How Russia used social media to divide Americans

a reply to: DJW001

IOB is very good at restating his opinion over and over again in the most wordy fashion possible, and even better at denying anybody opposing his (facile) arguments could in fact be correct.

I wonder if IOB is in fact an early AI bot with a very limited amount of parameters programmed into it.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Zerohedge is 100% Russian agitprop. In this case they are sowing doubt by pointing out that a few thousand dollars is not a significant sum for Facebook. True. What they don't mention is how many eyes viewed those ads. Combined with other Russian propaganda, such as blogs and "alternative media" like zerohedge, catering both to the right and left....

a reply to: DJW001

Then read the next zerohedge article on the topic :

Facebook Believes That $50,000 Changed The Election; Senator Warner Agrees

Meanwhile, Reuters may have just stumbled upon the key piece of evidence proving that the Russians managed to change the course of American history with just $50,000 in ad buys. Apparently, one series of ads was so effective that it managed to attract the "interest" of 48 people on Facebook to an "anti-immigrant" rally in Idaho...and 4 of them even said they went (again, this is not a typo...that's 4 people, not 4,000 or 400,000...no, just 4).

Leaked Descriptions Of Infamous "Russia Ads" Derail Collusion Narrative "They Showed Support For Clinton"

That was quick.

Less than a week after Facebook agreed to turn over to Congressional investigators copies of the 3,000-odd political advertisements that the company said it had inadvertently sold to a Russia-linked group intent on meddling in the 2016 presidential election, the contents of the ads have – unsurprisingly – leaked, just as we had expected them to.

Congressional investigators shared the information with Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team, which has repeatedly allowed information about its investigation into whether members of the Trump campaign actively colluded with Russian operatives to leak to the press. Once this happened, we knew it was only a matter of time before the ads became part of the public record.

And, shockingly, descriptions of the ads provided to the Washington Post hardly fit the narrative that Democratic lawmakers have spun in recent weeks, claiming the ads – which didn’t advocate on behalf of a specific candidate, but rather hewed to political issues like abortion rights – were instrumental in securing Trump’s victory.

After initially denying the story this spring, Facebook came clean earlier this month, saying its investigators had discovered that the company sold at least $100,000 worth of ads – and possibly as much as $150,000 – to Russia-linked group that bought the ads through 470 phony Facebook pages and accounts.

WaPo reports that the ads represented issues on both sides of the ideological spectrum, which would suggest that the buyers didn’t intend to support a specific candidate, but rather their own unique agenda.

Reminder : 2016 email from Sheryl Sandberg (Facebook COO) to John Podesta :

From:[email protected]
To: [email protected]
Date: 2016-01-02 22:07
Subject: RE: Happy New Year

I am thrilled at the progress Hillary is making. Thank you for the kind thoughts. No one was more excited for this year to END than me! Onward to a new year and hopefully health and happiness for you and your family.

 

From: John Podesta [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2016 1:30 PM
To: Sheryl Sandberg
Subject: Happy New Year

Wishing you a happy New Year. 2015 was challenging, but we ended in a good place thanks to your help and support. Look forward to working with you to elect the first woman President of the United States.

Have a great New Year.

-John

 

Source : WIKILEAKS : /podesta-emails/emailid/56638

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

I love how zerohedge emphasizes that only four reported that they went, then named much larger numbers to ridicule the figure. The operative here is not four, it is reported. Only four reported they attended although at least 48 were interested. We do not know how many of them attended, nor, for that matter, how many were influenced by the ad to attend a local event. Zerohedge is trying to ridicule the report through exaggeration and misdirection. If there were a thousand ads, each one of which drew four people to a rally, that's four thousand, each of whom would spread the word to the others at the rally. That's how influence works, and even zerohedge is starting to admit it was happening.

a reply to: DJW001

You are doing off-topic trolling when trying source-bashing as a last hope tactic.
There is no need to ridicule what is already totally stupid and I'm speaking now of the anti-Russian claims you feel forced to promote. The ones that are 'distorted' by an unaltered quotation ...

