Something happened today at the Daily Mail? sHillbots.

originally posted by: Ohanka
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 agree on your point about the Daily Mail not being the real world... well sadly it probably is quite close.

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

The OP did.

fewer would comment on it and even fewer would take the time to go through articles and upvote pro-Hillary messages

So why on earth would CTR target it then? Is it relevant or is it not? Your contradicting the Trump-ette line.

a reply to: SudoNim

I dunno, maybe they were bored I guess.

originally posted by: SoulSurfer
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.

Did I say Trump had barely people supporting him?

As for the cameraman. He doesn't answer to Trump does he? Unless it was an act by Trump.

If I was told my job was to cover Trumps speech and focus on him while he's talking, I'd be hesitant to go against what my boss has said just because Trump throws a tantrum.

originally posted by: SudoNim


Did I say Trump had barely people supporting him?

Yes, you did, but indirectly and I quote:

It couldn't possibly be that Donald Trump is just unpopular? No thats crazy.

So I responded to debunk this claim, and showed he has much more supporters than most realized.

originally posted by: SoulSurfer

originally posted by: SudoNim


Did I say Trump had barely people supporting him?

Yes, you did, but indirectly and I quote:

It couldn't possibly be that Donald Trump is just unpopular? No thats crazy.

So I responded to debunk this claim, and showed he has much more supporters than most realized.

Ah, for some reason you took the word "unpopular" to mean that he had no supporters whatsoever.

Well done on your debunk. Before I thought no-one supporter Trump and the Trump supporters on here were just, as Trump would say, "sarcasm".

Trump is not popular in relative terms. More specifically, most people in the world think he is a clown.


p.s here's some more pictures for you, I know you prefer them to reading

a reply to: SudoNim

Well I ask people to listen to his actual words instead of listening to biasness. His words is whats getting him millions of supporters.


The problem is, like OP says, there are trolls trying to sway public opinion. And ridiculing people is one of their tactics. But those of us who know whats going on as well as the election fraud

Julian Assange Sees 'Incredible Double Standard' In Clinton Email Case


When Julian Speaks, the world listens.

This has been going on for months on Hillary, immigrants, refugees and BLM articles. In less than 3 minutes one comment got 3k likes while everyone else had less than 10. Normally the commenters call them out and blame the staff or a bot. I have even seen some getting 20k+.

originally posted by: SoulSurfer
a reply to: SudoNim

Well I ask people to listen to his actual words instead of listening to biasness. His words is whats getting him millions of supporters.

The problem is, like OP says, there are trolls trying to sway public opinion. And ridiculing people is one of their tactics. But those of us who know whats going on as well as the election fraud

Julian Assange Sees 'Incredible Double Standard' In Clinton Email Case


When Julian Speaks, the world listens.

So should I trust my ears over my eyes? Yes, its very easy to spot the Trump trolls. The ones whose only answer to someone posting something positive regarding Hillary is that they must be paid to do it. They'll also claim the election is rigged, prepping themselves for when Trump loses they can call foul play.

I can guarantee you the majority of the world doesn't know or care who Julian is.

a reply to: SudoNim

I can guarantee you the majority of the world doesn't know or care who Julian is.

Just because you, (one single person) has an opinion, it does not make it true. You cannot speak for all of the world because you are not in peoples minds to say that.

You're not gonna sway peoples opinions here when we have evidences of Hilary clintons crimes. The world Does care.

Otherwise why would ecuador give him assylum/protection? because he is a well known whistleblower and his leaks are 100% trusted around the world.

These two videos are Bombshell information.




The truth will set you free. Exposing hilary clinton. (To those who read this post, listen to the interview very carefully, because it reveals ALOT.) What Hilary does not want people to know, click below.



Judge Napolitano


BREAKING: Assange Suggests Murdered Seth Rich Was Wikileaks DNC Source!

originally posted by: SoulSurfer

Just because one single person has an opinion, it does not make it true.
You cannot speak for all of the world because you are not in peoples minds to say that.

The world Does care.

Haha, how to end your own argument in the space of two sentences.

Why would someone artificially boost the "approval" of comments on the DM site?

And what purpose does it serve? Do we actually think someone is going to change their minds or be influenced in their politics by how many "arrows" a DM comment has?

originally posted by: SudoNim
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 happened and I am not a Trump supporter.

a reply to: introvert

I'm not behind inflating support on the DM it so I can't answer your questions.

I can only tell you that there is a group of people on the DM that are inflating their green arrows by the thousands, instantly. And they are pro-Hillary/anti-Trump across-the-board.

I saw it with my own eyes and other people noticed it besides me.

And, again, I am not a Trump supporter. But I am interested in how disinfo & propaganda are used to manipulate the public.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: SudoNim
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 happened and I am not a Trump supporter.

What happened? You noticed the pro-Hillary/anti-Trump comments had higher green arrows than pro-Trump/anti-Hillary ones?

It's your illogical jump to seeing something that you don't like and calling foul play which I found ignorant.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Like I posted on another thread, the Hillary campaign is using psychological propaganda the same one that is been used on the public by the government and corporate America, if you drill the public enough they can steer public opinion.

