New White Paper: Russia's Use of Pseudo-Think Tanks

The Stanford Internet Observatory has just published a new white paper on the online operations of the GRU, the main military foreign-intelligence service of Russia, highlighting pseudo-think tanks and personas.

Here is a clip from the report:

The GRU narrative strategy also involved the creation of think tanks and “alternative news” sites to serve as initial content drops, from which the content was syndicated or republished on other sites. These think tanks and media sites relied on personas —fake online identities that persist over time, or across multiple platforms, and attempt to create a perception that the person behind the identity is real—who served as both bylined authors for the GRU’s own fabricated media properties and “freelancers” who could inject the narrative into other publications under the guise of contributing authors. The content-creator personas served as both authors and amplifiers, often cross-promoting each other’s articles. In addition, we found a network of highly suspicious, likely fabricated accounts who were involved in the distribution of the content on other social platforms, including Twitter and Reddit.

Here is a recent Think Tank Watch post about a new think tank helping Russia gain influence in Africa.

Here is a previous Think Tank Watch piece on the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies (RISS), a think tank that has been accused of trying to sway the 2016 US presidential election.

Here is a piece on deepfake think tank scholars.

New Trend: Deepfake Think Tank Scholars

As if the think tank industry didn't already have enough to worry about, now comes a new concern that is sending shivers down the spine of the scholarly world: foreign spies using AI-generated images and posing as think tankers to lure targets.

Here is more from the Associated Press:

Katie Jones sure seemed plugged into Washington’s political scene. The 30-something redhead boasted a job at a top think tank and a who’s-who network of pundits and experts, from the centrist Brookings Institution to the right-wing Heritage Foundation. She was connected to a deputy assistant secretary of state, a senior aide to a senator and the economist Paul Winfree, who is being considered for a seat on the Federal Reserve.

But Katie Jones doesn’t exist, The Associated Press has determined. Instead, the persona was part of a vast army of phantom profiles lurking on the professional networking site LinkedIn. And several experts contacted by the AP said Jones’ profile picture appeared to have been created by a computer program.

Experts who reviewed the Jones profile’s LinkedIn activity say it’s typical of espionage efforts on the professional networking site, whose role as a global Rolodex has made it a powerful magnet for spies.

The Jones profile was first flagged by Keir Giles, a Russia specialist with London’s Chatham House think tank. Giles was recently caught up in an entirely separate espionage operation targeting critics of the Russian antivirus firm Kaspersky Lab. So when he received an invitation from Katie Jones on LinkedIn he was suspicious.

She claimed to have been working for years as a “Russia and Eurasia fellow” at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, but Giles said that, if that were true, “I ought to have heard of her.”

CSIS spokesman Andrew Schwartz told the AP that “no one named Katie Jones works for us.”

Here is a Think Tank Watch piece from 2015 about fake think tanks.  In November 2018, Think Tank Watch noted that hackers had been impersonating US State Department officials in order to attack think tanks.  We also reported on fake Chinese think tank accounts used for spying.  There have also been several instances of people impersonating think tank scholars online.

Here is a 2017 Think Tank Watch story about another fake think tank that had been uncovered.  Here is another 2017 piece about fake think tanks.

Also in 2017, Russians dumped real documents hacked from the Bradley Foundation (which funds a number of think tanks), and added a forged letter indicating that the foundation had made an illegal $150 million donation to the Clinton campaign.

Was the White House's internal think tank a fake think tank?

Other problems that think tanks recently have had to deal with include: a serious spearphishing campaign, Chinese hackers, 2020 presidential candidates plagiarizing their work, China blocking US think tank scholars from entering the country, Russian hackers, pressure over funding sources, the leaking of emails, being targeted by Iran, gender inequality problems, illegal think tanking, and deceptive information operations.

Here is a recent Brookings piece on AI and deepfakes.

On a lighter note, here is a parody video of think tankers from another "fake" think tank: The Institute for the Promotion of War.  However, we tend to prefer the work of the Center for Advanced Bullshit Studies.

