Disinformationists....where?

Here is just one example of the most likely type of agents on the web:

www.independencejournal.com...

"Memeering is alive and well as a formal PR discipline since about 2003-2004

Ogilvy PR has a "360 Degree Digital Influence group " that's been expanded worldwide, and in use since around 2005.

Ogilvy is the leader in memeering to date, with some pretty advanced manipulation tools and a collection capability (kind of like the bots) that evaluates tone, tempo, sentiment, etc. of blog posts and forums for their clients and distills the info into metrics.

Ogilvy was contracted by Department Of Health and Human Services to memeer last year's public blog on pandemic influenza. They were caught red-handed by several forum participants, and there was even a press release on their participation, put out by Ogilvy after the fact, touting their successes.

There are several other companies out there. I used to work for one circa 2004 (that shall not be named due to still-active non-disclosure agreements) that has multi hundred-thousand $$$ contracts to monitor blogs and forums, and to come up with strategic influence campaigns for 3-letter agencies like DOD, DOE, Defense Contractors, some political campaigns, one foreign government in the middle-east, and several large drug firms and banks.

So it's not your imagination. It's a full-blown formalized PR discipline that's earning many companies millions of $$$ a year in your tax money, and they employ many PR hacks and linguistic scientists at the core.
Some good Google terms are: Social Media Insight, Digital Influence, Media Intelligence

Digital Influence

•360 Degree Digital Influence is an organized way of planning and deploying programs in this new world. It is not about manipulation, nor about delivering messages."

•"It is about openly and honestly engaging with users and participating in the conversation."

•"We have developed a powerful method to create and execute digital influence strategies at a time when we are all influenced in new ways and anyone can be an influencer."

•“The rise of the social Web is happening all over the world, although it is unique in each market."

•"We apply market and audience-specific insight to the principles of conversation marketing and are now able to offer our clients influencer and word of mouth programs across Europe and Asia Pacific, as well as the Americas."

[edit on 14/4/08 by kosmicjack]

reply to post by kosmicjack

•"It is about openly and honestly engaging with users and participating in the conversation."

Wow, that's a far better example than I ever expected to see. And it's got it all. PR for PR company! They are even using their own tools. Can you believe it?

All nice to hear and see, and even sugar-coated sweet... ahhh... I feel like I'm already melting away...

Actually, this is right there in the same league as RFID chips for physically and mentaly disabled people in hospitals.

[paraphrasing (and mocking) the PR stuff I've read somewhere]

"We just don't want them to get lost. We care so much for our patients. And if they agree, we even put all of their personal and medical information in the chip under their skin. If they get lost in the street (which is no responsibility of ours, but we care so much for them) someone with a suitable RFID reader can determine who they are, and where they were hospitalized. And this good and sensible samaritan can even bring them back to the hospital they wandered off. We care so much for our patients. Don't you believe us?"

[there's something hypnotic in "we care so much for our patients", isn't there? it's just NLP exposed, nothing more]

Maybe someone should send them a letter of support, saying how their efforts for better and more humane future (or whatever PR language they are actually using) are greatly appreciated. That would be "controlled folly" at its best.

[Notice: I strongly discourage any amateurish attempts at playing with (para)military contractors; they know their jobs very well, and they will "eat" any unsuspecting victim with childish behavior in a matter of seconds]

[edit on 14-4-2008 by elendal]

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
reply to post by dizziedame

 

I completely agree with you.

It is absurd to think that the government would waste time, money and resources on presenting false inofrmation on ATS.

That is a typical shill comment lol.

Why wouldnt they. Thousands of viewers have a chance to read some truth before the shills come on a try to kill the thread.

Originally posted by redseal
this is another...like the many... do aliens like mustard threads... hope u get alot of points and can exchange them for your ats car!!! troll alert

HaHaHa! Do aliens like mustard on thier biscuits???

These threads in and of themselves are like being in a class room.

Read between the lines and watch and you can learn much.

Has anyone else noticed when a pretty good post appears contrary to what is attempting to control the discussion there will be a "playful, meaningless post made immediately following the "powerful" post?

This way the post is more likely to get lost amongst the sidelining, like the video Creo posted of people watching the ball and missing the other story.

.



