Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.

This is a business imperative, not a tech issue, says Brunswick’s Cybersecurity and Privacy team Cyber threats are generating some scary statistics: $400 billion a year in losses from attacks, with some larger businesses experiencing more than 12,000 attacks each year. But there is also good news. Companies are recognizing that cybersecurity is not a technology concern but rather a critical business issue and one they are preparing to deal with. To address the significant business and reputational risks involved, companies are using a cross-functional, top-to-bottom approach, one that treats cybersecurity as a business imperative. Many companies are beginning to strengthen their “human firewall,” creating a business culture where every employee sees cybersecurity as their responsibility. People, not software, are often the weakest link in a security system and that is a problem no software patch will solve. Regulation is growing increasingly complex and governments’ expectations differ from those of companies and consumers. The rules are murky and lag far behind the technology – and the threat. To deal with competing and at times conflicting requirements, some companies are moving beyond the minimum demanded of them, and aiming for a higher standard. To be effective, a company’s cybersecurity program needs to weave these threads into its underlying business plan. Cybersecurity is more than just a strong defense, more than compliance. It must be a part of corporate culture. It represents an opportunity to differentiate yourself from your competitors, increase the efficiency of your operations and earn a greater level of trust from customers, shareholders and the community.

Best-selling author Peter Singer talks with the Brunswick Review about winning the increasingly crowded and contentious war for attention What do Isis and Taylor Swift have in common? According to author and digital-security strategist Peter Singer, both the terrorist organization and pop star are fighting for your attention online and employing similar tactics to try and win it. ISIS kicked off its 2014 invasion of Mosul with the hashtag, “#AllEyesonISIS.” More recently, the terror group posted photos of its members holding cute cats in an effort to make them more relatable – tactics familiar to most celebrities and online marketers around the world. These online battles, the rules governing them, and their real-world impact are the focus of Mr. Singer’s latest book, LikeWar, which he coauthored with Emerson T. Brooking, at the time a research fellow with the Council of Foreign Relations. “A generation ago people talked about the emergence of cyber war, the hacking of networks. A ‘LikeWar’ is the flip side: the hacking of people and ideas on those networks. Power in this conflict is the command of attention,” says Mr. Singer, who in addition to his writing is also a strategist and Senior Fellow at the New America Foundation. Pretty much everyone who posts online – from governments to marketers to reality TV stars – is a combatant in this fight for virality, according to Mr. Singer. Triumph in a “LikeWar” and you command attention to your product or propaganda or personality. Lose and you cede control of the spotlight and the agenda. Mr. Singer recently spoke with Brunswick’s Siobhan Gorman about the trends he’s seeing in LikeWars around the world, and what companies can do to avoid being on the losing end. What were you most surprised by in researching LikeWar? One of the more interesting characters in the book was at one time voted TV’s greatest villain: Spencer Pratt, a reality TV star on MTV’s “The Hills.” He’s basically one of these people who became famous almost for nothing. But what Pratt figured out really early was the power of narrative, which allowed him to become famous through, as he put it, “manipulating the media.” In the same week, I interviewed both Pratt and the person at the US State Department who’s in charge of the US government’s efforts to battle ISIS online. And Pratt, this California bro who’s talking about how to manipulate the media to get attention, understood more of what was playing out online than the person at the State Department. Spencer Pratt, a reality TV star… understood more of what was playing out online than the person at the State Department.” How much have online conflicts changed the rules in the last few years? First, the internet has left adolescence. It’s only just now starting to flex its muscles and deal with some of its responsibilities. The structure of the network changes how these battles play out. So, it’s this contest of both psychological but also algorithmic manipulation. What you see go across your screen on social media is not always decided by you. The rule makers of this global fight are a handful of Silicon Valley engineers. Another aspect of it is that social media has effectively rendered secrets of any consequence almost impossible to keep. As one CIA person put it to us, “secrets now come with a half-life.” Virality matters more than veracity; the truth doesn’t always win out. In fact, the truth can be buried underneath a sea of lies and likes. And the last part is that we’re all part of it. All of our decisions as individuals shape which side gets attention, and therefore which side wins out. But you highlight that this is playing out differently in China. Exactly. There are two different models shaping the internet, and shaping people’s behavior through the internet, playing out in the West and in China. Essentially, internet activity in China is all combined. Look at WeChat, which is used for everything from social media to mobile payment; it’s Amazon meets Facebook meets Pizza Hut delivery. And you combine that with an authoritarian government that’s had a multi-decade plan for building out surveillance, and you get the social credit system, which is like Orwellian surveillance crossed with marketing. The social credit system allows both companies and the government to mine and combine all the different points of information that an online citizen in China reveals of themselves, and then use that to create a single score – think of it as your financial credit score of your “trustworthiness.” For example, if you buy diapers your score goes up, because that