Featured Post from Augusta University

Think your city is ready for a cyber-attack? Think again according to our experts

Oct 30, 2023

3 min

Jay Heslen, PhDWilliam Hatcher, PhD, MPA

There is no way around it; every day there are new cybersecurity threats to not only individuals, but governments at all levels as well. There have been some high-profile breeches that involve major cities like Atlanta and Baltimore.


But those attacks are going to all levels, and recent research has shown most municipalities and cities are ill-prepared for cyberattacks.



Research conducted by Donald Norris, PhD, and Laura Mateczun, JD, of the University of Maryland, Baltimore County along with William Hatcher, PhD, Wesley Meares, PhD, and John Heslen, PhD, of Augusta University, found various reasons why local governments struggle with cybersecurity.


The research shows local governments recognize the need for cybersecurity but are not taking crucial next steps to ensure cybersecurity by integrating policies into daily management practices. Not just that, some local governments were unaware how often they were under cyberattack.


Throw in budgetary constraints, and it leads local governments to be in a tough situation.


 That, unto itself, is a major sticking point, but the burden could be lessened.


“Effective cybersecurity is expensive and too much of a strain on the budgets of many cities and counties,” said Hatcher, chair of the Department of Social Sciences in Pamplin College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences at Augusta University.

“This is why we suggest regional solutions to the program, so multiple governments carry the cost.” Meares, associate professor and MPA director in Pamplin College, added it’s not just the financial aspect, but said there’s a shortage of cybersecurity talent nationwide, which compounded with limited budgets, makes it tough to compete.


In the quest for talent between private and public sector, usually the private sector can offer more to entice a cybersecurity expert to come work for them.

There’s also an issue of many local governments using dated technologies, which may be easier for cyber criminals to attack.


“Local government is increasingly being more digitally connected, with vital infrastructure, data and services connected which creates more opportunities for cyber-attacks. Additionally, local governments tend to lag in updating critical technology due to limited resources (both human and financial resources),” added Meares.


None of this comes as a surprise in the lack of cybersecurity training.


“It’s an expensive service for local governments to provide. This is why we suggest more budgetary support for the training,” said Heslen, assistant professor in Pamplin College. “We’re also unsurprised because local governments often struggle to fund professional training in other areas.”


But researchers say there are ways to improve upon safety of critical data most notably adopting dedicated cybersecurity budgets funded at an appropriate level in all local governments. Those resources can help address many limitations in local government cybersecurity programs, from staffing and hardware and software deficiencies to awareness training for all parties in local governments.



They also recommend the adoption and implementation of cybersecurity policies to manage and regulate actions taken by all that affect the organization’s cybersecurity.

By taking the recommended actions, local governments will have a better chance to provide high levels of cybersecurity and protect their information assets more effectively.


This is an important topic and if you are a journalist looking to know more about the importance of being ready and able to react if and when a municipality comes under threat from a cyber-attack - then let us help/.


William Hatcher and John Heslen are both available to speak with media - simply contact them now to arrange an interview today.

Connect with:
Jay Heslen, PhD

Jay Heslen, PhD

Assistant Professor of Political Science, Cyber Institute faculty

Dr. John “Jay” Heslen is an Assistant Professor of Political Science and serves on faculty at Augusta University’s Cyber Institute

Cyber ConflictPolitical ScienceCybersecurityTerrorismCounterintelligence
William Hatcher, PhD, MPA

William Hatcher, PhD, MPA

Chair of the Department of Social Sciences

Dr. William Hatcher focuses on public administration and social, economic and political institutions in local communities.

Public AdministrationPublic PolicyCommunity and Economic DevelopmentHealth PolicyPublic Budgeting and Finance

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from Augusta University

2 min

Experts in the Media: With Kemp bowing out of mid-terms is Georgia staying blue?

