What would be the point of "paid disinfo agents" on ATS?

I'm often accused of being a paid disinfo agent employed by - usually- the government. So are a number of other posters who broadly support the "OS".

What I struggle to understand is why anyone would pay for such a service. It's not as though an ATS message board would, if left without any counter-arguments, suddenly automatically trigger a revolution. Or even a popularisation of 9/11 "Truth". Indeed having people participate in the discussions prolongs them and makes them more, not less, likely to achieve publicity.

Imagine a board without "debunkers". How would it further the cause of 9/11 Truth? And if it wouldn't particularly, then why would debunkers be needed?

And wouldn't the paid agents need, by definition, to be in on the conspiracy? So much for a small group of insiders. If they're inducting cubicle wage slaves into the Grand Plan then surely one of us would blow the whole thing open for a few dollars?

Jeez..if they point fingers to you, believing you're a disinfo agent...there's only one truth...and this is...

...they don't agree with your opinion.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

Imagine a board without "debunkers".

That would be loose change forum. They ban debunkers. They also have no one there. So much for the revolution.

How would it further the cause of 9/11 Truth?

Debunkers, no debunkers, its all irrelevant. The "cause" is non-existant due to a lack of interest and conflicting egos.

Originally posted by hooper

That would be loose change forum. They ban debunkers. They also have no one there. So much for the revolution.

That's rather my point. A forum with debunkers seems actually more effective at mediating 9/11 "Truth" since it maintains popularity. Mind you, I'm not claiming that it is actually "effective" in any real sense.

A lot of 9/11 "Truthers" problems actually seem to come from misunderstandings about the nature of the internet. The notion that this board is more important than it is, that there is a silent majority of floating voters watching the threads and anxiously waiting to be convinced either for or against the "OS". When of course there's actually nobody there. The idea that because seemingly large numbers of people claim something on the net that it holds some veracity - confirmation bias writ large.

Debunkers, no debunkers, its all irrelevant. The "cause" is non-existant due to a lack of interest and conflicting egos.

Yes. So why would anyone pay someone to debunk this stuff? When all it does is sit on the fringes of the internet?

@What would be the point of "paid disinfo agents" on ATS?
Maybe some members on internet sites like ATS are paid to change the minds of potential observers of Truth?

Ex:
if 1 cow walks away from the slaughter house aware of the agenda of slaughter houses and another cow sees and follows then the slaughter house it out of bussiness eventually. my guess

I should also add that it seems somewhat egocentric to assume that the government cares what you think, enough to covertly attempt to prevent you preaching it. Especially when all you do about it is talk on the internet.

I was in the US recently and the government seem unable to provide you with even the most basic roads. If they can't do that I rather doubt they have the wherewithal to employ people like me to "debunk". And they seem about a trillion miles from effectively pulling off 9/11.

Three reasons:

1. You have a differing opinion
2. Paranoia
3. Self importance

People disagree, it happens.

People are unaware of their bias here on ats, and suffer from vast cases of the My side bias, or confirmation bias, not to mention the abundance of intelligence that lacks rational thinking to go along with it.

Combine all this, and when you don't agree with them your labeled a dis-info agent (something I am unsure even exist here) I often see the dis-info thing thrown around when people have actually brought up a valid argument that is reasonable and hard to argue against, then surprise you must be a dis-info agent because you have masterly defeated their logic, something only a paid gov agent could do...

I do however have no doubt that these sites are monitored by gov, if not by individual people then by a supercomputer that is keyed to key phrases, probably gets flagged and sent to a person to see if the threat is real.

Well its obvious.

The point would be, that if you are a "paid agent" you are getting PAID!!

Enough said. Money first, no ones going to help you out with your bills.

To the OP, if you are a "paid agent", well done. Whats the pay if I may ask?