What percentage of voters do 48 individuals represent in the total voting population of Idaho ?

Make sure you deliver you comments on the mail of Sheryl Sandberg as well.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

It is not source bashing. I explicitly pointed out their disinformation techniques. Why did they add so much "editorial content" to the original article, do you suppose? Idaho is a small state, and 48 voters could easily motivate 560 voters to go to the polls who otherwise might not vote. Not that Clinton had a chance of carrying that state... it is about establishing a narrative. If Clinton had won-- as expected, you would have five hundred angry voters who now have "skin in the game." They would then be highly motivated to organize further.

ETA: The email is not even on topic.

originally posted by: DJW001

ETA: The email is not even on topic.

The COO of facebook rejoicing with the Clinton head of campaign about the fact she is a helping hand is not relevant in a thread about influence of social medias.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

How is a United States citizen campaigning for a legally registered campaign dealing with a fellow American citizen under her own name with no misdirection attempting to get her candidate legally elected at all comparable to foreign agents masquerading as American citizens spreading disinformation and incendiary propaganda in an attempt to sow confusion and discontent?

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: Damiel

I don't have any serious doubts that Russian-based groups are amplifying the *noise* in western political debates. At the same time, I very much doubt that Trump is affiliated with them or has any say on their activities.

I believe Brad Parscale, Trumps digital campaign head, worked with Russian Propaganda teams informing them what districts to target with fake news and ads with precision (which the Russians did).

Interestingly the Senate Investigative Committee asked him to testify a few months ago and then withdrew it's invitation without explanation. That hints that Robert Mueller is still chasing that lead and they did not want to interfere.

What can they do about it? They are social media platforms and therefore open to people from all over the world. Their role is not to scrutinise the political opinions of individuals to see if they conform to certain values. I'm not sure what the solution is even though it's a problem that needs addressing.

It is illegal in the United States for foreign governments to run political ads and commercials.

Online is bigger than television now.

We should not police content of political advertising, we should police who is able to pay for that advertising.

a reply to: soberbacchus

It is illegal in the United States for foreign governments to run political ads and commercials.

Absolutely spot on.
Which makes this latest report even more troublesome

Russian troll factory paid US activists to help fund protests during election

Russian trolls posing as Americans made payments to genuine activists in the US to help fund protest movements on socially divisive issues, according to a new investigation by a respected Russian media outlet.

...snip...

Many of the accounts had already been linked to Russian disinformation efforts in western outlets, but RBC said its sources at the troll factory had provided screenshots of the internal group administration pages of some of the groups, as proof they were run from Russia. It also spoke to former and current employees of the troll factory, all of whom spoke anonymously.

Perhaps the most alarming element of the article was the claim that employees of the troll factory had contacted about 100 real US-based activists to help with the organisation of protests and events. RBC claimed the activists were contacted by Facebook group administrators hiding their Russian origin and were offered financial help to pay for transport or printing costs. About $80,000 was spent during a two-year period, according to the report.

The main topics covered by the groups run from Russia were race relations, Texan independence and gun rights. RBC counted 16 groups relating to the Black Lives Matter campaign and other race issues that had a total of 1.2 million subscribers. The biggest group was entitled Blacktivist and reportedly had more than 350,000 likes at its peak.

...snip...

The infiltration of American social networks by Russian trolls and bots appears to be the conclusion of an operation that began by targeting the Russian-language internet space, grew to encompass the comment pages of western newspapers and blogs, and eventually seems to have led to the creation of whole Facebook communities designed to look like they are run by ordinary Americans

Link

80K came from 'someone',
Someone in Russia

Certainly no official evidence that it was from a foreign government
However, one name is circulating : Evgeny Prigozhin
Businessman, chef, restaurant owner ...
Big *cough cough* buddies with V. Putin

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

So you are saying that Facebook is lying about the Russian ads?

Give us one good reason to believe anything CNN, NYT, Facebook or Google God says.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

So you are saying that Facebook is lying about the Russian ads?

Give us one good reason to believe anything CNN, NYT, Facebook or Google God says.