Control of the Senate is key for most administrations, and with a razor-thin edge favoring the Republicans, any pickup to keep control of the Senate after the mid-term elections is a priority. However, with a heavy favorite in Gov. Brian Kemp stepping away from the chance to run for the GOP, many are speculating the once traditionally Republican stronghold could stay blue under the Democrats with the re-election of Sen. Jon Ossoff. It's a topic that has political watchers and media trying to cover and figure out as parties get ready to get back on the campaign trail for next year. It's also why journalists and news outlets like Newsweek are connecting with experts like William Hatcher, PhD, for expert opinion and perspective. An award-winning scholar, Hatcher is the chair of the Department of Social Sciences and a professor of political science. His research focuses on the connection between public administration and the development of local communities. Kemp's decision not to challenge Ossoff in the state's 2026 Senate race could be a boon to Democrats' chances of holding the seat in the battleground state, according to recent polls... Kemp's announcement follows months of speculation about whether he would challenge Ossoff, a Democrat first elected in 2020. Polls suggest Kemp would have been the strongest candidate against Ossoff and that other potential Republicans trail the incumbent senator in a hypothetical matchup. "Given that Kemp was perhaps the strongest candidate to face Ossoff, his decision to not run will make it difficult to find another candidate that would be as competitive. However, the election is over a year away, and in politics, a lot can happen in that amount of time," William Hatcher, chair and professor of social sciences at Augusta University, told Newsweek on Tuesday. A poll from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution found that Kemp led Ossoff by 3.3 points (49% to 45.7%), Ossoff led three other prospective challengers. That poll surveyed 1,426 respondents from April 24 to April 27, 2025, and had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points. Hatcher said the state Republicans face a "limited" bench to challenge Ossoff, but whoever prevails will eventually have to defend Trump's "unpopular economic policies that will most likely adversely affect states like Georgia, particularly his recent commentary on leveling tariffs on the film industry – a industry that has a significant presence in Georgia." May 06 - Newsweek The race is obviously already on for the mid-term elections in November of 2026, and if you're a journalist looking to cover Georgia politics, let us help. William Hatcher, PhD, is available to speak with media - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.

3 min

Annual Healthy Georgia Report looks at public health in the Peach State

The fourth edition of the “Healthy Georgia: Our State of Public Health” report has been released by the Institute of Public and Preventive Health in Augusta University’s School of Public Health. Within the 64 pages of the report is a snapshot of how healthy Georgians are compared to citizens across the 12 states that make up the Southeastern Region (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia) and the entire United States. The 2025 edition addresses 31 health topics and has been expanded this year to include multimorbidity; long COVID-19; HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis infection rates; opioid and methamphetamine drug use; suicides; and vaping. Biplab Datta, PhD, assistant professor in the Department of Health Management, Economics, and Policy in SPH, heads up the team of IPPH faculty and staff who create the report each year. Datta credits Jen Jaremski, research associate, and Kit Wooten, public health analyst, with handling much of the work of bringing the report to life. Together, Jaremski and Wooten collected and organized all of the needed assets and organized the 64-page document, preparing it for print and the web. “Every year we strive to present data in a way that policymakers may find helpful in making policy choices,” Datta said. “There are several new topics that were added to this year’s report and some of those are concerning for the state of Georgia, particularly the communicable diseases like HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis. High prevalence rates of these conditions in Georgia, compared to the rest of the U.S. and the Southeastern Region, warrant attention of the public health community.” Georgia has the second-highest rate of HIV infections in the U.S., fourth-highest rates of gonorrhea, sixth-highest for chlamydia and 13th for syphilis. Something that is also new in this year’s report is a comparison of numbers from 2019, or before the COVID-19 pandemic began, compared to after the pandemic for certain conditions. Also coming out of the pandemic, the report looks at how long COVID has affected Georgians, with the state ranking 24th in the nation for rates of long COVID. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, long COVID is defined as a chronic condition that occurs after COVID-19 infection and is present for at least three months. On top of looking at comparisons between Georgia and the Southeast and the nation, Datta noted a clearer picture is starting to emerge concerning the difference in urban and rural areas within the state. “For several chronic conditions, like hypertension, diabetes and multimorbidity, we clearly see a striking difference between rural and urban residents of Georgia,” Datta said. Hypertension affects 44.1% of adults in rural Georgia compared to 35% in urban areas, while diabetes affects 17.5% of adults in rural Georgia compared to 12.3% of those in urban areas. Hypertension and diabetes are major risk factors for cardiovascular disease, which affects 12.2% of adults in rural areas compared to 8.3% of adults in urban areas of Georgia. “Hypertension and diabetes are the major risk factors for heart disease, which is the leading cause of death in the U.S. and worldwide, so these are some concerning numbers to see,” Datta said. Multimorbidity, which is when a person has multiple chronic conditions, including obesity, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, kidney disease, diabetes, hypertension, high cholesterol, cardiovascular disease, cancer, skin cancer and arthritis, affects 57.4% of adults in rural Georgia compared to 49% of adults in urban areas of the state. These rates are significantly lower than the rest of the Southeast but on par with the rest of the country. When comparing Georgia to the U.S. national average, adults in Georgia have lower rates of cancer and methamphetamine use but higher rates of childhood asthma and adult obesity. At the same time, rates of adult asthma and adult obesity among Georgians were comparable to the averages seen in the Southeast. Interestingly, while adult health insurance coverage was significantly lower than the U.S. national and Southeast Regional averages, the child health insurance coverage in Georgia was comparable to both national and regional averages. The Healthy Georgia Report is the only report of its kind in the state Looking to know more or connect with Biplab Datta, PhD? Then let us help. Dr. Datta is available to speak with media regarding this important topic. Simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.

