Source criticism used to be a matter of examining a text. Who wrote it, why, and what is left out. That method still works, but it is not enough when the content is a video clip that looks exactly like reality, sounds like a person you recognise and has no author at all.
The chapter opens with information influence as a threat, what separates it from ordinary opinion forming and why it is regarded as a security threat to Sweden rather than a media question. The aim is rarely to convince anyone of one particular thing. It is to make enough people unsure about enough things that shared decisions become harder. Then follow deepfakes and AI generated content, with a review of what the technology can actually do today and what still gives it away, with the caveat that the latter list is shrinking. After that comes the most useful part of the chapter, practical source criticism when the material may be synthetic. The weight shifts there from examining the content to examining where it came from, who spread it first and why it is reaching you now. One section gathers Swedish resources for anyone wanting to check a claim or learn more. The chapter closes with organisational responsibility, since influence is also aimed at workplaces, brands and individual employees. The other digital habits of everyday life are covered in chapter 25 on digital security for citizens.
The question is pressing for a simple reason. The tools for creating convincing fake material are free and require no knowledge, while the spread moves faster than any correction can. The content that stirs the strongest feelings also travels furthest, which makes indignation a signal worth pausing on. For organisations it means influence has to be handled as a security question with a state of readiness, not as a communications question that arises when needed.
This page shows what the chapter covers and why judgement is what is being protected. The methods, the Swedish resources and the practical warning signs are in chapter 26 of the book.
Whoever shapes the story shapes how we perceive reality. Source criticism is how you keep your own judgement.
Key insights
- The aim of influence is rarely to make you believe something specific, but to make you stop trusting that anything can be known.
- Deepfakes have moved the line. That something looks genuine is no longer a sign that it is.
- Source criticism in practice is more about checking the sender and the route of spread than about examining the content.
- Emotion is the engine of spread. Content that makes you angry is worth checking before you share it on.
- Organisations carry responsibility too, since influence campaigns can be aimed at their brand and their staff.
Tools that belong to this chapter
The templates and interactive tools are in the Toolbox, free of charge.
Glossary and resource catalogue
Terms and official resources, including those within psychological defence.
Read on
Next step
Where does your organisation stand?
The self-assessment gives you a maturity profile against the ten requirement areas of the Cybersecurity Act in a few minutes, right on screen.