indicates you’re a parent and a good parent. If you play video games for longer than an hour your score goes down because you’re wasting time online. And it’s all networked. Your friends and family know your score. It creates a soft form of collective censorship; if your brother posts something that’s critical of the government, you’re the one who goes to him and says, “Knock it off ’cause you’re hurting my score.” And you do that because the score has real consequences. Already it’s being used for everything from seating on trains and job applications to online dating. Your score literally shapes your romantic prospects. So, you have this massive global competition between Chinese tech companies and other global tech companies not only for access to markets, but also for whose vision of the internet is going to win out. How can companies win a “LikeWar”? Everyone’s wondering: What are the best ways to drive your message out there and have it triumph over others? The best companies I’ve seen create a narrative, have a story and have emotion – in particular, they have emotion that provokes a reaction of some kind. It’s all about planned authenticity. That sounds like a contradiction, but it’s about acting in ways that are genuine, but are also tailored because you’re aware that the world is watching you. A good comparison here is Wendy’s versus Hillary Clinton. Wendy’s is a hamburger chain – not a real person – but it acts and comes across as “authentic” online and has developed a massive following. They’re funny, irreverent. Yet Hillary Clinton – a very real person – never felt very authentic in her online messaging. And that’s because it involved a large number of people – by one account, 11 different people – all weighing in on what should be tweeted out. Inundation and experimentation are also key. Throwing not just one message out there, but massive amounts of them. Treating each message as both a kind of weapon, but also an experiment that allows you to then learn, refine, do it again, do it again, do it again. How do you measure and gauge battles online now? Is it just volume? It all depends on what your battle is, what your end goal is. Is it driving sales? Is it getting people to vote for you, to show up to your conference? This is what the US gets wrong about Russian propaganda and its disinformation campaigns. We think they’re designed to make people love or trust a government. From its very start back in the 1920s, the goal of propaganda coming from the Soviet Union, and today Russia, has been instead to make you distrust – distrust everything, disbelieve everything. And we can see it’s been incredibly effective for them. First, we need to recognize that we’re a part of the battle. In fact, we’re a target of most of the battles. How effective have disinformation campaigns actually been in the US? What can be done? One of the scariest and maybe saddest things we discovered is that the US is now the story that other nations point to as the example of what you don’t want to have happen. There’s no silver bullet, of course. But one example was something called the Active Measures Working Group, a Cold War organization that brought together the intelligence community, diplomats and communicators to identify incoming KGB disinformation campaigns and then develop responses to them. We’re dealing with the modern, way more effective online version of something similar, and we haven’t got anything like that. There are also digital literacy programs. I find it stunning that the US supports education programs to help citizens and kids in Ukraine learn about what to do and how to think about online disinformation, but we don’t do that for our own students. What can people like you or me do? First, we need to recognize that we’re a part of the battle. In fact, we’re a target of most of the battles. And we need to better understand how the platforms work that we use all the time. A majority of people actually still don’t understand how social media companies make money. The other is to seek out the truth. How do we do that? And the best way is to remember the ancient parable of the blind man and the elephant – don’t just rely on one source, pull from multiple different sources. That’s been proven in a series of academic studies as the best way to find the facts online. It’s not exactly new, but it’s effective. Where will the next online war be fought? The cell phone in your pocket, or if we’re being futuristic, the augmented reality glasses that you wear as you walk down the street. It’ll come from the keepsake videos that you play on them. If you want to know what comes next in the internet there have always been two places to go: university research labs and the porn industry. That’s been the case with webcams, chat rooms and so on. What we’re seeing playing out now are called “deep fakes,” which use artificial intelligence to create hyper-realistic videos and images. There’s also “madcoms,” which are hyper-realistic chat bots that make it seem like you’re talking to another person online. Combine the two, and the voices, the images, the information that we’ll increasingly see online might be fake, but hyper-realistic. The tools that militaries and tech companies are using to fight back against the AI-created deep fakes are other AI. So, the future of online conflict looks like it’ll be two AIs battling back and forth. Let me give you a historic parallel, because we’ve been dealing with these issues for a very long time. The first newspaper came when a German printer figured out a way to monetize his press’s downtime by publishing a weekly collection of news and advice. And in publishing the first newspaper, he created an entire industry, a new profession that sold information itself. And it created a market for something that had never before existed – but in creating that market, truth has often fallen by the wayside. One of the very first newspapers in America about a century later was called the New England Courant. It published a series of letters by a woman named Mrs. Silence Do-good. The actual writer of the letters was a 16-year-old apprentice at the newspaper named Benjamin Franklin, making him the founding father of fake news in America. In some sense it’s always been there, using deception and marketing to persuade people to your view.