Fake Chinese Think Tank Accounts Used for Spy Efforts on French

This is from the Epoch Times:

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is trying to recruit or spy on thousands of French experts using fake LinkedIn accounts, according to Le Figaro.

Several hundred people have been compromised, the French paper reported.

Chinese agents targeted some 4,000 French individuals, including civil servants, scientists, high-level managers, and other influential figures, Le Figaro reported on Oct. 23. Of that figure, about 1,700 are employed or otherwise involved with national institutions.

The agents use fake LinkedIn accounts to present themselves as entrepreneurial representatives, think tank members, or consultants, who offer all-expenses-paid trips to China to the experts they are trying to recruit.

Here is a recent Think Tank Watch piece about Chinese think tankers being targeted by the US Department of Homeland Security.

Shadowy Think Tank Linked to Manfort Disappears

Here is more from Daily Beast:

A shadowy think tank that Paul Manafort boasted about directing featured one of the libertarian movement’s most prominent foreign policy voices—who told The Daily Beast he didn’t know the now-convicted fraudster was involved.

The think tank, which appears to no longer exist, typifies the way savvy lobbyists can covertly introduce and amplify voices backing their clients—a strategy that’s especially valuable when those clients are tough to defend.

But while it’s not unusual for lobbyists to turn to K Street to gin up support for their clients, it is extraordinary for them to manufacture entire institutions—which is just what Manafort’s group reportedly did.

The Guardian reported in April that Manafort’s then-business partner, Alan Friedman, started a “fake think tank” called the Center for the Study of Former Soviet Socialist Republics (CXSSR) to push narratives that supported his then-client, former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych. People affiliated with the think tank say they don’t share the assessment that it was fake, and one said he received a monthly stipend for his work.

The think tank’s website no longer works. But archived internet pages show Doug Bandow, currently a scholar with the libertarian Cato Institute, was listed as its only “senior scholar” going back to 2012. A few other names come and go from the archived masthead, some of them with virtually nonexistent online footprints. 

Here is a previous post on how Manafort may have gotten help from a Wilson Center scholar.  Did Manafort work with scholars from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) to help Vladimir Putin?

DC Think Tank Using Fake Twitter Accounts and "Shady" Expert

Here is more from Craig Silverman of BuzzFeed:

Earlier this year, leaders from the Marine Corps, the Department of Homeland Security, NASA, the NSA, the White House, and the FBI gathered at a Ritz-Carlton in Virginia to discuss the latest in cybersecurity and information warfare.

The event was organized by the Institute for Critical Infrastructure Technology, a nonprofit think tank founded just a few years ago that quickly established itself as a convener of well-attended cybersecurity events, a facilitator of Capitol Hill briefings, and the beneficiary of hundreds of thousands of dollars in sponsorships from top private sector security vendors.

The day’s closing session featured James Scott, ICIT’s senior fellow and cofounder, discussing Russian cyberinfluence operations and his new book about information warfare. What audience members from intelligence and law enforcement agencies didn’t know is that Scott and ICIT have been running their own deceptive information operation.

BuzzFeed News identified a network of at least 45 fake Twitter accounts being used to amplify ICIT content and Scott’s book, as well as a group of fake YouTube accounts that upload and like ICIT videos and frequently post adoring comments about Scott on content featuring him.

Reporting by BuzzFeed News has also established that Scott, ICIT’s top expert, previously sold spammy and fake social media engagement services, has a history of manufacturing flattering articles about himself and his ventures using dubious SEO techniques, and ran companies that are magnets for online complaints about dishonest business practices. His background in information security also primarily consists of self-published books on the topic that he only began publishing in 2013.

ICIT will be holding its annual forum on June 18 at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Washington, DC.  Sponsors of that event include McAfee, Micro Focus Government Solutions, Centrify, Skybox Security, Cylance, Garrison, and KPMG.  Epoch Times is a "partner" for the event.

Here is a Think Tank piece from 2015 about a fake think tank apparently set up by Russia to project its power.

Here is a 2017 Think Tank Watch story about a fake think tank that had been uncovered. Here is another 2017 piece about fake think tanks.

