Black Swans Part II

Last week, we introduced Taleb’s definition of black swans; rare, unpredictable ‘unknown unknowns’ in military terms, with major impacts, exploring historical examples that reshaped society post-event. This week I’m going to introduce a fictional black swan and how to react to them but before that the unpredictable part of Taleb’s definition needs some modifications. True black swans by Taleb definition are not only rare but practically non-existent outside of natural disasters such as earthquakes. To discuss a black swan, I am going to change the definition a bit and say these events are unpredictable to most observers but predictable or at least imaginable to some. Taleb would likely call them grey swans. For instance, Sputnik was known to the Soviets, but an intelligence failure and complete surprise to the rest of the world. Nikola Tesla anticipated the iPhone 81 years ahead of time. 9/11 was known to the perpetrators and was an intelligence failure. Staging a significant part of your naval fleet in Pearl Harbor during a world war and forgetting to surveil the surrounding area is not a black swan, just incompetence.

With that tweak out of the way, we’ll explore in Part II where Taleb discusses strategies to mitigate a black (grey) swan’s major impacts with a fictional example. His strategies can be applied to pre-swan events as well as post-swan. Pre-swan planning in business is called contingency planning, risk management, or, you guessed it, black swan planning. They include prioritizing redundancy, flexibility, robustness, and simplicity, as well as preparing for extremes, fostering experimentation, and embracing antifragility.

Imagine a modern black swan: a relentless AI generated cyberattack cripples the Federal Reserve and banking system, wiping out reserves and assets. Industry and services collapse nationwide and globally as capital evaporates, straining essentials, with recovery decades away if ever. After the shock comes analysis and damage reports, then the rebuilding begins.

The Treasury, with no liquid assets, must renegotiate debt to preserve global trust. Defense capabilities are maintained at a sufficient level, hopefully hardened, to protect national security, while the State Department reimagines the world to effectively bolster domestic production and resource independence while keeping the wolves at bay.

Non-essential programs, from expansive infrastructure projects, research, federal education initiatives, all non-essential services are shelved, shifting priorities and remaining resources to maintaining core social and population safety nets like Social Security and Defense. Emergency measures kick in: targeted taxes on luxury goods and wealth are imposed to boost revenue and redirect resources. Tariffs encourage domestic production and independence.

Federal funding to states and localities is reduced to a trickle. States and municipalities must take ownership of essential public services such as education, water, roads, and public safety. The states are forced to retrench and innovate, turning federal scarcity into local progress.

Looking ahead, resilience becomes the first principle. Diversification takes center stage, with the creation of a sovereign wealth fund based on assets like gold, bitcoin, and commodities, bolstered by states that had stockpiled reserves such as rainy-day funds, ensuring financial stability. Local agriculture, leaner industries and a realigned electrical grid, freed from federal oversight, innovate under pressure, strengthening a recovery. Resilience becomes antifragility, the need to build stronger and better in the face of adversity. And finally, the government must revert to its Lockean and Jeffersonian roots, favoring liberty and growth over control, safety, and stagnation: anti-fragility.

Source: The Black Swan by Nassim Nicholas Taleb, 2007. Graphic: The Black Swan hardback cover.

Journalism – Denver Post 2024

I’ve been running a weekly post on the shortcomings and biases within the news media complex since April of 2024, starting with Walter Duranty of the New York Times covering for Stalin’s forced collectivization of Ukrainian farms in 1929. Duranty claimed in 1933 that no Ukrainian’s died of starvation even though estimates stated that up to 5 million did die from severe ‘food shortage’ in Timesman’s words.

I’ve attempted to cover just the most egregious and mendacious examples of media malpractice over the last 9 months amounting to about 30 posts spanning about 95 years of print and broadcast journalism. One thing that has become clear over that time is reporting hasn’t improved; fabrications, prevarications, and deceptions still appear to be the currency of the realm. Objective and factual journalism only appears when there are no winners or losers, a rare occurrence indeed.