Are we on the verge of a vaccine? Let our COVID-19 expert explain if you are covering
It’s breaking news that is dominating headlines, impacting financial markets and perhaps finally relieving some of the anxiety that has been growing across America since late winter. On Monday, Pfizer announced that early results from its coronavirus vaccine indicate that it is 90 percent effective at preventing COVID-19. The pharmaceutical giant expects to be applying as soon as this month for emergency use approval from the Food and Drug Administration. If you are covering this breaking news and need to know about: What is the testing process for vaccines? How they are developed? What is involved in final approval? How will it be administered? And how quickly will it take to show positive results in our population? Then let the experts from UConn help with your coverage. Dr. Paulo Verardi is a virologist who specializes in vaccine research and development. He is an Associate Professor at UConn and a member of the Center of Excellence for Vaccine Research. Dr. Verardi is available to speak with media regarding this emerging development – simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.

Experts available to discuss the 2020 election challenges
When voters cast their ballots across this country to participate in the Nov. 3 election, their votes — much like many of the events of 2020 — were like no other. Below are a few of the news stories to consider for your coverage of the 2020 presidential election. Clarifying the Electoral College and the popular vote As votes filtered in on election night, both presidential campaigns were focused on the number 270, the total of Electoral College votes needed to win the White House. Schedule an interview with American politics expert Dr. Gregg Murray to learn how a candidate can win the popular vote and another wins the electoral vote and presidency. To arrange an interview with Dr. Murray - simply click on his icon now to arrange a time. COVID-19’s impact on the 2020 presidential election Speculations are growing on how the COVID-19 pandemic influenced voters’ decisions. Schedule an interview with Dr. Mary-Kate Lizotte, an expert in public opinion and political science professor in Augusta University’s Department of Social Sciences, to gain more insight into how the health crisis may have deepened already wide differences among Americans. To arrange an interview with Dr. Lizotte - simply click on her icon now to arrange a time. View a complete list of our experts available for your coverage of the 2020 presidential election. CONTACT: Lisa Kaylor, 706-522-3023, lkaylor@augusta.edu Teleconferencing and phone interview opportunities are available for these story ideas. Call 706-522-3023 to schedule an interview on any of these topics. Also, check out the Augusta University Expert Center to view a complete list of our experts.

How will the newest pick to the Supreme Court impact America for decades to come?
It was quick, controversial and the outcome was all but obvious once set into motion, but this week Amy Coney Barret t became the youngest female sworn in as a Supreme Court Justice. A sitting judge, a former professor at Notre Dame Law School and mother of seven became President Donald Trump’s third appointee to America’s highest court during his term. The confirmation has left Democrats concerned that the now conservative make-up may sway some very important upcoming decisions. Barrett's confirmation has left Democrats concerned about the fate of the nation's health care law, the Affordable Care Act, and Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision allowing women to have access to abortions. The court will be hearing a case on the constitutionality of the ACA's individual mandate in November. Barrett could also end up weighing in on a general election-related case involving the man who nominated her, should the results of the race between President Trump and Joe Biden come before the Supreme Court. October 26 - CBS News In an election that may see several lawsuits about voting, mail-in ballots and other key elements that could decide the fate of a state or even the presidential election – the Supreme Court where Donald Trump may have a say indecisions and outcomes. If you are a journalist covering this ongoing story, that’s where our experts on this topic can help. Dr. Martha Ginn, professor of political science at Augusta University, is an expert on the judicial process, constitutional law and the U.S. Supreme Court. Dr. Ginn is available to speak with media about this topic – simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.

