for ID.
- Encourage community participation and peer review.
R2: Create a Policy Sandbox
- Experiment with technologies like blockchain and AI watermarking.
- Conduct game-theory and agent-based modelling research.
- Funnel successful research into policy trials.
R3: Develop Harm Assessment Models
- Quantify potential harms using frameworks akin to the National Risk Register.
- Fund interdisciplinary research to explore socio-economic impacts.
R4: Launch a National Resilience Programme
- Prepare likely targets for AI-ID attacks through scenario planning.
- Build a vetted pool of academic and technical experts.
- Develop “killchain” protocols for rapid response to disinformation.
R5: Introduce a Public Confidence Framework
- Implement an “8-Tick Check” to help users assess the credibility of news:
1. Trustworthy source?
2. Trust in the reporter?
3. Clear source-to-reporter path?
4. Parallel reporting from trusted outlets?
5. Expert verification?
6. No harm to public interest?
7. No benefit to hostile actors?
8. No manipulation or AI distortion?
R6: Structural and Strategic Preparedness
- Equip the public with tools and knowledge to remain informed during crises.
- Stress-test public services against disinformation.
- Design resilient supply chains and communication strategies.
Read the Short Report: Roundtable discussion: How can we manage the risk from AI to spread Information Disorder?
Roundtable Discussion: Building Resilience in the UK’s Electromagnetic Environment – T. Riley-Smith
ARISC provided the framework or context within which this event could flourish. This is underpinned by a set of values and processes, around addressing wicked problems through building a diverse network of stakeholders and subject-matter experts to generate quality-assured insights and recommendations designed to further public good.
Steinmann, F. & Riley-Smith, T. (2024). Summary Report – Roundtable Discussion: Building Resilience in the UK’s Electromagnetic Environment. Building resilience in the UK’s electromagnetic environment – Networks of evidence and expertise for public policy (cam.ac.uk)
Future Biodetection Technologies Hub – I. Johnston
After contacts being made through NSEC a research proposal was submitted to Research England’s Expanding Excellence in England call, to develop the Future Biodetection Technologies Hub at the University of Hertfordshire, in collaboration with Cranfield University, The University of Leeds and The University of Manchester has been funded.
The collaborative team hope to develop new technologies to address real-world applications impacting human, animal and plant health, as well as to develop instrumentation that enhances our understanding of atmospheric processes associated with climate change and its impacts.