[edit on 14-4-2008 by interestedalways]

From a conspiratorial point of view this could number among the more important posts = Flagged and Starred.

Even if no 'accusations' are brought forth, and regardless of the 'evidence' revealed (and/or debunked). No one should disregard the possibility that ANY channel of communication can be compromised or corrupted - the key is that the 'diversion' is intended to put distance between you and your point. Right or wrong, playful or malicious, this can be, and I would even wager is happening all around not infrequently.

I expect that this thread has been severely diluted as it is. Many of those commenting are no doubt 'victims' of the accusations in question. I imagine them to have all their supporting strategies lined up and ready to go. It is also evident that among these accused there exists a camaraderie of sorts.

I would have posited the question a bit differently for the thread (if I may);

Give examples of what criteria can be used to determine if someone's post 'might' be purposefully misleading or disingenuous.

Any foray into disinformation research needs to be presented clinically. Otherwise it's all about the posters' ego - after all, some might be inclined to argue 'in support of disinformation' innocently believing it's valid.

Its certainly interesting hearing other peoples experience which these types of people since while im not new to forums im still fairly new to forums of these topics and ive noticed people play many little games here so its handy picking up some of these little tricks that make it easier to spot them. i try to be open and honest in sharing whatever information ive found about subjects but i need to get better at reading between the lines and studying peoples behavior better. ive read up a bit on all this manipulation bull crap but this thread reminds me i need to put the anti measures into practice a lot more because IMO if you trust a liar they can "infect" you with bad knowledge that can throw you from the true path and that can waste a lot of time and energy

Originally posted by HuntaXX
Its certainly interesting hearing other peoples experience which these types of people since while im not new to forums im still fairly new to forums of these topics and ive noticed people play many little games here so its handy picking up some of these little tricks that make it easier to spot them. i try to be open and honest in sharing whatever information ive found about subjects but i need to get better at reading between the lines and studying peoples behavior better. ive read up a bit on all this manipulation bull crap but this thread reminds me i need to put the anti measures into practice a lot more because IMO if you trust a liar they can "infect" you with bad knowledge that can throw you from the true path and that can waste a lot of time and energy

Great point!

I would want to learn without the nagging doubt that I'm being 'spun.' And I certainly want - when I 'reveal' something of what I know - to be confident that A) it is free of disinfo. and B) anyone interested can feel comfortable that it's not disinfo.

I study subconscious suggestion and hypnosis and basically mental manipulation in general from time to time when i can stomach it because i KNOW in this day and age its necessary especially if your into the sort of subjects discussed on this board. i highly recommend every good honest person here get a good legit book on "mind control" and read it whenever you can stomach it and im positive you will all be amazed just how much of this manipulation is all around us, i certainly was!!! if everyone takes one lesson from this thread it should be that there are more forces in your life shaping your decisions than most of you realize and if you study how they do it you can learn how to protect yourself from it

reply to post by HuntaXX


I have been looking in this area myself for some time. Many people are unaware of the amount of effort our governments have put into this field. Many can't recognize propaganda at all.

My most intense interest is in 'cultural meeming' at the moment because of all manipulation types, this seems to be the strongest evidence for a 'larger objective' than selling books, and creating national 'diversions.' I want to be more prepared the next time 'disinformation' and 'misinformation' are married into the next 'big' event.

Calling people "disinformation agents," eh?

Well, since this is the topic at hand I'll offer up my explanation. It may ruffle a feather or two, I'm afraid.

See, there are people who are dogged and noble pursuers of The Truth(tm). They'll often make a very obvious point of using telling everyone so: "They need to tell us The Truth"; "The Truth is out there"; "I just want to know The Truth", and so on.

This is, apparently, to convince everyone they're very open-minded people and wide-eyed, willing absorbers of suggestions, alternative theories and the points of view held by others on whatever the subject may be. There may in fact be some self-convincing going on, too.

My observation is those people--the ones who bandy about The Truth very often--are probably the most closed-minded and dogmatic people around. They indeed want to hear The Truth. So long as it fits their preconceived notions of that it is. Anything that doesn't fit becomes "disinformation" as soon as the discussion gets heated enough. These folks don't like their paradigms shifted and will resist with all their noble, Truth-seeking might.

