• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • Podcast
  • Full Measure
  • Blog
  • Donate
  • "Slanted" Preorder here

Sharyl Attkisson

Untouchable Subjects. Fearless, Nonpartisan Reporting.

  • US
  • World
  • Business
  • Health
    • Vaccine, Medical links
  • Special Investigations
    • Attkisson v. DOJ
    • Benghazi
    • "Collusion v. Trump" TL
    • Fake News
    • Fast and Furious
    • Media Mistakes on Trump
    • Obama Surveillance TL
    • Obamacare

Sharyl Attkisson

The truth about "Deep Fakes"

Siwei Lyu, Deep Fake Specialist

Our Full Measure investigation into fascinating and fast-moving "Deep Fake" technology explains why we in the news media must be more mindful than ever not to jump to conclusions based on what we think we see with our own eyes. And why you should be extra skeptical, too.

Watch the video at this link and read the transcript below:

Today, a fascinating and somewhat frightening trip down a technological rabbit hole. To a place where it’s becoming nearly impossible to believe your own eyes. Deep Fakes are videos that use Artificial Intelligence to make it look like someone said or did something they never said or did. As you can imagine, they’re raising all kinds of legal and policy concerns. That’s today’s cover story.

Siwei Lyu is our intrepid Deep Fake detective.

He’s an associate professor in Computer Science at the University at Albany, New York.

Sharyl: In very simple terms, can you define Deepfake?

Lyu: Deepfake is just an AI-based algorithm software that can swap faces.

Before we go there, it’s worth noting that we’ve been faking images for as long as we’ve been recording them.

Support independent journalism. Donate to SharylAttkisson.com by clicking here.

Lyu: It’s actually not a real photograph of Lincoln; is actually a composition of Lincoln's head with somebody else's body.

Sharyl: Maybe this faked image crossed your internet path in 90s.

Sharyl: So, this says it's a real photo, but it's not?

Lyu: This is not.

The shark was added.

Lyu: And with the help of Photoshop, you can load these two images in, crop the original out, and put it back into compose generating this fake photograph in about 10 minutes.

Full Measure's David Bernknopf and Bryan Barr with Professor Lyu in Albany, New York

The meteoric leap forward came in December 2017. An anonymous internet user by the name “deepfakes” demonstrated new face-swapping Artificial Intelligence capability using it to insert celebrity faces into porn videos.

One unfortunate victim of the X-rated face puppetry was Wonder Woman star Gal Gadot. “Deep fakes” made the technology available to anyone through a free app. And pretty soon, countless technophiles joined the party.

One popular extrapolation involves swapping actor Nicholas Cage’s face into all kinds of scenarios— Nicholas Cage as Stephen Carrell.

Video: No God, please no. No.

Nicholas Cage as captain of the Star ship Enterprise Using Cage is an inside joke — he starred in the 1997 film Face/Off 

Face/Off: I will become him

where his character switches faces with John Travolta’s.

Face/Off: Let’s just kill each other.

Sharyl:This is Nicholas Cage's face?

Lyu: Right, deep faking Nicholas Cage's face into different person including President Trump, Tom Cruise, Ben Stiller

Sharyl: In simple terms, the process has to do with taking hundreds or thousands of images of the person to be swapped in and sending them through an automated training process - Putting Hollywood-quality special effects within most anyone’s reach. By the way, that’s Donald Trump as Frankenstein’s monster.

Jennifer Lawrence: My favorite is probably Lisa Vanderpump.

Here, the face of actor Jennifer Lawrence is swapped out with actor Steve Buscemi...

Lawrence: I don’t know what to say, because who knows when you’re gonna run into these people.

Which Buscemi seemed to find pretty creepy when he was shown a clip on a comedy show.

Steve Buscemi: It makes me sad that someone spent that much time on that. I’ll bet that was hard to do.

Not as hard as it used to be. To see how easy it can be to make someone say words they never actually uttered, Lyu’s team created a demonstration for Full Measure. First, I make it clear that I don’t like donuts.

Sharyl: I did not take the donuts from the break room. I have never eaten a donut in my life.

Next we record Full Measure correspondent Lisa Fletcher saying the opposite.

Lisa: I love donuts and I ate all of the ones that were in the break room.

Face swapping technology literally puts Lisa’s words in my mouth.

Lisa, deepfake: I love donuts and I ate all of the ones that were in the break room.

Now, on the right, I’m even blinking and moving my head in Lisa’s pattern, not my own.

Lisa, deepfake: I took the donuts from the break room, I have eaten donuts all my life.