This no new it has been done for years, with success on people that are more susceptible to others to mental manipulation.

Actually the first time this methods was used was during the wwII I am sure they has gotten more sophisticated now.

This agencies are now call polling and surveying.

Constructing Public Opinion:
How Politicians and the Media Misrepresent the Public

◦constructs, rather than reflects, true public opinion by failing to reflect the specific and accurate opinions of the public on specific issues;

◦constructs by misrepresentation the public itself;

◦excludes real and mainstream public sentiment that has been shown repeatedly in surveys to lie outside, and to the left, of what mainstream reporting of opinion allows;

◦reflects the interests of politicians who must first satisfy the interests of those who fund them, interests that are by definition conservative because wedded to the status quo;

◦reflects the interests of the mass media whose job it is to report what the public says it wants: the media’s institutional interests as corporations themselves, and the related pressure on them to trade in labels, image and oversimplification – rather than specifics, nuance and substance – in order to maintain ratings and market share;

◦reflects media bias toward the elite interests who have the greatest access to media;

◦does not so much measure public feeling about the direction or shape of policy as it does direct and shape public feeling about predetermined policies that often work against what the public says it wants.

◦creates a climate of misinformation which in turn affects public opinion by affecting people’s understanding of major issues.

Is actually a film on this issue

www.csub.edu...

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: SudoNim
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 happened and I am not a Trump supporter.

What happened?

Reread the OP. I'm not running in your circles.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: introvert

I'm not behind inflating support on the DM it so I can't answer your questions.

I can only tell you that there is a group of people on the DM that are inflating their green arrows by the thousands, instantly. And they are pro-Hillary/anti-Trump across-the-board.

I saw it with my own eyes and other people noticed it besides me.

And, again, I am not a Trump supporter. But I am interested in how disinfo & propaganda are used to manipulate the public.

Well, it serves no purpose to inflate the "likes" of comments on a UK news website, in regards to American politics. And I would not call it a disinfo or propaganda effort. Someone's playing with the scripts or code.

There are better ways to spread propaganda and I highly doubt CTR is involved. That is not what they do.

a reply to: introvert

And what purpose does it serve? Do we actually think someone is going to change their minds or be influenced in their politics by how many "arrows" a DM comment has?

Well, let's look at what researchers have found:

What the Study Found

Xiong and Liu discovered that public opinion on Twitter often evolves rapidly and levels off quickly into an ordered state in which one opinion remains dominant. In true social media form, this consensus is often driven by the endorsements of larger and larger groups, which tend to have the most influence.

The work also revealed that when dominant opinions emerge, however, they tend not to achieve complete consensus. In fact, Xiong said, when Twitter users who hold minority views are faced with overwhelming opposition, they are still not likely to change their opinions.

Since public opinion levels off and evolves into an ordered state within a short time, small advantages of one opinion in the early stages can turn into a bigger advantage during the evolution of public opinion, Xiong said.

"Once public opinion stabilizes, it’s difficult to change,” he added.

The work also revealed that Twitter users overall are more likely to work to change the opinions of others than to admit to changes of their own.

How Twitter Shapes Public Opinion

And yes, I know this relates to Twitter, but the DM comments section is a form of social media in and of itself so the same theory applies.

Let's look elsewhere:

The largest and perhaps best-known inquiry into this issue so far is a 2012 study published in the journal Nature, “A 61-Million-Person Experiment in Social Influence and Political Mobilization,” which suggested that messages on users’ Facebook feeds could significantly influence voting patterns. The study data — analyzed in collaboration with Facebook data scientists — suggested that certain messages promoted by friends “increased turnout directly by about 60,000 voters and indirectly through social contagion by another 280,000 voters, for a total of 340,000 additional votes.” Close friends with real-world ties were found to be much more influential than casual online acquaintances. (Following the study, concerns were raised about the potential manipulation of users and “digital gerrymandering.”)

How does social media use influence political participation and civic engagement? A meta-analysis

So your attempt at downplaying the obvious purpose of this activity is, to me, obvious.

a reply to: introvert

The Daily Mail has a huge U.S. readership. And they run a lot of U.S. political stories.

I'm not sure of what particular 'group' that's behind it, but it is organized, coordinated, and there is a common theme among the posters inflating their support...they are all pro-Hillary/anti-Trump.

a reply to: marg6043

This not new it has been done for years, with success on people that are more susceptible to others to mental manipulation.

Actually the first time this methods was used was during the wwII I am sure they has gotten more sophisticated now.

Spot on Marg.

I think it's partially aimed at playing on human tendencies of conformity. You're right about its coloured past too; it's been a key pillar of propaganda since who knows when? Certainly as early as WW1. People are supposed to be subconsciously influenced by the rah-rah uplikes and then drawn towards supporting whoever is getting all that *love.*

Incidentally, I looked at the *all* selection of the stats posted by MotherMayEye too. Those accounts have tens of thousands of down votes too which (imo) indicates others playing their own agenda too.