Anyhow, there's the $0.02 of someone who reads a lot and posts rarely. FWIW.

You want to know who the disinformationists are?! I'll tell you, darnit! ALL you who deny the FACT of shapeshifting, soul eating, mind warping, pedophile aliens that control the empty shells of humanity that run the world. Wake up you SHEEPLE these disinformationists are leading you astray! They think we're naive enough to think humanity controls its own destiny, HAHA. The disinformationists at this site are just pawns of Sssazz and his Reptilian army tasked with subduing Earth via the last active astral gate before it closes in the twilight of 2012. IDIOTS, every last one of you who don't see these FACTS!

reply to post by Threadfall


NO!

The disinformationists are the ones who deny the FACT that Ford Prefect (an alien from Betelgeuse) is around the corner at the pub right now drinking pints and carrying a towel and a Babel Fish!

And the FACT that the Pleiadian Super-Babes are over at the Mt. Adams Sanctuary chillin out with James Gilliland and gang!

reply to post by Threadfall


Well, now that you've made it so clear.....I'm completely on board!!

See....all it took was some level-headed discussion

Closed minded huh? Good examples.

Reptilians are a strange topic when it comes to conspiracy theory. im open to the possibility of their existence but im not entirely convince theres any truth to them either. i sometimes wonder if the elites of the world want us to believe in them so they can use them as yet another scapegoat to get themselves off the hook if need be

Great topic, even it is going off-course every so often...

There are definitely professional disinfo agents here. Probably not many, I would think 3 at the most if they want to work around the clock. Think how many replies you can write in an 8-hour period.

However, you'll have a lot of trouble finding them, they probably use dozens of log-ins.

When you come to the topics that actually bring something new, an idea undiscussed before, or a topic which starts heading in a new, sound direction, notice that you will start getting replies that go against the idea (and can kill the thread quite fast) and that are all written in the same style, same grammatical structure, etc. I've noticed it often enough; it's clear the replies are written by the same person (sometimes they go as far as making the same spelling mistakes), but are all posted by "different" people. You see these all over the place.

And I'd also pay special attention to those who start new threads using particularly bad spelling (and explaining this by saying they are not writers). I remember one last week or the week before where the spelling kept getting worse as I read on, then became better, then worse...

As I said, probably no more than 3 people, but they're all over the place, trying to divert us from the flashes of inspiration.

Originally posted by ajmusicmedia
Great topic, even it is going off-course every so often...

There are definitely professional disinfo agents here. Probably not many, I would think 3 at the most if they want to work around the clock. Think how many replies you can write in an 8-hour period.

However, you'll have a lot of trouble finding them, they probably use dozens of log-ins.

When you come to the topics that actually bring something new, an idea undiscussed before, or a topic which starts heading in a new, sound direction, notice that you will start getting replies that go against the idea (and can kill the thread quite fast) and that are all written in the same style, same grammatical structure, etc. I've noticed it often enough; it's clear the replies are written by the same person (sometimes they go as far as making the same spelling mistakes), but are all posted by "different" people. You see these all over the place.

And I'd also pay special attention to those who start new threads using particularly bad spelling (and explaining this by saying they are not writers). I remember one last week or the week before where the spelling kept getting worse as I read on, then became better, then worse...

As I said, probably no more than 3 people, but they're all over the place, trying to divert us from the flashes of inspiration.

now that you mention it ive seen quite a few people that make a point of saying "im not a writer" but then i look at their avatar and it clearly says in their own self made descriptions "writer". since most of us here are seeking the truth people spreading lies are a direct threat to or goal so i suggest a admin make it a bannable offense to intentionally spread lies (careful how you do this one as it could be abused and must only apply to people that are guilty beyond a doubt) and maybe make a thread detailing how to spot these people and providing information to educate new members on the various tricks they use and getting it stickied somewhere people will see it. why should we tolerate a direct opposition to our goals when we could at the very least make their jobs as hard as possible?

Originally posted by ajmusicmedia
I've noticed it often enough; it's clear the replies are written by the same person (sometimes they go as far as making the same spelling mistakes), but are all posted by "different" people. You see these all over the place.

So, in order to help out the thread author, OzWeatherman....

Why dont you name the members you think are trying to mislead the ATS population and why you think they are providing false info or covering up stuff?

