Something happened today at the Daily Mail? sHillbots.

originally posted by: Talorc
This happens all over the place online, mainly on prominent news websites. Artificial inflation of "likes" and the other analogues meant to gauge "approval." I've witnessed it first hand more than once.

I'm an extremely careful, methodical observer of things around me. I notice this stuff more than other people, but I'm always afraid to speak up for fear of being called paranoid or delusional.

Glad to see I'm not the only one seeing this.

Great post Talorc, pretty much sums up the role that social media has with regard to it's effects on society. It literally is a "numbers game".

One of my greatest personality traits that I've been blessed with has always been a natural distrust of anything so universally liked. When I see all those big thumbs up counts, I just become more skeptical or wish to look deeper into the information presented.

Being an outsider, especially in today's social media driven/manipulated society, has never been such a great thing.

a reply to: introvert

Yes it matters introvert if didn't we will not have agencies that specializes on shaping public opinion making millions and corporations paying the agencies for using this same methods to push their products and ideas, or the government influencing public opinion toward desirable policies in order to pass legislation base on fake approvals.

Remember the 2008 bail out and Obama care, polls were used to show that supposedly the public was for this legislations when it was not truth.

originally posted by: introvert
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?

I basically said the same thing on the other thread so I understand your point. But on one comment the green arrow jumped 1500 in a few seconds so it tells me someone IS messing with the arrows. The only reason I can think of is to bully others into silence.

It is weird.

a reply to: Kandinsky

I guess since the beginning of the social media I never got myself attracted to any of their places of interaction, I never trusted Facebook or twitter never.

The true intention of social media is not just for people to interact, right now we are seen the dangers of the psychological manipulation that goes on within their media interaction.

Is fascinating to see how social media this days is affecting entire sections of human population.

Is a phenomena really.

I always wonder if facebook was actually a secret program stated by the government as a test and look how big it has gotten, their expectations are beyond what they dreamed off.

Kind of makes you realize that the veil is coming off.
The manipulation that is occurring is so open and blatant that you have to wonder if something massive is the cause of it.
Not just the normal old political agenda but something so big that its going to change the world forever. This is end phase, the last gasp of normal before the thing happens. Some of the people who know what is coming cant stop from just trying to get one last play in before it happens. They have lost all shred of caution and have just thrown it all into the wind. Rats leaving the ship.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Do you discount all possibility that the majority of American prefer flawed Hillary to flawed Trump? Both are bottom-of-the-barrel. Both have histories of providing suspicious information about themselves and their actions. Both have had legal troubles. Both 'earned' money via potentially shady means... This list of similarities goes on...

Is it not possible, that between these 2 awful candidates, the majority of Americans simply choose to go with Clinton even with all of her baggage, over Trump, and all his baggage?

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Ok. So why would they do this on a UK site to affect US elections?

a reply to: marg6043

What I believe happens is everything 'media' can serve different masters. FB expresses people's needs to connect with each other. It also acts as a way to study people or a way to control them ( old article). It's like no matter what anyone uses to connect/communicate, some other entity will hook into it and start trying to monitor and/or manipulate the conversations, emotions and behaviours.

Tapped phones, intercepted letters etc. It's always been the same.

I don't think FB or even Google set out to become what they've become, but they have anyway. They can control us in ways we aren't always aware of and, of course, are piped in to the NSA servers as Snowden told us. There are layers and layers of different systems at work and and they nearly all want to control masses.

Aye, social media is a hydra lol.

originally posted by: Dragoon01
Kind of makes you realize that the veil is coming off.
The manipulation that is occurring is so open and blatant that you have to wonder if something massive is the cause of it.
Not just the normal old political agenda but something so big that its going to change the world forever. This is end phase, the last gasp of normal before the thing happens. Some of the people who know what is coming cant stop from just trying to get one last play in before it happens. They have lost all shred of caution and have just thrown it all into the wind. Rats leaving the ship.

No not really.

boaty-mcboatface-wins-poll-to-name-p olar-research-vessel

a reply to: TownCryer

I will have to say that is a possibility, but it still doesn't take away the fact that political candidates and specially one like Hillary that is hungry for the presidential seat will spend millions of dollars to hired agencies to help her shape her voting approval using data manipulation and poll pandering, after all is available, easily done with all the social media around and is proven to work.

originally posted by: TownCryer
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Do you discount all possibility that the majority of American prefer flawed Hillary to flawed Trump? Both are bottom-of-the-barrel. Both have histories of providing suspicious information about themselves and their actions. Both have had legal troubles. Both 'earned' money via potentially shady means... This list of similarities goes on...

