We need information that will help us cope with the 2024 political campaigns and facilitate Democratic wins. Barbara McQuade’s new book has the potential to do that.

McQuade is a law school professor and legal analyst for NBC News and MSNBC. A former US Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, she was appointed the first female in that position by President Obama. She possesses legal bona fides. She also co-hosts a podcast called Sisters In Law.

She is one of several combination authors/lawyers/talking heads/podcasters I follow. Her new book, Attack from Within: How Disinformation is Sabotaging America, comes at a perfect time for this presidential election year. It is relevant, engaging, and necessary. What is it about?

In part, the book is an explainer. McQuade pulls commonly known information from the media ecosphere and relates it to the concept of disinformation, demonstrating the potential and real consequences for American Democracy. She presents a coherent narrative that includes how disinformers gain power, disinformation tactics, why disinformation works, the danger of emerging technologies, and more. For those parts of the book alone it is worth reading.

What I found most engaging was the chapter “We Alone Can Fix It: Proposed Solutions.” Dealing with disinformation and misinformation can be daunting. McQuade compares this task to the moon shot during the Kennedy administration and wrote:

The tandem threats of authoritarianism and disinformation can seem overwhelming, but we as a nation have solved big problems before. The stakes for democracy are simply too high to ignore them or surrender to despair. Unless we take action, democracy in the Unites States seems destined to fail, and our sovereignty as citizens will perish with it.

Attack From Within: How Disinformation is Sabotaging America by Barbara McQuade, page 249.

In this chapter, McQuade turns from describing the problems with disinformation to potential solutions. Free speech protections are not absolute in the United States, she said. We should be seeking regulatory solutions to misinformation and disinformation rather than simply banning content. She asserted this can be done without implicating censorship concerns. That may seem like a difficult needle to thread, yet it is the approach taken by other western governments like Germany and the European Union.

Another idea is related to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. I have frequently bemoaned loss of enforcement of the Fairness Doctrine under President Reagan, yet there may be a different solution. “Making online media companies legally responsible for the content on their platforms would force them to remove posts that endanger the public,” McQuade wrote. This issue is at the heart of the Supreme Court case Murthy v. Missouri for which the high court heard oral arguments on March 18. This approach is not without problems. A discussion is needed to discover a way to balance stripping some protections from legal liability while continuing to make reforms in how online content is regulated. It doesn’t have to be a free-for-all. My sense is the high court will decide this case on narrow grounds and throw it to the legislative branch of government to be addressed. The days of having discussions like these at the Supreme Court, as was done in deciding Roe v. Wade, are over with the Roberts Court.

My advice? Secure a copy of the book, by buying it or asking your public library to get a copy, and read it. I’m missing some things in a short book review, but believe me, you are going to want it all from Barbara McQuade.