Any benefits like pension and medical?

reply to post by Ophiuchus 13


But to do that you would have to admit to the employee that there was a conspiracy, which increases your number of initiates and the risk of someone blowing it open. And I still can't see the point of it because the cows you envisage - the floating voters - don't really exist. Witness sites like the one mentioned above. Nobody goes to them. They aren't full of righteously angry normal Americans, an ever-growing number who aren't held back by athin line of debunkers. They're empty.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
I should also add that it seems somewhat egocentric to assume that the government cares what you think, enough to covertly attempt to prevent you preaching it. Especially when all you do about it is talk on the internet.
.

I hear ya but some may touch on extremely sensitive subjects that they must intervine somehow.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

Yes. So why would anyone pay someone to debunk this stuff? When all it does is sit on the fringes of the internet?

Exactly my point. By the way, could you pick me up on your way home from Langely? Fords in the garage again and I've got to get ready for the "trip".

Originally posted by Six6Six
Well its obvious.

The point would be, that if you are a "paid agent" you are getting PAID!!

Enough said. Money first, no ones going to help you out with your bills.

To the OP, if you are a "paid agent", well done. Whats the pay if I may ask?

Any benefits like pension and medical?

You see, I don't acknowledge this view of human nature. Most people will not do something they consider to be evil just for money. Would you?

And anyway, it makes no sense. Because if one exposed the conspiracy one could make a lot more money than I imagine the government would pay "disinfo agents"on message boards. If they were paying them. Which they aren't.

Pay and benefits for the disinfo agents is not nearly as good as it is for the realinfo agents... But which is the minority here?

You know what I think do exist on here? I think there could be paid conspirators on here, people that are SOOOOO Hard core about it they make the rest of us seem crazy so no one listens to us, if theres a conspiracy my money is on that.

reply to post by hooper


I'm working from home today. The wife's gone to a blood sacrifice at the Church of Numerology so I'm looking after little Succubus and Beelzebub and typing "debunks" in between.

Hrm. Disinfo agents, do they exist?

Focuses on Ron Paul, but goes for supposedly real known DiAs.

References of the Washington Post and Spybloggers.

33 points of misinformation-behavior.

Communication management does exist.

Strategic Communication Laboratories is the leading supplier of strategic communications, information operations and public diplomacy to governments and military clients around the world. The company is the exclusive licence holder of the BDi strategic communication methodology, which is the most advanced and effective persuasion methodology for social and group communication.

Information about what SCL does
More references to SCL

n a world where the perception is the reality, all countries need to have the capability to manage their own perceptual alignment – otherwise someone else will. We live in a global village, which is reliant on communication and perception. Every country needs the tools to be part of that game.

A direct quote from the website of Strategic Communication Laboratories, a London based company that offers "the most powerful weapon in the world", the ability to manage every aspect of a conflict from one operation centre.

SCL behavioral Case Studies: Specifically, Lloyds of London, Coys, Birds Eye Walls, and Toleman

Complaints about homeland security.

But it is not like this is all one-sided. In Defense of Government Disinformation:

But in 2008, a pair of legal professors from the Harvard Law School published a paper in which they suggested that the government do precisely that. Their concern was about the spreading of conspiracy theories, both by mass media and particularly by individuals on Internet forums, and about the possible damaging effects this could have. As legal professors, they wondered if there was some kind of legal recourse, or a lawful way that this could be fought.

Harvard paper on Conspiracy theories

Disinfo agent is code for: you debunked my point with your meddlesome facts, so now I resort to name calling.

reply to post by CynicalDrivel


None of that really answers why anyone would bother to target ATS specifically with disinfo.

Can you tell me what would happen here if there were no disinfo agents? No debunkers? Explain what would happen that TPTB would not like.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by hooper

 

I'm working from home today. The wife's gone to a blood sacrifice at the Church of Numerology so I'm looking after little Succubus and Beelzebub and typing "debunks" in between.

That's OK, I'll get a lift from "you know who". You guys still running that facebook operation?