Also in 2017, Russians dumped real documents hacked from the Bradley Foundation (which funds a number of think tanks), and added a forged letter indicating that the foundation had made an illegal $150 million donation to the Clinton campaign.

Welcome to the new world of fake think tanking.

Fake Think Tank Raises Alarm for Think Tank Scholars

A new nuisance is emerging for think tanks and think tank scholars that has the potential to severely damage their brands and reputation: fake think tanks touting fake news.

Brian Mefford, a Senior Nonresident Fellow at the Eurasia Center of the Atlantic Council recently wrote a blog post on a "think tank" that, among other things, appears to be posting fake articles and publishing them using bylines of real think tank scholars, without permission.

Here is more from Mr Mefford:

A few weeks ago, a colleague asked why I was a part of an organization called the Center for Global Strategic Monitoring (also known as the CGS Monitor). Despite working in foreign policy for seventeen years, I had never heard of this organization. Imagine my surprise when I discovered my photograph and biography listed on the CGS Monitor website as one of their “experts.”

I immediately began searching the website for contact information to request that my name be removed. However, it became clear that there was something fishy about this website. Not only was no mailing address given; the only email contact to be found was a ubiquitous “info@” address. My email requesting that my name be removed has never been answered and the website continues to list me as one of their experts.

The Center for Global Strategic Monitoring website appears to be an impressive and thoughtful news and opinion site at first glance. However, one does not have to dig deep to discover that the organization is phony. Here’s how they do it: First, the website re-publishes analysis and opinion pieces from real, respectable research institutions (apparently without permission). Then these legitimate pieces are mixed with “news” from Russian-controlled sources without attribution. Worse yet, the website even posts some fake articles under the names of distinguished think tank scholars. As a result, the website contains an assortment of good analysis from actual think tanks, pseudo intellectual drivel produced by propaganda outlets and conspiracy theorists, and fake opinion pieces camouflaged as the handiwork of foreign policy experts.

The website for the Center for Global Strategic Monitoring (CGS) can be found here.  The site says that CGS is a "nonprofit and nonpartisan research and analysis institution dedicated to providing insights of the think tank community publications."  In other words, it says it is a think tank promoting the work of other think tanks.

A number of US and non-US think tank scholars are listed on the site as "experts," including those from Chatham House, Brookings Institution, Cato Institute, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Atlantic Council, and American Enterprise Institute (AEI).

Here is what Michael Isikoff has uncovered about CGS.

Think Tank Watch recently wrote that fake think tanks are quite fashionable these days.  Well, that is becoming the biggest think tank understatement of 2017.

Update: After Think Tank Watch's story, Vanessa Williamson and Norman Eisen of Brookings published a piece entitled "We Were the Victims of Fake News," which notes Brookings is exploring different options to address the "hijacking" of its scholar's reputations.

Fake Think Tanks?

While fake news is getting all the attention these days, it is a little known fact that fake think tanks are highly fashionable.

The New York Times just wrote a piece on the proliferation of fake academia - what is essentially "fraudulent" journals and conferences.  Here is an excerpt from NYT:

OMICS International is a leader in the growing business of academic publication fraud.  It has created scores of "journals" that mimic the look and feel of traditional scholarly publications, but without the integrity.  OMICS is also in the less well-known business of what might be called conference fraud.  Both schemes exploit a fundamental weakness of modern higher education: Academics need to publish in order to advance professionally, get better jobs or secure tenure.  Even within the halls of respectable academia, the difference between legitimate and fake publications and conferences is far blurrier than scholars would like to admit."

But fake think tanks have been around awhile.  Here is a piece that Think Tank Watch wrote in 2015 about "fake" think tanks.

In fact, fake think tanks have been around for decades.  Take the so-called Boring Institute, a "fake," one-man think tank that originated in 1984.  Here is more on that "think tank" from the New York Times.

We should also note that there are a number of fictitious think tanks floating around...

Update: Here is a new Wired piece entitled "Fake Think Tanks Fuel Fake News - and the President's Tweets."