It’s finally here. The campaigns are on their final push and as of Tuesday night – the results will start rolling in. This has been one of the most unique elections in modern history. A divisive and bitter campaign fought during a global health crisis. Texas, which has 38 electoral college votes, second only to California in number – may be in play. Though Texas has not swung blue since 1976, Tuesday night a lot of eyes will be watching Texas to see what role it takes in deciding the outcome of the election. If you are a reporter covering the election in Texas, the key issues in the state and what motivates it to vote for either candidate – then let our experts help. Jim Riddlesperger is professor of Political Science at TCU and focuses on American politics, with emphasis in the presidency, Congress, and Texas politics. Professor Adam Schiffer writes and speaks on media bias, presidential nomination contests, political news, elections, and public opinion. Both are available to speak with media – simply click on either expert’s icon to book an interview today.

As the persistent turmoil of protests grips America on an almost daily basis, people are becoming more aware of issues, getting engaged and taking sides. Be it around the dinner table debating, marching in the streets or even arguing on a national news panel – topics like Black Lives Matter, masks during COVID, the upcoming election or a host of other hot-topic issues are all part of the American conversation these days. It’s easy and even healthy for people to debate the issues – but for a business to pick a side on a controversial topic, it’s a much different picture. One recent example was Nike’s support of NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick. However, Nike also had the resources to bolster their support. They had a multi-million-dollar ad budget, a public relations machine generating hours of earned media – and the company was, for the most part playing to its core audience. Though there was push-back, Nike was rewarded with increased sales and its stock surged. For almost a decade now, Chick-fil-A has also boldly taken a stance with its opinion on gay marriage. The restaurant chain has faced mountains of negative press and protests, but the fast-food giant’s bottom lined never suffered. It still sees sales over 10 billion a year. For Nike and Chik-Fil-A and their deep pockets to wade into the fray with an opinion – it’s one thing, but for a small business to share how it feels, there’s a matter of weighing risk versus reward no matter how important the topic might be. “It may well be that it’s harder for entrepreneurs to create a viable business model for their venture in a more polarized context, says Giacomo Negro, a Professor of Organization & Management at Emory University’s Goizueta Business School. “If your business is more hybrid—if you’re supportive of a cause without being overtly affiliated with it—then it could be harder to engage other customers or clients who are uncomfortable doing business with a firm that is even vaguely linked to a specific social group or movement. Similarly, the core supporters of the cause can look at the same organization as not authentically engaged with them.” His findings certainly suggest that existing in a “gray zone,” where you take neither one side or the other, is a hard place for organizations to thrive in times of social change. “If protest activates the cultural boundary surrounding a group’s identity, then increasing protest participation will threaten the viability of precisely those organizations trying to engage inside and outside audiences,” Negro said. “At the same time, bridging inside and outside audiences also conveys a confusing identity and a more limited commitment to pursuing goals relevant to either audience.” With a global pandemic impacting all aspects of national and local economies – small businesses are under pressure to sustain and survive like never before. And if you are a journalist looking to cover the state of small businesses in America and whether or not small business has a role to play in protests and politics in America – then let our experts help with your coverage. Giacomo Negro is a Professor of Organization & Management at Emory University’s Goizueta Business School and is an expert in the area of economic sociology. His resent research study research study, “Which Side Are You On? The Divergent Effects of Protest Participation on Organizations Affiliated with Identity Groups’ focuses on this very subject. Professor Negro is available to speak with media about this topic – simply click on his icon to arrange an interview today.