Is it not possible, that between these 2 awful candidates, the majority of Americans simply choose to go with Clinton even with all of her baggage, over Trump, and all his baggage?

In the case of these comments, the up arrows increase by the hundreds and thousands instantly, and just minutes after the comment is posted.

Meanwhile, other pro-Hillary/anti-Trump comments posted at about the same time might have 5 up arrows.

If Hillary has the majority of support, like you seem to believe, then this handful os people are still inflating support for their comments.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
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.

They do have a huge readership, but that is not indicative of the number of people that actually read the comment section.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Ok. So why would they do this on a UK site to affect US elections?

It's a website anyone can visit. They have their own U.S. news section and they have a lot of U.S. readers.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: introvert

Yes it matters introvert if didn't we will not have agencies that specializes on shaping public opinion making millions and corporations paying the agencies for using this same methods to push their products and ideas, or the government influencing public opinion toward desirable policies in order to pass legislation base on fake approvals.

Remember the 2008 bail out and Obama care, polls were used to show that supposedly the public was for this legislations when it was not truth.

I don't think what you describe can be compared to inflating "arrows" on the comment section of an online news site.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Ok. So why would they do this on a UK site to affect US elections?

It's a website anyone can visit. They have their own U.S. news section and they have a lot of U.S. readers.

How many read the comment section?

a reply to: Kandinsky

Hey what can I say, I have never felt the FB or other social media phenomena influences as I do not subscribe to any of them, but at the end I guess the dream of the NWO is to manipulate entire populations public opinions.

It works, we can see how much it does, sometimes in good ways others in a dangerous way when people are influenced to take their own lives, something that I can not really grasp to this day, how public opinion can do that to some people.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
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.

They do have a huge readership, but that is not indicative of the number of people that actually read the comment section.

You can see the locations of those commenting next to their name. The very large majority of people commenting on U.S. political news are people from the U.S.

Here's an example, from today: Link

a reply to: MotherMayEye

I am glad you are noticing this manipulation and are showing how is working, we can not deny that public opinion and manipulation works and is been used all the time.

But supposedly is greater during election year, but after the way the public respond this time I am sure that it will be used for many other reasons to the point that people will start to get tired of it.

Hopefully.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

There just so happens to be a website dedicated to the green arrow issue.

www.fakegreenarrows.com...

Apparently, it happens on all kinds of topics and stories.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

You're quite correct and I have to wonder.............how will people react to this installation of HRC? I don't mean how the HRC supporters will react, they'll doubtless be giddy for months. I mean, "the rest of us"; how are the "rest of us" going to feel and react. I know this sounds like sort of a silly question. Most of the rest of us will just grit our teeth and pray we can get through this without losing too many of our Constitutional rights and protections. We'll groan when she appoints some uber-liberal leftist space case to the Supreme Court; we'll watch as she wrangles with Congress to get her programs funded and pray for gridlock; and we'll watch in disgust as she pursues some Council on Foreign Relations "off the shelf" scheme to interdict in the Middle East with boots on the ground as she escalates US Military involvement in another lost cause, edging ever closer to confrontation with Russia and/or China and/or Iran, or "whatever".

But there's a whole nother level of reaction I have to wonder about. Yea, the most of the rest of us will continue to muddle through as cited above............but..............it occurs to me that at a gut level, a near subconscious level, there's a growing and profound disgust with the entire scene, the whole "process" by which this installation of HRC came about. How will that deep disgust and profound lack of confidence in the "processes" of this government manifest themselves from the most of the "rest of us"?

Put another way............how little public approval can a government function with? HRC is already polling at extreme lows in public approval. Polls at realclearpolitics: www.realclearpolitics.com... show Clinton with an average 53% unfavorable rating. She isn't even liked by her "base". She'll enjoy the "honeymoon" boost after the inauguration, but I'd guess that boost won't last long. I may be wrong but I'd guess that by the mid term elections of 2018, HRC will be the type president that some red state governors won't meet at the airport when she flies to visit their state.

How in the world is this going to work out?