Can you offer any examples of these occurrences that are "all over the place"? 'Cause I really don't notice them myself.....and if you could help me discover them, that would be wonderful.

Originally posted by HuntaXX
why should we tolerate a direct opposition to our goals when we could at the very least make their jobs as hard as possible?

That's not fair. This is a public forum, requiring only an account to login and post opinions and thoughts while staying within the T&C. And what do you mean by "our" goals? Is there a mouse in your pocket? You wouldn't be advocating a policy of "trolling" members you judge to be disinfo agents, would you?

Some posters have a strong desire to inject a higher level of contemplative reason and critical review into the content here at ATS. Quite often that level of scrutiny annoys those that are hell-bent on disseminating their beliefs, regardless of the strengths or weaknesses of their position. And as happens so many times....when one of those weaknesses is mentioned, or a perceived strength is shattered and left in tatters.....someone has to be the bad guy; and it's rarely the poster that simply can't admit that they might just be wrong.

If we accept the premise that there are 'disinformation' agents (because I'm lazy let me refer to them as 'DAs" within the community we have to realize that the ground rules change:

1) DAs become ineffective if compromised - there would be no purpose to have a DA found out.

2) DAs cannot work 'alone'. There must be mutual support to add validation to the DAs 'genuine seeker' appearance. This would mean 'staged' arguments to create sympathy for the DAs on the board

3) DAs are not here to 'learn' or ask questions. DAs would not be here to gather intelligence. The actual existence of a DA would make it pretty clear that this 'community's information' has already been compromised. DAs would be like gardeners, cultivating misdirection and encouraging anything that would hinder a potential discovery of significance, or to irritate consensus bringers.

I think that the presence of a DA here would be counter-productive if their goal was to 'spread disinfo' for a number of reasons:

- The population of the board community is a roiling cauldron of interests - all over the map - not necessarily good for a specific 'agenda' since the material offered here is very often self-contradictory - and certainly diluted with 'personal opinion'. for example - If I were to cite this board as the source of a particularly 'important' political or cultural information, that information's validity would be minimized by the 'sister thread' where the debate rages on regarding "Elvis was seen in a UFO driven by Yetis. He was sporting a cloaking device"

- Human intelligence is at best marginally useful and tremendously time-consuming - in fact it is the source of the 'gravy train' money makers for official intelligence agencies around the world (it's mostly how they 'rip-off' their own governments). In order for it to be done effectively for the purpose of gathering intelligence or propagating disinformation, requires significant real-time tasking and analysis - not really a 'minor chore'. I'm not sure they would get much 'bang' for the buck in such an effort.

- We may be somewhat 'enamored' of the notion of 'real live' Disinformation Agents here, if only to validate our own opinions, and feel our own sense of 'we're on to something.' We may not want to believe that what we see and say here - doesn't matter to the PTB.

However I maintain that DAs would represent more of a liability to any theoretical parties who don't want information disseminated, publicly debated, or 'dissected' by 'conspiracy theorists' I would think there would be 'watchers,' but engaging people in the threads would probably be highly frowned upon. The truth is, unless a DA had a stunning array of alternate accounts, it would be fairly easy to note that a particular poster's entries all seem strangely focused on suspicious arguments.

Sometimes I find that certain members behave in a manner which appears to purposefully take on the 'flavor' of a professional detractor, or a person who is not interested in the process, just the 'show'. Maybe they are creating an environment of conflict to promote more heated debate, maybe they think that's what this place is for. But I wouldn't be me if I didn't point out that it only makes them look like an e-bully. Especially when like-minded types get together to do nothing other than 'opine' on the nature of the OP or commenter to demean and belittle them - or those who support their views.

Some expect to be granted more credibility because they profess to be professionals in certain career fields, or members in relevant or prestigious groups. However some of those folks get quite 'confrontational' when they sense that you are not allowing them the 'authoritative latitude' the feel is there due. Next thing you know the stereotypical behavior begins which seems to often spark the 'your a liar/disinformation' accusations.

On the other hand, my entire entry could be construed (for whatever reason) as a DA effort in and of itself - since I hold that I don't think that happens around here (generalization). "Nothing to see here folk, just move along...'"



[edit on 15-4-2008 by Maxmars]