So, let’s start off the new year with the Denver Post’s initial headline documenting the attempt on Trump’s life at his Butler rally on 13 July 2024: “Gunman Dies in Attack.” A major candidate for the presidency is almost killed and the paper’s concern is for the assassin.

After taking considerable flak for that headline the Post scrubbed the headline from their website and replaced it with “Trump is injured but ‘fine’…

Graphic: Front Page Denver Post, via Charlie Kirk, 14 July 2024, X.

Journalism – Hunter Biden’s Laptop and the FBI 2019-2020:

In October 2020, a few weeks before the election, the New York Post reported on the existence and contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop. Media sources other than the Post did not report on the laptop, supposedly due to concerns about the authenticity of the computer and its contents. Below is a partial timeline of FBI’s involvement in the laptop.

  • Summer 2019: John Paul Mac Isaac, owner of the computer repair shop, attempted to notify the FBI through his father that he had a laptop belonging to Hunter Biden. The FBI turned Isaac away.
  • October 2019: The FBI contacted Isaac’s father and eventually Isaac to discuss the laptop, which occurred during the impeachment of President Trump. That same month, Hunter Biden’s attorney contacted Isaac about the laptop, but nothing came of that interaction.
  • November 2019: The FBI authenticated the laptop as belonging to Hunter Biden and determined it was not part of any foreign disinformation campaign. The FBI authenticated the laptop, in part, by matching communications contained on the computer with intercepted 2017 communications from China. The FBI kept the authentication confidential, supposedly due to concerns over foreign disinformation.
  • December 2019: The FBI seized the laptop from Isaac under a subpoena issued by a Wilmington Grand Jury. The grand jury had been investigating Hunter Biden’s foreign financial dealings. The IRS was also notified that the laptop likely contained evidence of tax crimes.
  • Run-up to the 2020 Election: The FBI warned social media companies about potential foreign disinformation related to the laptop, which caused the story to be suppressed on Twitter and Facebook.
  • Post-2020 Election: The FBI continued to remain silent about the authenticity and contents of the laptop, citing concerns over foreign disinformation and ongoing criminal cases.

Sources: Morris and Fonrouge, NY Post, 2020. John Solomon, Just the News, 2020. Kerr and Simonson, Free Beacon, 2023. Oliver, Washington Examiner, 2023. Sperry, NY Post, 2023. Graphic: President Biden and his son Hunter, AP Photo/Visar Kryeziu).

Journalism – Tom Llamas and Ian Panell 2019

In October 2019, ABC “News” broadcast video supposedly from Syria, depicting an attack by the Turkish military on Kurdish town and civilians. ABC later apologized that the video was not from Syria but from a gun range in Kentucky in 2017.

Both ABC News anchor Tom Llamas and foreign correspondent Ian Panell described the video as a military bombing in Syria during their nightly broadcast. “This video, obtained by ABC News, appears to show the fury of the Turkish attack on the border town of Tal Abyad two nights ago,” said Panell, while Llamas also told viewers the footage appeared to show “Turkey’s military bombing Kurd civilians in a Syrian border town.

However, Gizmodo, a tech site, said the explosions in the video are very likely from a YouTube titled “Knob Creek Night Shoot 2017,” a biannual event hosted at a local gun range in West Point, Kentucky.

Source: Fake Bombing by Kayla Kibbe, InsideHook, 2019. Graphic: Beat the Press, PBS.

Journalism – New York Times 2008

In February 2008, The New York Times published an anonymously sourced front-page story accusing Senator and Republican presidential candidate John McCain of having an improper relationship with telecommunications lobbyist Vicki Iseman. Both McCain and Iseman denied the allegations.