But it’s hardly all fun and games.

Obama deepfake: We’re entering an era in which our enemies can make it look like anyone is saying anything at any point in time.

Filmmaker and comedian Jordan Peele was part of an effort to put words into former President Obama’s mouth as a warning.

Obama deepfake, Jordan Peele: You see I would never say these things at least not in a public address. But someone else would. Someone like Jordan Peele. This is a dangerous time. Moving forward we need to be more vigilant with what we trust from the internet.

Sharyl: What are the potential dangers of this technology?

Lyu: If somebody wanted to manipulate the stock market, generating a short video of a company CEO announcing the performance of the company, this probably will cause a stir and then cause some movement in the market. So, that's a likely scenario.

To try to stay ahead of the bad guys, Lyu and his team are working under a contract from the military’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, DARPA. Early on, he discovered one sign of a Deep Fake.

Lyu: And one day I realized something not correct, not right. And that is those figures in the fake videos, they don't blink. They never blinked actually. Their eyes keep open.

As shown in this unblinking Deep Fake of Nicholas Cage as Tom Cruise. But no sooner do analysts like Lyu figure out how to detect a Deep Fake, than the method becomes obsolete.

Lyu: This detection of fake media and the synthesis of fake media is playing a cat-and-mouse game. We always trying to beat the other side. So, once they notice there's a way fake videos can be detected, they actually improve their algorithm.

Sharyl: Now they blink?

Lyu: They blink now, yes.

Kalev Leetaru: Historically in Hollywood that took a lot of resources.

Sharyl: Special effects?

Leetaru: Exactly. Exactly. And now using deep learning and all this AI technology, machines are able to do that almost in point and click simplicity.

Kalev Leetaru is an analyst with the think tank: The Center for Cyber and Homeland Security. He worries about the accessibility of Deep Fake technology. The app is free. There are tutorials online.

Sharyl: If a Deepfake were used for malicious purposes, what is the fear?

Leetaru: ..what Deepfakes has done, its lowered that bar where you can just literally take a video of Donald Trump speaking, load it into a package and then set the camera, have yourself talking and literally make him talk, hit record, submit it back to Twitter and suddenly you have a video of him giving a speech somewhere.

Recently, Congressman Adam Schiff sounded warnings about deep fakes and the 2020 presidential campaign.

Rep. Adam Schiff: That concern now is heightened exponentially given that this new technology would allow the Russians or any other foreign actor, or any other malicious domestic actor, to push out in proximity to an election video or audio which is completely a forged product.

Meantime the technology moves forward. Early iterations relied on using a lookalike to make the face swap more convincing. Now, that’s no longer needed.

Beckham: Malaria isn’t just any disease.

English soccer star David Beckham appears to be flawlessly speaking multi-languages in this video about malaria.

Beckham deepfake: (Arabic) “And it still kills a child every two minutes.” (French) "But we can end it. We have the knowledge, we have the opportunity.”

Whether the technology is used for good or evil there’s a brave new artificial reality.

Sharyl: Are we quickly approaching a time do you think when we shouldn't believe at face value anything we see online?

Lyu: I think, at least, I will say everybody should be careful and keep vigilant about this kind of visual media we're seeing, simply because we have the capacity of changing them.

Lyu is working on ideas to make photos that we post online on social media harder to steal and use in face swapping technology. Also with the warning not to believe anything, is undermining our trust in all videos including those that are genuine, it’s own problem? When we can no longer be sure what is real and what is not? And there’s the issue of plausible deniability. People can say something real “is not me.”

Watch the video investigation by clicking the link below:

http://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/deep-fakes

Fight improper government surveillance. Support Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI over the government computer intrusions of Attkisson's work while she was a CBS News investigative correspondent. Visit the Attkisson Fourth Amendment Litigation Fund. Click here.

How to support SharylAttkisson.com and independent journalism

A number of you have asked over the years how you can support my independent writing. I have not previously had a mechanism set up for such support.

Now, with the redevelopment and improvement of SharylAttkisson.com, there's a way you can contribute to independent journalism. Visit this page to find out more.

With all the moves toward censorship of certain facts and views on the news and social media, it seems more important than ever to maintain reliable, accurate and fair sources of information.

Thank you for your consideration!

DOJ ready to investigate politically-connected Google

Multiple news reports state that the Department of Justice is planning an antitrust investigation into the world's most popular search engine: Google.

Google has been under scrutiny for allegedly skewing its results, often to favor liberal interests and to the detriment of conservative interests. Google has denied those claims.

