Overt Internet Activist Groups and Opinion Forming.

Reading ATS earlier today i saw the following vid in this thread:

Coming to a School near you, The Koch Youth

regarding a group who ("allegedly") are being instructed on opinion forming via the abuse of "likes" and rating systems over a variety of web pages..



and then i came across an intro thread by a new member (which i wont link) who openly discusses being an activist for The Jewish Internet Defence Force.

The JIDF state that they have no official membership and so forth, so we are not (overtly at least) talking about "paid posters" and so forth, and i also assume that the same is true with regards the Tea Party activists being instructed in the posted vid. They are posting/supporting a cause from a point of their own beliefs and organising accordingly.

I am pretty uncomfortable with this. Granted, the two groups i mention come from one side of a political spectrum, and i think it's obvious that such groups will exist throughout the spectrum of beliefs and opinions, but i simply linked the two groups in this thread as they are the ones i have encountered information on here on ATS today.

Should ATS really be allowing organised, partisan activist posting like this, be it from a Palestinian or Jewish group, Tea Party or Liberal etc etc when it becomes obvious? It seems to me that the JIDF (and accusations of Anti-Semitism have already begun) or any similar interest pressure group represents a forum-gang that may begin with the arrival of a "scout" soon to be followed by an expeditionary force.

However i feel that we can not at present do anything about a group who may spend some of their time liking/starring posts from posters of a certain persuasion (quite possibly without even reading the posts, possibly using multiple accounts through multiple devices etc) .. But there is a possible solution to consider - Should the star system be binned as it is so open to abuse as a way to signpost less discerning readers to popular or thought provoking posts?

Are these issues that i have raised good for free discussion and does it represent the thin end of a wedge? Or am i just over reacting and it's way past my bed time?

Thoughts, comments and criticism would be most welcome.

Whether or not it was the cause for my concern (and I don't believe so) it really is way, way past bed time for moi, so although I hate to post and run I'll have to see what others think after I've had some much needed beauty sleep.

a reply to: skalla

Are we still allowed to have opinions?

I mean, what's the point if we aren't "for" or "against" something?

a reply to: skalla

Should ATS really be allowing organised, partisan activist posting like this, be it from a Palestinian or Jewish group, Tea Party or Liberal etc etc when it becomes obvious? It seems to me that the JIDF (and accusations of Anti-Semitism have already begun) or any similar interest pressure group represents a forum-gang that may begin with the arrival of a "scout" soon to be followed by an expeditionary force.

Actually I prefer to hear everything, all sides, and even the gray areas. But I am a big boy and can discern info for myself.... There are to many of the world who want to ban books and thoughts because they disagree with a current agenda. IMO individualism is being replace with collectivism...and I don't like it ! Disagree and point out something even if documented and be attacked personally not on the content.. Pretty simple to realize what kind of person/organization you are dealing with in short order.

From what you describe, without knowing what post it is, then it is tip-toeing the T&C line. But if they are just posting their opinion, then it's all good.

Many a member here has stated they are a Member of some such group. Is ATS to ban them as well?

a reply to: skalla

A Jewish woman in youtube admitted that zionist were paying Jewish university students by the hour to defend zionism on the web so yes it does happen and it clearly is happening in ATS as well. People should be aware of the shenanigans and weigh the information they obtain from the internet (including discussion) accordingly.

Im for people behing open about advocating for a certain agenda, problem is people arent always honest about it, different opinions makes for a better democratic world.

originally posted by: glend
People should be aware of the shenanigans and weigh the information they obtain from the internet (including discussion) accordingly.

Totally correct. Everybody is doing it.

People need to learn to think for themselves, though I'm not holding my breath.

a reply to: beezzer

"For" or "Against" isn't really having an opinion.

It's more of a team sport mentality where there is zero critical thinking.

Thoughts that fall only into stark contrast categories already set up, predetermined and not by you.

This is why I wish the star and flag system on ATS didn't exist.

a reply to: OrphanApology

I guess I don't understand the OP then.

If you're in the military, you cant talk about the military because you're in the military?

a reply to: beezzer

No you can have an opinion. As long as it's positive.

originally posted by: OrphanApology
a reply to: beezzer

No you can have an opinion. As long as it's positive.

Might as well ban me now.

lolz

a reply to: beezzer

Star for you.

Maybe one day, they will add moons. Then we'll really know what to think.

a reply to: skalla

Bring it!
No problem on my part, it will only sharpen everyone's research and debate skills.
Most on ATS, who have been here for a while can tell if a poster has an agenda and usually what it is.
A troll is a troll and most are actively ignored.
But let them post what they wish and let others rip their political, religious etc.. rhetoric apart with research and facts.
They might just learn something and possibly have their views changed because of it.
Deny Ignorance, by properly documented research and education.

I'd have to say that's a very valid question for the owners. I suppose if they found the 'reward system' being abused, they might take your concerns under consideration. There have been other arguments to get rid of stars and flags in the past. They obviously failed. I'm a take it or leave it kind of guy. Just a guest here.

From what I've been able to observe on the specific subject area, I'd say it's going the other way ATM. I see a lot of stars being applied to thoughts which are incredibly biased against Israel on the whole. It doesn't seem to matter that general aspersions are being cast. It doesn't matter that counter-argument is very focused. The number of stars clearly reflect the opposite of what you imply ... on ATS ... ATM.

Thanks you for the contributions - they are all balanced and intelligent (like what happened to this place???) and reflect elements of my own thoughts on this last night.

I'd like to emphasise that this was not intended as a partisan anti-tea party/JIDF question - it was just that the triggers for me considering this issue came from those groups in one way or another.

It was a tricky thing for me to consider, as we of course all have our own opinions, allegiances and conscience and to suggest that we do not act accordingly in the arena is quite simply daft, but i felt that the presence of what i saw as a single issue internet pressure group here on ATS was pretty negative.

I still feel that it may represent the thin end of a wedge and i'll be interested to see how it develops over the coming weeks, though it does seem that we may need to keep an eye out for forum gangs, which exist in a de-facto nature anyway. I guess there is little we can do about that except to continue enjoying meeting such stuff head on in our various different manners.

However - i have felt in the past that large numbers of partisan posters have come out of the woodwork when certain issues come to the fore but then that's just the internet and the nature of a site like this i guess. It's all part of freedom of expression and the members here are good at dealing with "lively discussion" and (lol) "eat that s--- for breakfast" so as to speak.

The star system (and possibly flags too) is borked beyond belief though, imo at least - and represents very little. I reckon to a discerning reader (of course, i am highly discerning and fall within the top 1% of this category, naturally etc etc) it's pretty much ignored. But peeps like their treats and i cant see that changing, although i think it would be a classy change that the site owners could make.

Thanks for your time folks, i appreciate it