Shorenstein APARC Introduces New Journalism Award Selection Committee, Seeks 2019 Award Nominations
Congress’s annual worldwide-threat hearings are usually scary affairs, during which intelligence-agency leaders run down all the dangers confronting the United States. This year’s January assessment was especially worrisome, because the minds of American citizens were listed as key battlegrounds for geopolitical conflict for the first time. “China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea increasingly use cyber operations to threaten both minds and machines in an expanding number of ways,” wrote Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats. Coats went on to suggest that Russia’s 2016 election interference is only the beginning, with new tactics and deep fakes probably coming soon, and the bad guys learning from experience.
Deception, of course, has a long history in statecraft and warfare. The Greeks used it to win at the Battle of Salamis in the fifth century b.c. The Allies won the Second World War in Europe with a surprise landing at Normandy—which hinged on an elaborate plan to convince Hitler that the invasion would be elsewhere. Throughout the Cold War, the Soviets engaged in extensive “active measure” operations, using front organizations, propaganda, and forged American documents to peddle half-truths, distortions, and outright lies in the hope of swaying opinion abroad.
But what makes people susceptible to deception? A colleague and I recently launched the two-year Information Warfare Working Group at Stanford. Our first assignment was to read up on psychology research, which drove home how vulnerable we all are to wishful thinking and manipulation.
Stanford's Poverty, Violence and Governance Lab is hosting a two day conference that seeks to advance understanding of the causes and consequences of human rights violations in both dictatorships and democracies. It brings together researchers studying repression – including illegal detention, police killings, and censorship – to better understand the conditions under which states violate human rights, and how this affects the relationship between the state and its citizens. CLICK HERE FOR THE CONFERENCE PAGE.
Keynote Speaker Bio
THIS EVENT IS CO-SPONSORED BY:
[[{"fid":"236200","view_mode":"crop_870xauto","fields":{"format":"crop_870xauto","field_file_image_description[und][0][value]":"","field_file_image_alt_text[und][0][value]":false,"field_file_image_title_text[und][0][value]":false,"field_credit[und][0][value]":"","field_caption[und][0][value]":"","thumbnails":"crop_870xauto"},"link_text":null,"type":"media","field_deltas":{"3":{"format":"crop_870xauto","field_file_image_description[und][0][value]":"","field_file_image_alt_text[und][0][value]":false,"field_file_image_title_text[und][0][value]":false,"field_credit[und][0][value]":"","field_caption[und][0][value]":"","thumbnails":"crop_870xauto"}},"attributes":{"class":"media-element file-crop-870xauto","data-delta":"3"}}]]
Dept. of Political Science
Encina Hall, Room 436
Stanford University,
Stanford, CA
Beatriz Magaloni Magaloni is the Graham Stuart Professor of International Relations at the Department of Political Science. Magaloni is also a Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute, where she holds affiliations with the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) and the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC). She is also a Stanford’s King Center for Global Development faculty affiliate. Magaloni has taught at Stanford University for over two decades.
She leads the Poverty, Violence, and Governance Lab (Povgov). Founded by Magaloni in 2010, Povgov is one of Stanford University’s leading impact-driven knowledge production laboratories in the social sciences. Under her leadership, Povgov has innovated and advanced a host of cutting-edge research agendas to reduce violence and poverty and promote peace, security, and human rights.
Magaloni’s work has contributed to the study of authoritarian politics, poverty alleviation, indigenous governance, and, more recently, violence, crime, security institutions, and human rights. Her first book, Voting for Autocracy: Hegemonic Party Survival and its Demise in Mexico (Cambridge University Press, 2006) is widely recognized as a seminal study in the field of comparative politics. It received the 2007 Leon Epstein Award for the Best Book published in the previous two years in the area of political parties and organizations, as well as the Best Book Award from the American Political Science Association’s Comparative Democratization Section. Her second book The Politics of Poverty Relief: Strategies of Vote Buying and Social Policies in Mexico (with Alberto Diaz-Cayeros and Federico Estevez) (Cambridge University Press, 2016) explores how politics shapes poverty alleviation.
Magaloni’s work was published in leading journals, including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Criminology & Public Policy, World Development, Comparative Political Studies, Annual Review of Political Science, Cambridge Journal of Evidence-Based Policing, Latin American Research Review, and others.
Magaloni received wide international acclaim for identifying innovative solutions for salient societal problems through impact-driven research. In 2023, she was named winner of the world-renowned Stockholm Prize in Criminology, considered an equivalent of the Nobel Prize in the field of criminology. The award recognized her extensive research on crime, policing, and human rights in Mexico and Brazil. Magaloni’s research production in this area was also recognized by the American Political Science Association, which named her recipient of the 2021 Heinz I. Eulau Award for the best article published in the American Political Science Review, the leading journal in the discipline.
She received her Ph.D. in political science from Duke University and holds a law degree from the Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de México.
Misconduct by those in high places is always dangerous to reveal. Whistleblowers thus face a paradox: by challenging and exposing transgressions by the powerful, they perform a vital public service; yet they always suffer for it. Comparing whistleblower protection in Europe and the United States brings into fuller relief the vital role truth-telling can play in sustaining civil discourse and democracy.