Google is a subsidiary of the politically-active company Alphabet. Alphabet has given millions of dollars political contributions to Democrat Hillary Clinton through its employees and Political Action Committees, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. As such, Alphabet was a top donor to Hillary Clinton as U.S. Senator ($1.6 million) and also the top donor to Clinton's failed 2016 presidential campaign ($1.6 million).

Alphabet was also the top donor to Democrat Bernie Sanders' failed presidential bid in 2016 ($361,408).

  • Google's parent company, Alphabet, contributed more than $3.2 million to Hillary Clinton's political campaign through its employees and PACs.
  • As Bernie Sander's top donor, Alphabet contributed $361,408 to that campaign in 2016. (Source: Center for Responsive Politics)

Alphabet is not listed as a donor of significance to presidential campaign of Donald Trump, a Republican, in 2016.

As I reported in The Smear, Alphabet's executive chairman at the time of the 2016 campaign, Eric Schmidt, offered himself up as a campaign adviser to Clinton. And Google also provided funding to start up a nonprofit, First Draft, which launched the campaign against so-called "fake news" in September of 2016.

Under First Draft's definition, fake news is primarily-- if not exclusively-- a conservative issue.

Alphabet reportedly raked in nearly $137 billion in revenue in 2018.

Google reportedly controls more than 70% of the search engine market.

In 2013, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigated Google under antitrust law but took no action.

Read more about the antitrust story by clicking the links below:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/31/doj-preparing-antitrust-probe-of-google---dow-jones.html

https://thehill.com/policy/technology/446447-justice-dept-preparing-to-launch-antitrust-investigation-into-google-report

Police Scanner Audio: Virginia Beach Shooter DeWayne Craddock

Alleged shooter DeWayne Craddock, allegedly shown in work photo

The website Heavy.com has published some background about the latest mass shooter in the U.S.: DeWayne Craddock. Some of the information was gleaned from prior newspaper articles about Craddock, according to the website.

Craddock was a public utilities engineer whose name frequently appeared on city notices. He was entrusted with giving tours on pumping stations to community leaders, and he was a former member of the Army National Guard.

--Heavy.com

Heavy.com has also published the police scanner audio of exchanges recorded during the response to the shooting including, Craddock audio in which Craddock was named as the suspect. The audio also details the movement of the police SWAT team.

Please note: The audio may be disturbing to some. It can be found at the bottom of the Heavy.com article. The report of a police officer being shot-- but apparently protected in part by his bullet proof vest-- can also be heard.

(Opinion Note: In my opinion, the police scanner audio serves to emphasize the heroic nature of many law enforcement officers who find themselves in harm's way on a regular basis as they do the job of protecting the rest of us.)

According to Heavy.com: "In July 2018, the City of Virginia Beach published an article that suggested people contact 'DeWayne Craddock with Virginia Beach Public Utilities.' The article was about utility work affecting local traffic. There are many such city notices with his name listed. In 2014, he was listed as the contact person for the city’s “Public Utilities Design Standards Manual Update.”

Various news media published photos of the victims after the photos were released by police today. You can read CNN's article on the victims by clicking here.

Read more and listen to the police scanner audio at Heavy.com

Support independent journalism. Donate to SharylAttkisson.com by clicking here.

$50,000 Whistleblower Award Offered in Unlawful Government Surveillance Case

Reward: Up to $50,000

Many of you are familiar with the forensically-proven Government spying on me and my family. It’s one of multiple documented surveillance abuses by our Government. 

Details on Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI here.

Unfortunately, the Department of Justice refuses to act on the forensic evidence, investigate its own, and punish those responsible. The only option left for ordinary citizens who are targeted for abuse is to self-fund a fight for justice in court. I’m now in year four of my fight.

Even here, the battle is daunting. The Government holds the evidence, the Government uses our tax money to withhold the evidence, then the courts declare the case cannot go forward because we cannot list the exact names of the federal agents responsible— names which only the Government knows.

Today, we are announcing a substantial monetary reward, up to $50,000.00, for anyone providing information that helps us identify names of those responsible for the Government surveillance operation against me. *

The reward is our way of acknowledging we understand that too often, in the Government, the deck can be stacked against those who speak up and do the right thing. 

For me and my team of attorneys, forensics experts, and privacy and civil liberties advocates— we believe that actions taken by our Government should be fair, just and within Constitutional limits.

If the guilty parties are not exposed and held accountable in this case, then virtually no victim of improper Government surveillance has reasonable recourse.