Continuing to Learn and Explore American History
In the United States, students take several American history courses throughout their K-12 experience. So, why should students bother to continue taking American history courses in college? For Southern Utah University's Dr. Mark Miller, the answer is simple. “When I teach a history course, I am always looking for ways to point out how an issue or event in the past is relevant to something going on in today's world,” said Dr. Miller. “With this year's presidential election going on there have been plenty of examples to tie into regarding past politics and past political crises we have lived through as Americans.” Dr. Miller has conducted some exciting research that will be published in 2021. His upcoming articles includes: “Polygamy under the Red Cliffs: Women’s Voices and Historical Memory at Centennial Park” in Utah Historical Quarterly, “A River Again: Fossil Creek, Desert Fishes, and Dam Removal in the American Southwest” in Pacific Historical Review, and “‘One Territory, Many Peoples:” Racial and Ethnic Groups and the Development of Arizona Territory” in The Smoke Signal. “I think my work on plural marriage and environmental history shows that history is never dead,” said Dr. Miller. “It reveals that in current debates history is quite important. What happened in the past still informs the present. Since both of these topics are quite controversial today, I think historians provide a valuable service by exposing the history behind debates over allowing polygamy in modern America or whether we should make trade offs in development and water use to preserve unique species. Knowledge of people who practice plural marriage and their religious history as well as the history of preservation efforts toward endangered species is vital to all participants in the debates.” Dr. Mark Miller is a professor of history and the department chair of History, Sociology, & Anthropology at Southern Utah University. His research and teaching specialties include United States History, American West, Borderlands, Indigenous Culture and History, World Civilization, and Latin America. He has published articles and books on modern American Indian History, most recently Forgotten Tribes (2006) and Claiming Tribal Identity (2013). He has published articles on race and ethnicity, on indigenous identity and politics in several journals. Dr. Miller is familiar with the media and available for an interview. Simply visit his profile.

MEDIA RELEASE: CAA MyPace™ pay-as-you-go auto insurance now available in Atlantic Canada
CAA MyPace™, Canada’s only pay-as-you-go auto insurance payment program, is now officially available to consumers in Nova Scotia. First announced in Ontario in May 2018 by CAA Insurance Company, the program puts choice and control back in the hands of consumers. CAA MyPace will become available to drivers on in New Brunswick on December 1, 2020 and in PEI on February 15, 2021. “CAA MyPace has been generating a great deal of interest in the market, and we’re excited to offer this new program to the Maritime provinces,” said Matthew Turack, president, CAA Insurance Company. “Drivers now have access to an insurance option designed to meet the needs of their individual lifestyles and puts choice and control back in their hands.” The program is ideal for those who are driving less amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, or the Monday to Friday public transit commuter who leaves their car at home, retirees who like to visit family on weekends, or any motorists that drives under 9,000 kilometres. Consumers in Nova Scotia can now get a quote for CAA MyPace through their insurance broker, or by visiting www.caamypace.com, by calling 1-877-552-5717 or visiting a CAA retail store.

As battle-weary Americans struggle to emerge from the anxiety and worry of COVID-19, there might be even more bad news around the corner this fall for parents of young children. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is sounding the alarm now about increased cases of acute flaccid myelitis (AFM) in the coming fall. It is of a rare but serious polio-like condition that surfaces every two years and children under five are its main target. On average, patients during the last outbreak in 2018 were aged 5 years old. Limb weakness and paralysis is the most common symptom of the condition which affects the nerve cells in the gray matter of the spinal cord. Others include a fever, pain, or numbness in one or more limbs, problems walking normally, a headache, back or neck pain, issues with swallowing or talking, and weakness in the face or neck. Patients may also have had a recent or current respiratory illness. August 05 - Newsweek In what has already been a harrowing year, it looks like there may be another serious health concern on the horizon. And if you are an expert covering children’s health the potential for acute flaccid myelitis to peak in 2020 – then let our experts help. Dr. Elizabeth Sekul is a highly acclaimed pediatric neurologist specializing in electrodiagnostic medicine and neuromuscular diseases. She also works as an associate professor at the Medical College of Georgia's Department of Neurology and the Department of Pediatrics and Child Neurology. If you are a journalist looking to book an interview – simply click on Dr. Sekul’s icon and arrange a time today.







