Something happened today at the Daily Mail? sHillbots.

a reply to: xuenchen

Because stars or likes on comments on online news outlets matters so much??? Really they would feel a need to inflate that? . The correct the record people want thumbs up. Lol.
They're already getting big thumbs ups from the many polls showing her ahead by wide margins. I seriously doubt they care about those stars.

a reply to: IAMTAT

No one cares about those comments. They like to read them. But they don't matter in the least . They're comments on a news article on a sometimes questionable news website. Why would anyone care or why would it matter who gets the most stars. You really think it's to influence opinions? Really?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: IAMTAT

No one cares about those comments. They like to read them. But they don't matter in the least . They're comments on a news article on a sometimes questionable news website. Why would anyone care or why would it matter who gets the most stars. You really think it's to influence opinions? Really?

They cared enough about the numbers to artificially inflate them.

a reply to: Sillyolme

I bet most of the polls are using the GEMS system.

And if they absolutely cannot get Hillary in for some reason... makes me wonder how quickly this "Zika issue" spreads before voting time. Couldn't the election be suspended under state of emergency crises or such for concern of speeding up the spread of it?

We could have direct democracy using digital distributed networks with no central control that can't be corrupted, but people would rather play the tribal representative hunger games.

I'm not surprised that centralized, proprietary comments sections online are as corrupt as centralized, proprietary voting software. Why wouldn't they be?

I witnessed the same thing in real time on a poll i conducted on live leak, Trump was winning by 300 points then within a matter of minutes the poll jumped over 500 points in favour of hillary, I wrote what i noticed in the comments and others commented that they had noticed it aswell.

CTR are everywere.

I wonder if they use a vote script or CTR can actually find people pathetic and desperate enough for cash to do this?

I have noticed this before as well, more recently just a few weeks ago.
An article I commented on started to to get green arrow approvals over several hours and when I switched off and went to bed it was well up into the 60's. When I logged in the following morning and went back to the news item to look at other comments, I noticed the green arrows were down into single digits.

Another trend I have seen for a long time is certain news stories don't even give you the opportunity to comment, even when all the others news stories do. I guess some things are forbidden to comment on and present a dissenting or contrary opinion!

To be honest, I don't really care how much they manipulate things, it makes them look crooked when outed and doesn't change my opinion one bit.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

WOW. I always believed DailyMail to be a right-leaning news outlet judging from the many anti-left articles.
This means that DailyMail could be a wolf in sheeps clothing

a reply to: MotherMayEye
Back in april 21st, this Article was posted revealing those same tactics mentioned in your post.
Its nothing new, its been going on for quite awhile, especially against Bernie supporters on facebook groups.

This is out in the open, but people tend to turn a blind eye to it.
Best we can do is expose the busted efforts of these people. But whether or not people listen remain to be seen. Until then, these tactics and disinformation by those people will continue to try and sway the publics opinion by any means necessary.

BUSTED: Pro-Clinton Super PAC Caught Spending $1 Million on Social Media Trolls

Edit

S & F btw, and nice find!

originally posted by: Kalixi
a reply to: MotherMayEye

WOW. I always believed DailyMail to be a right-leaning news outlet judging from the many anti-left articles.
This means that DailyMail could be a wolf in sheeps clothing

The Daily Mail's definitely a right-leaning site and Hillary Clinton's policies are centre-right by UK standards. I doubt it's got anything to do with the Mail though. These are *probably* astroturfers whose job it is to create false public sentiments that create genuine support. People see Public Figure A getting all this popularity and naturally tend to side with them or feel warmer to them.

They'll work for lobby organisations who want a Democrat administration or they'll work for a company contracted by the Dems to massage public opinions. It's big business and destroys the concept of informed voters. PR and BS for businesses, celebrities and political groups.

Fake Twitter followers

a reply to: MotherMayEye

fantastic investigation here mate,

good work...

It's called the real world.

You've gotten to accustomed to ATS where you can post an anti-Hillary one-liner and get a 20 stars.
Or start a thread about user profiles on the daily mail website and get 38 flags. ATS isn't a reflection of how the world views Trump.

The ignorance of some Trump supporters, anytime you see anything or anyone that is pro-Hillary or anti-Trump and you claim its CTR.

It couldn't possibly be that Donald Trump is just unpopular? No thats crazy. Everyone loves him. He's not ridiculed because he's of the stupid things he says, he's ridiculed because of CTR and media bias... yeah... that's it.

originally posted by: SudoNim
It's called the real world.

You've gotten to accustomed to ATS where you can post an anti-Hillary one-liner and get a 20 stars.
Or start a thread about user profiles on the daily mail website and get 38 flags. ATS isn't a reflection of how the world views Trump.

The ignorance of some Trump supporters, anytime you see anything or anyone that is pro-Hillary or anti-Trump and you claim its CTR.

It couldn't possibly be that Donald Trump is just unpopular? No thats crazy. Everyone loves him. He's not ridiculed because he's of the stupid things he says, he's ridiculed because of CTR and media bias... yeah... that's it.

I trust My eyes, more than your words.





Trump Filled Stadiums


Here Trump tells the Cameraman to show the crowd.



Just saying.

originally posted by: SoulSurfer

I trust My eyes, more than your words.

Just saying.

I get it, you prefer pictures over text. It's quite common.

Here's some pictures, maybe these will confuse your eyes.

Remember DON'T READ ANYTHING ABOUT THESE PICTURES, can't be trusting those pesky little words can we. Just let your eyes work.

Trump:



Hillary:



Just saying.

a reply to: SudoNim

How do you explain the video showing the crowd then? Just saying.

Nice try though.

originally posted by: SoulSurfer
a reply to: SudoNim

How do you explain the video showing the crowd then? Just saying.

Nice try though.

How do I explain what? You haven't made a point yet?
Just posted images and a video of people are a Trump rally.

a reply to: SudoNim

Well, knowing the daily mail's usual readership and typical commenters, it clearly is NOT the real world. There is foul play at hand here. Clinton supporters most likely wouldn't read the daily mail website, fewer would comment on it and even fewer would take the time to go through articles and upvote pro-Hillary messages.

I wonder how many Americans are even aware of the Daily Mail's existence really. It's a British newspaper, and I don't know the newspapers from other countries (not many anyway).

I wouldn't go out of my way to find and comment anti-Erdogan stuff on a Turkish Islamist newspaper website.

a reply to: SudoNim

The point is that the video shows a LARGE crowd when the cameraman hesitated on showing the LARGE crowd of trump supporters. Trump called him out because the media has been twisting the story along with paid trolls to tell the public that trump barely had people supporting him. Trump showed that the crowd is much larger than people think.

That is the point.
The video is evidence of the amount of people gathering at these rallies.

Including this LOOONG line of people.