As one judge who sided with me puts it:

As the government’s and private entities’ capacity to hoover up data increases—and as we move beyond accessing the Internet through a limited universe of devices to the Internet of things—the potential intrusion on privacy only increases. Under the government’s playbook…plaintiffs would be deprived all opportunity to challenge the legality of most, if not all, these government surveillance efforts.

Judge James A. Wynn, Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, opinion in Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI

We must be clear: those responsible for committing surveillance abuses against U.S. citizens are not above the law. They cannot use the authority we give them for their own improper purposes and then hide under the cover of Government.

*If you have information you think might be helpful, please contact Anthony Thomas at for terms and details. Contacts will be treated with the strictest of confidence.

Contact: Anthony Thomas

Email: Contact.Anthony@protonmail.com

Phone: (Use Signal App) 202-753-7575

Pass it on.

Thanks to the thousands who have supported Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI. To support, click here.

Fight improper government surveillance. Support Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI over the government computer intrusions of Attkisson's work while she was a CBS News investigative correspondent. Visit the Attkisson Fourth Amendment Litigation Fund. Click here.

San Francisco bans facial recognition technology

Facial recognition art by teguhjatipras

The city of San Francisco has banned local government agencies from deploying facial recognition technology.

The recent vote by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors came in response to criticism about the technology.

Facial recognition identifies or verifies a person's identity by comparing digital images to faces in a database. It is controversial because critics say the method could be used to conduct real-time surveillance, invading individual privacy. There have also been questions about the technology's accuracy and about cases of mistaken identity.

The ban only applies to city agencies; not individuals, businesses or federal agencies. Observers say it's likely to inspire similar efforts elsewhere.

Read more in Wired.

Fight improper government surveillance. Support Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI over the government computer intrusions of Attkisson's work while she was a CBS News investigative correspondent. Visit the Attkisson Fourth Amendment Litigation Fund. Click here.

Questions about deficient medical care for immigrant children

Unaccompanied migrant child
Photo by U.S. Customs and Border Protection

A pediatrician who has treated migrant children describes extensive negligence and lapses in medical care at shelters. That account is reported in a multi-state investigation by ProPublica.

Dr. Elana Levites-Agababa describes a consistent and repetitive lack of medical care for migrant children. She says that minors who report medical issues are frequently left untreated. Dr. Levites-Agababa also says that some of the children's issues are life threatening and could lead to death if not properly treated.

ProPublica documented multiple incidents of serious health issues as a surge of children is crossing into the U.S. through the Mexican border.

The federal government is managing a network of about 100 shelters. At the end of February, there were 13,500 children in the shelters, according to ProPublica.

Read more in Michael Grabell's ProPublica article at the link below:

https://www.propublica.org/article/pediatrician-who-treated-immigrant-children-describes-pattern-of-lapses-in-medical-care-in-shelters

Fight improper government surveillance. Support Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI over the government computer intrusions of Attkisson's work while she was a CBS News investigative correspondent. Visit the Attkisson Fourth Amendment Litigation Fund. Click here.

Unscientific poll: "The Wall," or lack thereof...Who's to blame?

Last week we wanted to hear from our readers regarding who is responsible for Trump's failure to follow through on the promise to stop illegal immigration and build a wall.

Our latest unscientific poll revealed that 59% of those polled blame the Democrats for the lack of follow through. Another 32% blamed the entirety of "the Swamp" in general.

Full results are below:

Trump (5%)

The Swamp (32%)

Democrats (59%)

Republicans (3%)

Mexicans (0%)

None of the above (>1%)

Fight government overreach and double-standard justice by supporting the Attkisson Fourth Amendment Litigation Fund for Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI for the government computer intrusions. Click here.


« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Coming Soon

Subscribe

Get the Latest Stories Straight to Your Inbox

Follow Sharyl Attkisson

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Recent Comments

  • Mickey Pullen on Hydroxychloroquine: Politicizing Medicine (PODCAST)
  • Mike Marinak on Hydroxychloroquine: Politicizing Medicine (PODCAST)
  • Debunking “The Hotchkiss Republicans Report” - The Hotchkiss Record on "Collusion against Trump" timeline

Subscribe

Get the Latest Stories Straight to Your Inbox

Footer

Pages

  • Home
  • About
  • Podcast
  • Support
  • Contact

2ndary Pages

  • Full Measure Stations
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Subscribe to SharylAttkisson.com

SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS

  • Attkisson v. DOJ/FBI
  • Benghazi
  • Fake News
  • Fast & Furious
  • Obamacare

Ad

Ad