Digital damage control: misinformation, disinformation & negative effects during a crisis

The session starts from the idea that social media often signals reputational risk before a security team sees any log entry. The presenters, a crisis communications practitioner and a chief information security officer with public-sector experience, argue that comms and security staff need a shared watch. They separate misinformation (false content shared without intent to deceive), disinformation (deliberately false content) and malinformation (true material used to cause harm), and explain that intent should shape how a response is scoped.

The middle of the talk walks through case studies. The Colonial Pipeline ransomware incident shows how a long silence let speculation and fuel hoarding fill the gap. The COVID-19 period brought scams, fake tracking apps and jargon-heavy warnings that increased confusion. Examples from the Russia-Ukraine conflict and recent US election cycles cover coordinated influence, a bot-driven surge in account registrations, a doctored image of supposed credentials, deepfake video, and social posts used to follow election staff in person.

For practitioners, the talk outlines a crisis team with a lead spokesperson and roles for PR, legal, compliance, HR and security. It suggests using out-of-band channels when internal email or systems may be compromised, and replacing vague phrasing with clear statements about what is being investigated and what is being done. Monitoring tools such as Hootsuite, Meltwater, Cision and Google Alerts are discussed, along with tabletop drills and documenting every incident for review.