Critics blasted the paper for running a front-page story based on slender and anonymous sourcing. Steve Schmidt, McCain’s campaign advisor, sneered, “It was something that you would see in The National Enquirer.” A few days after the story ran, Times ombudsman Clark Hoyt criticized it for being short on facts, writing, “If you cannot provide readers with some independent evidence, I think it is wrong to report the suppositions or concerns of anonymous aides…

Vicki Iseman sued The New York Times for defamation in December 2008. The case was settled a few months later, but the Times did not issue a retraction. They did, however, publish a clarifying note stating that they did not intend to imply an improper relationship between Iseman and McCain. John Dean, writing for Verdict, commented on the absurdity of the defamation agreement, stating, “Rather than apologize and/or retract, they [the Times] would merely say what they said is not what they meant, and that readers should not be fooled into understanding what they read as saying what everybody thought it said.

Source: Times Hit Piece Dying on Media Vine by Clay Waters, 2008. Who Won…by John Dean, Verdict, 2013.

Journalism – Johann Hari

Johann Hari has been involved in significant journalistic malpractice since joining the British media in 2001, earning sneering testimonials for plagiarism, fabrication, misconduct, misrepresentation of research, malicious editing of his biography, false and defamatory articles against fellow journalists, threats of libel suits against anyone challenging his ethical failings, selective editing of interviews to alter narratives, errors in cited data, and claiming evidence without proper citations. And he’s only 45.

Hari has worked for numerous prestigious publications, including the New Statesman, The Independent, The Huffington Post, The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, The New Republic, The Nation, Le Monde, El Pais, The Sydney Morning Herald, Haaretz, BBC, and Slate. He currently writes non-fiction books on drugs—both legal and illegal—drug culture, and the harm of social media.

Source: Forbes. Wikipedia. Graphic: Johann Hari supplied by Johann Hari, 2011, creative commons.

Journalism–BuzzFeed 2017

On January 10, 2017, ten days before Donald Trump’s inauguration as the 45th President of the United States, BuzzFeed News published an unverified, salacious dossier compiled by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer, suggesting that Russia had compromising evidence on the future President.

The dossier’s claims, laughable and fictional to any objective reporter, included graphic instances of abhorrent sexual behavior and treasonous activity. BuzzFeed supposedly attempted to verify or falsify any of the claims but was unable to do so. They published the dossier anyway.

On January 5, 2017, U.S. Intelligence, including James Comey, John Brennan, Mike Rogers, and James Clapper, briefed Obama on the contents of the dossier. The next day, likely on Obama’s orders, the same intelligence chiefs briefed Trump in New York. Trump later claimed that he thought the intelligence chiefs, mainly Comey, were trying to blackmail him. Comey knew at the time that the Democrats had funded the dossier but felt that information was immaterial to the discussion with Trump.

After much gnashing of teeth and rending of clothes concerning Trump’s alleged misdeeds by the mainstream media, it eventually came out that the Steele dossier was a complete fiction, although Steele to this day maintains its accuracy. It was bought and paid for by the 2016 Hillary Clinton presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee. The dossier funding was brokered by the Democratic lawyer Marc Elias, who at the time was working for the Clinton campaign, through the law firm Perkins Coie. This firm then hired Fusion GPS, which in turn hired Christopher Steele to compile the dossier.

After the BuzzFeed publication, Trump responded a few hours later on X as shown in the attached graphic, calling it nothing but fake news.

Trivia: In May 2024, Vivek Ramaswamy paid $3.3 million for a small interest in BuzzFeed, attempting to steer its content to the right. His interest is too small to affect any change.

Source: These Reports Allege Trump Has Deep Ties to Russia by Bensinger, Elder, and Schoofs, 10 January 2017, BuzzFeed. Graphic: X Response from Trump, 2017.

Journalism—CNN’s Sycophants for Saddam Hussein 2003

CNN’s news chief in 2003, Eason Jordan, admitted that the network ignored and suppressed Saddam Hussein’s mass killings of his citizens and other crimes against humanity, to keep their access to the Iraqi thug. Jordan said that telling the truth likely would have meant closing their Baghdad bureau. Franklin Foer of the New Republic wrote in The Wall Street Journal: “CNN could have abandoned Baghdad. Not only would they have stopped recycling lies, they could have focused more intently on obtaining the truth about Saddam.”

