3 ms·

Apostrophes! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjUOXJoM6rI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjUOXJoM6rI

• Per_Bothner 5y ago
  The author might mean "it is history" - i.e. it is no longer a thing. Somehow I doubt that ...
  • takeda 5y ago
    > Rather than seeing the last five years as an anomaly, what happens when policy makers see this is a historical problem that is here to stay?
  • Mordisquitos 5y ago
    I interpret the title as "it is history" in the sense that disinformation is historically relevant, and as such it is a valid field of historical studies.
    • XFrequentist 5y ago
      IMO this is the best interpretation.
  • the-dude 5y ago
    Or has always been a thing.
• js2 5y ago
  Disinformation: It's History is correct from the context of the piece. i.e. the piece isn't about the history of disinformation, but rather, how history is relevant to disinformation. Just look at the sub-title: > But history can help to disentangle the unprecedented from the historical. That said, the author (or maybe an editor) could have avoided any argument by not using a contraction instead of trying to be punny.