Ah...So everyone is lying but for Lord Trump. GOP, Dem, His own CIA, NSA, congress at large, News outlets entire except for Trump approved outlets.

This really has become a bizarre cult.

The only one in the mix that consistently, unabashedly LIES is the only one you believe..Trumpites! Like oompa-loompa's or minions, but less intelligent.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

So you are saying that Facebook is lying about the Russian ads?

Give us one good reason to believe anything CNN, NYT, Facebook or Google God says.

Ah...So everyone is lying but for Lord Trump. GOP, Dem, His own CIA, NSA, congress at large, News outlets entire except for Trump approved outlets.

This really has become a bizarre cult.

The only one in the mix that consistently, unabashedly LIES is the only one you believe..Trumpites! Like oompa-loompa's or minions, but less intelligent.

Your cultish anti-trump obsession is showing. You might want to pull that up. I wans't talking about Trump. And just because Trump has been getting dirty with them in the playpen for me to talk about them doesn't insist any actual position on Trump's trustworthiness.

Everyone knows you cant make it in politics without being a professional liar. Although not being as refined of one upon entry as the rest of the DC horde might explain a bit of all the drama we saw unfold last year.

PS: Good job dodging my challenge by the way.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Give us one good reason to believe anything CNN, NYT, Facebook or Google God says.

You're confabulating here: sorry to say it out loud in-front of everone

Right now, anyone could light up FB,Twitter ... whatever
hell, even start a thread on ATS right now with this :

'Trump resigns, markets in turmoil, Pence outlaws gay marriage as 1st act ... bbc breaking, more to follow'

No links, just my own bullchit !
Yet it would be liked and shared in abundance
go do it right now !
Mods: wanna try ?

What i'm getting at, is that,
It's the intrinsic value of social media
Everyone has become a 'journalist'

That's why it's fundamentally untrustable

"Msn"
be that CNN, NYT, WSJ, WAPO, FOX et al,
just to cite a few ...

irrespective of their trempe, leaning and editorial poilicy
Doesn't matter if you or i like them or not
They are all - respectable - journalistic instutions

Rhetorical question:
How many Pulitzer's have they won between them ?

Facebook, Google, Twitter, et al, are open to everyone
Everyone with a keyboard ... and an opinion

Do you rate Trump's Tweets as 100% truthfull ?

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

So you are saying that Facebook is lying about the Russian ads?

Give us one good reason to believe anything CNN, NYT, Facebook or Google God says.

Because they are usually right. Their analysis of the polls in the last election was flawed, but so far they have reported accurately about Manafort's ties to Russia, Michael Flynn, Tom Price., etc, etc. Meanwhile, all Trump can do is accuse them of lying without providing facts of his own. In fact, there is a long backlog of Trump claims that he has yet to even try to prove.

Why do you hate the First Amendment so much? We know why Trump hates it but why you? Your constant rants against the media and news agencies suggest you are actively trying to undermine it.

a reply to: DJW001

Your constant rants against the media and news agencies suggest you are actively trying to undermine it

A free media is the last bastion of defense before totalitarianism ... why would anyone want to shut it down ?

a reply to: Damiel

It wasn't Russia...it was your own country....

a reply to: DJW001

Because they are usually right.

...on the money and big algo censorship, not on decent journalism. Stop fooling yourself, it's mainstream hogwash filled with systemic russian agressions from the other MICs. We can call it propaganda and it's a fcking disgrace for any western society.

4th cornerstone of the civil society and all that, ya know. People need to be educated in order to make informed decisions, not swayed into swallowing certain narratives hook, line and sinker. Yes. It's a problem, it has been for years and now another branch of gubbermint douches offers more of the same old wrong solutions to complex problems. With less freedom for the people and more control for the psychopaths without psylocibin, of course. Surprise!

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Can you provide an example of a fabricated story that was not retracted and its author fired?

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: Damiel

It wasn't Russia...it was your own country....

Russia is exploiting America's divisions to keep it from moving with confidence on the world stage. So long as we are bickering, Russia and China can rewrite the rules of international conduct.