CNN lied; Iraqis died.

Human Rights Watch has estimated that 250,000 to 290,000 Iraqis were presumed killed under Saddam.

Eason Jordan resigned from CNN in 2005. It wasn’t possible to discover why he wasn’t fired in 2003 for his efforts to aid Saddam Hussein.

Source: The Washington Post. HRW 2003. Franklin Foer, Wall Street Journal 2003.   Graphic: Iraqi Victims Found in a Mass Grave killed under Saddam’s Rule, GWB Whitehouse Archives, 2003.

Journalism–Paid to Promote 2005-2024

USA Today, in a 2005 story, revealed that the younger Bush White House had paid columnists to promote the president’s ‘No Child Left Behind’ policy, that he signed into law in 2002.

The Bush’s Education Department paid Armstrong Williams, Maggie Gallagher, and Michael McManus thousands of dollars to give favorable coverage in print, radio, and television. Williams was paid the most, $241,000 to write positive NCLB articles for his syndicated column at the Tribune Co., and speak glowingly about it on his TV and radio programs. The Tribune Co., his syndicator, dropped his column after the pay-to-print arrangement was discovered. The media in 2005 considered the pay-to-promote practice insidious, abhorrent, and unethical.

It has been reported that the Biden administration, through a political action committee, has paid at least 1 million dollars to approximately 150 social media influencers to promote its policies. These include Harry Sisson, Vivian Tu, and Awa Sanneh among others, all active on TikTok, X, and Instagram. While these payments and influencers were disclosed, the process has been less than transparent and generally, the influencers do not state upfront what posts are paid for by the Biden administration or the PACs controlled by its administration.

What was considered unethical behavior 20 years ago is standard operating procedure today.

Source: The Top 12 Journalism Scandals by Tony Rogers, ThoughtCo., 2023. The Conversation, 2024. Graphic: Influencers, Morgan MacNaughton/Palette Management.

Journalism – Sabrina Erdely 2014

On 19 November 2014, Rolling Stone published “A Rape on Campus” by Sabrina Erdely, an incendiary and malicious expose of gang-rape by U of Virginia fraternity brothers. Erdely’s story centered on UVA student Jackie Coakley, only identified as Jackie in the article, who was allegedly gang-raped at a Phi Kappa Psi party by several members that fraternity in 2012.

Mainstream journalists at Worth, Slate, and the Washington Post immediately began to question the sourcing and methods that went into the story. Rolling Stone, to quell the growing roar of disbelief, commissioned the Columbia School of Journalism to investigate the story and the magazine’s journalistic methods.

Columbia School of Journalism found that the “Rolling Stone’s repudiation of the main narrative in “A Rape on Campus” is a story of journalistic failure that was avoidable. The failure encompassed reporting, editing, editorial supervision and fact-checking.”

Jonathan Taylor of Title IX for All wrote, “Virtually every claim made by “Jackie” and chronicled by Sabrina Rubin Erdely in Rolling Stone has been objectively proven false.”

Multiple lawsuits by university personal and fraternity members were filed against Erdely and Rolling Stone in 2015 and 2017. The UVA lawsuit was settled for $3 million in damages against the magazine and Erdely. The PKP fraternity lawsuit was settled for $1.65 million. A lawsuit by members of Virginia Alpha chapter of PKP was settled though the fraternity members are bound by confidentiality agreement that does not allow comment or disclosure of terms.

Source: #uvahoax – UVA Rape Hoax by Jonathan Taylor Title IX for All, 2015. Rolling Stone’s Investigation by Sheila Coronel et al, CJR, 2015. Graphic: UVA Rape Hoax, Title IX for All copyright.