Allison Stanger is the Russell Leng ’60 Professor of International Politics and Economics and founding director of the Rohatyn Center for International Affairs at Middlebury College. She is the author of One Nation Under Contract: The Outsourcing of American Power and the Future of Foreign Policy and Whistleblowers: Honesty in America from Washington to Trump, both with Yale University Press. She is working on a new book tentatively titled Consumers vs. Citizens: Justice and Democracy’s Public Square in a Big Data World. Stanger’s writing has appeared in Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, Financial Times, International Herald Tribune, New York Times, USA Today, U.S. News and World Report, and the Washington Post, and she has testified before the Commission on Wartime Contracting, the Senate Budget Committee, the Congressional Oversight Panel, the Senate HELP Committee, and the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform. She is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and received her Ph.D. in Political Science from Harvard University. Stanger is currently a Scholar in Residence in the Cybersecurity Initiative at New America and an External Professor at the Santa Fe Institute.
Co-sponsored by the McCoy Family Center for Ethics in Society
My research centers on topics in comparative politics and the political economy of development. I focus on the micro-foundations of political behavior to gain leverage on macro-political questions. How do autocrats survive? How can citizen-state relations be improved and government accountability strengthened? Can shared identities mitigate out-group animosity? Adopting a multi-method approach, I use lab-in-the-field and online experiments, surveys, and in-depth field research to examine these questions in sub-Saharan Africa and the US. My current book project reexamines the role of elections in authoritarian endurance and explains why citizens vote in elections with foregone conclusions in Tanzania and Uganda. Moving beyond conventional paradigms, my theory describes how a social norm of voting and accompanying social sanctions from peers contribute to high turnout in semi-authoritarian elections. In other ongoing projects, I study how national and pan-African identification stimulated through national sports games influence attitudes toward refugees, the relationship between identity, emotions, and belief in fake news, and how researchers can use Facebook as a tool for social science research.
After the Revolution of Dignity Ukraine has faced a challenging combination: Hybrid war from Russia side and economic and institutional collapse. Years under Yanukovych rule in conjunction with a lingering post-Soviet legacy created a perfect storm and required rapid, powerful and tailored response both from Ukrainian government and donor community. Inspired by the signing of the EU-Ukraine Association agreement, as well as understanding the weakness of Ukrainian institutions, the Ukrainian Reforms Architecture project was created. Co-invented by EU and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the project focuses on different reform areas such as Public Administration Reform, Business Climate, Public Finance management, Privatization and SOE corporate governance, and many others. This panel of experts will discuss the results of the project on the Ukrainian reform process: What is the future of the project? Can these reforms sustain major political changes with this year's elections? And, if successful, can it be replicated in other countries?
This event will be moderated by Francis Fukuyama, Mosbacher Director of the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, and Steven Pifer, William J. Perry fellow at Stanford’s Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI).
Speaker Bios
Nataliya Mykolska is the Trade Representative of Ukraine - Deputy Minister of Economic Development and Trade. In the government, Mykolska is responsible for developing and implementing consistent, predictable and efficient trade policy. She focuses on export strategy and promotion, building an effective system of state support for Ukrainian exports, free trade agreements, protecting Ukrainian trade interests in the World Trade Organization (WTO), dialogue with Ukrainian exporters, and removing trade barriers. Mykolska is the Vice-Chair of the International Trade Council and the Intergovernmental Committee on International Trade.
"Are democracy and capitalism compatible? Or, to put it differently: What made democracy and capitalism compatible for decades, even centuries, and what strains this relationship today? The end of the Cold War seemed to settle longstanding debates about the political and economic institutions best able to achieve freedom and security. But a few decades have passed, and our institutions now seem brittle. Longstanding critiques of capitalism are being dusted off and repackaged," writes Didi Kuo in Democracy Journal. Read here.
Eloise Duvillier is the Program Manager of the Program on Democracy and the Internet at the Cyber Policy Center. She previously was a HR Program Manager and acting HR Business Partner at Bytedance Inc, a rapidly-growing Chinese technology startup. At Bytedance, she supported the globalization of the company by driving US acquisition integrations in Los Angeles and building new R&D teams in Seattle and Silicon Valley. Prior to Bytedance, she led talent acquisition for Baidu USA LLC’s artificial intelligence division. She began her career in the nonprofit industry where she worked in foster care, HIV education and emergency response during humanitarian crises, as well as helping war-torn communities rebuild. She graduated from University of California, Berkeley with a bachelor’s degree in Development Studies, focusing on political economics in unindustrialized societies.
Midterm elections pose an opportunity for hackers interested in disrupting the democratic process
Voter registration systems provide an additional target for hackers intending to disrupt the US midterm elections; if voting machines themselves are too disperse or too obvious a target, removing voters from the rolls could have a similar effect. in Esquire, Jack Holmes explains that election security experts consider this one of many nightmare scenarios facing the American voting public—and thus, American democracy itself—on the eve of the 2018 midterm elections. (Allison Berke, Executive Director of the Stanford Cyber Initiative, quoted.)