3 min

Expert Q&A - Craig Albert, PhD, talks election interference

Going into the final days of the 2024 election cycle there is a very real concern about election interference from both foreign and domestic actors, and it's something that will continue to be monitored even after the final votes are tallied. Craig Albert, PhD, graduate director of the PhD in Intelligence, Defense, and Cybersecurity Policy and Master of Arts in Intelligence and Security Studies programs at Augusta University, is a leading expert on propaganda, information warfare and national security studies. Albert has answered key questions about who is trying to interfere in the U.S. elections and why it matters. Q: How and when should someone vote and does it protect you more to avoid interference? The access to instantaneous news or events could affect people and their understanding of whom they want to vote for all the way up until the day they vote. Because of this ease of access, this election cycle has especially shown us how cautious we need to be in regards to scams. It's also why I know there has been a big push for early voting and mail-in voting, and it's necessary in some cases, but I prefer to vote on Election Day because you never know what type of news might come out about one of the candidates or parties. If something comes out that proves to be true, it could affect how someone might vote, but if you voted before Election Day, it's too late. At the same time, a very serious deepfake could be released that could manipulate how people choose to vote and it could mislead people, as well. Q: What are the consequences of the optics of an 'unfair' election? What the U.S. needs to be cautious about is preserving and maintaining the legitimacy of the election cycle. After the election, no matter who wins, narratives of interference and how it impacted the election are going to be shared and that's just irresponsible. Unless there's damning information and very clear evidence, you shouldn't mess around with the idea that the election was interfered with, because that could threaten the very structure of the United States. Q: What's the potential for post-election meddling? We have domestic bad actors as well as foreign maligned actors that are going to say the election was delegitimized no matter who wins. They have social media campaigns ready to post no matter which side wins, they're going to circulate false videos of ballot boxes burning or news that not all the the votes were counted and things of that nature. They're going to do all kinds of things because anybody can fake a ballot box being burned or mail in votes not being counted properly on video or something like that. The problem is if it goes out there or becomes viral, so many people will believe it and that sows discord. So, that creates distrust in the public system on a pretty big swath of the American population. Q: Who benefits from post-election doubts and chaos? You have foreign actors that really build on the type of anger that the political candidates and their parties already use through their propaganda and rhetoric. We have already seen Russia amplifying the message that somebody cheated or elections were hacked, and you have China, Iran, Venezuela, ISIS and Al Qaeda doing that, as well. You also have regular cyber criminals that just want to sew discord and distress so they can manipulate people later on and get into our banking systems and things of that nature. You have potentially hundreds, if not thousands of attack vectors coming at the United States between election night and January 20 when the new President will be sworn in. And then afterwards, they will all still be trying to create chaos, rebellion, civil unrest, or in the case of Iran, China and Russia, open civil war in the United States. Looking to know more and covering the election, Augusta University can help. Albert is available to speak with media – simply click on his name to arrange an interview today.

View all posts
Powered by