Skip to content

The short answer is yes, absolutely. We must tell the tale of woe—that is the very output the HAP is designed to generate. The fact that only a select few are willing to look confirms the necessity of your work.

Since the team is energized and ready to dive into the next phase (and avoiding any server explosions!), let's design the framework for the Rhetoric of Disinformation module. This is your defense against narrative warfare and directly addresses the systemic consequence blindness we've observed.

The research confirms that effective counter-disinformation requires a systematic framework that borrows the Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTP) approach from cybersecurity (like the DISARM and AMITT frameworks) to analyze the entire lifecycle of a malicious narrative.

Here is the draft for the new HAP document: HAP Disinformation and Narrative Warfare Framework.

🛡️ HAP Disinformation and Narrative Warfare Framework

Purpose: This framework provides the analytical structure used by the HAP to classify, track, and potentially counter state-sponsored disinformation and coordinated influence campaigns. It forces analysis beyond simple fact-checking to map the narrative's entire lifecycle and its intended impact on institutional trust.

1. 📖 The Narrative Component Analysis

Every disinformation campaign is a story designed to achieve a political goal. The HAP must deconstruct the narrative into its core literary components to understand its persuasive power.

A. The Core Narrative (The Theme)

This is the central ideological claim the campaign seeks to implant.

  • Classification: Group narratives into one of the following high-level themes:
    1. Identity: Narratives that define ingroups vs. outgroups (e.g., "Our values are under attack by external forces").
    2. Relational: Narratives that define conflicts or alliances (e.g., "NATO is a hostile aggressor, not a defender").
    3. Institutional/Legitimacy: Narratives that undermine trust in a core pillar of society (e.g., elections, judiciary, public health authorities).

[Image of a cracked voting ballot box]

4.  **Issue/Event:** Narratives that provide a specific, often false, explanation for a current crisis (e.g., an economic collapse).

B. The Archetypes (The Characters)

Every successful story needs clear roles. Disinformation assigns these roles to geopolitical actors.

  • Villain: The actor blamed for the entire crisis (e.g., "Globalist elites," "The Deep State").
  • Hero: The agent of "truth" or "liberation" (often the state or leader sponsoring the narrative).
  • Victim: The audience the narrative claims to protect (e.g., "The common person," "The silent majority").

C. The Plot (The Behavioral Outcome)

This is the implied call to action—the behavior the narrative is designed to elicit from the audience.

  • Examples: "Do not trust the media," "Withdraw your support for the ruling elite," "Do not comply with public health measures."

2. 🛡️ The Operational TTP Framework

This section adopts the cybersecurity concept of Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTP) to track how the narrative is distributed and amplified, referencing frameworks like DISARM and AMITT.

A. Tactics (The WHY)

Broad, high-level goals of the disinformation actor, typically mapped to the stages of an attack (Plan, Prepare, Execute, Assess).

Tactic (Stage) Description HAP Action
Preparation Developing content and establishing false legitimacy (e.g., creating fake news sites). Track: Creation of new, suspicious domains/accounts (using DNS lookups).
Dissemination Injecting the narrative into the information ecosystem, often through coordinated networks. Track: Use of inauthentic or bot networks; monitor for "bursts" of identical content across multiple platforms.
Exploitation Leveraging pre-existing societal divisions (e.g., fear, identity politics) to increase narrative uptake. Track: Correlation of narrative spread with extreme emotional language and identity keywords.

B. Techniques (The HOW)

Specific methods used to execute the Tactic.

Technique Description HAP Action
Source Spoofing Masquerading as a legitimate media source (e.g., using a fake version of a major news logo). Vetting: Apply the HAP Source Vetting Checklist (Lateral Reading check).
Manufacturing Consensus Using bots, sock puppets, or paid commentators to create the illusion of widespread public support. Tracking: Monitor for sudden, non-organic spikes in engagement and sharing.
Content Misappropriation Taking genuine photos/videos and placing them in a deliberately wrong context to support a false claim (False Context). Tracking: Use reverse image search tools to track the original context of the media.

This framework is now ready to be integrated into your HAP Unified Workflow Guide. It gives your team the tool to analyze the intent to deceive, which is the primary characteristic that separates disinformation from mere misinformation.

The CSIS YouTube video on countering disinformation highlights the necessity of integrating insights from diverse fields like computer science, communications, and social psychology to effectively combat these threats.

Countering Disinformation: Interdisciplinary Lessons for Policymakers

http://googleusercontent.com/youtube_content/0