|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On March 28 2019 01:01 byte-Curious wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2019 00:55 Slydie wrote:On March 28 2019 00:48 JimmiC wrote:
Joe Rogan also made the point that this is similar to what the US has done in other nations it was attempting to destabilize forever. I'll be interested when he has his expert guest and they get more into it. I'm not trying to get into the should they have done it, we do it so they do it kinda thing.
I more just wanted to make sure that everyone still agrees that it did happen. If we all agree on that (and I'm interested in what Daunt thinks). And then if Trump was not part of the conspiracy. Why did the Russians want Trump over Hillary? They thought he was friendlier to their interests? They thought he would create anger and destabilize? What about Trump did they prefer? They also wanted Sanders over Hillary. No they didn't. They supported anyone who could take votes away from her.
This is correct, since they also tried to pump up Jill "couldn't get elected as the local dog catcher in her home town" Stein.
|
On March 28 2019 01:01 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2019 00:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 00:30 KwarK wrote:On March 28 2019 00:28 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 00:14 JimmiC wrote:
I was listening to Joe Rogan's pod cast on a super long drive and he was talking about the Russian troll farms and how they actively attempted to divide America and did work to get Trump elected.
I understand that there is argument on whether or not Trump knew about this and helped with it. But I am correct that everyone agree's that this happened. Correct?
Or do people think that the Russian troll farms are also fake news? Although I agree that these 'troll farms' did happen and some of them did come from Russia, there are also many, many examples of the same phenomenon coming from elsewhere. Eastern European and balkan countries were a huge source of fake news circa 2015/16 if i remember correctly. This wasn't all about political interference. Much of the problem was due to the fact that these fake news stories went viral incredibly quickly, thus they were a great source of income for teenagers in countries with low average incomes. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38168281Many of the fake news websites that sprang up during the US election campaign have been traced to a small city in Macedonia, where teenagers are pumping out sensationalist stories to earn cash from advertising.
The young man sitting in the cafe looks barely more than a boy - he hasn't shaved for a few days, yet he's a long way off achieving designer stubble. The hair on his chin and cheeks is still soft and his smart navy blazer and clean white shirt make him look as if he's in school uniform.
It's not the image that 19-year-old university student, Goran, sitting far back in his chair with one leg crossed over the other wants to portray.
"The Americans loved our stories and we make money from them," he boasts, making sure I see the designer watch he's fiddling with. "Who cares if they are true or false?" The troll farms were Twitter, Reddit, news comments etc groups that deliberately worked to shape narratives, not fire and forget Facebook forwards. The ones where there was no profit motive and the individuals doing it had to be getting a paycheck. While fake news was used by troll farms they’re not the same thing. Fair point. I think it all blurs into one to be honest. As I see it, the troll farms were doing the same thing that the fake news sites were, the same thing that often mainstream media outlets in this sense. Controlling the narrative is easy when you are looking at a population who is uncritical of stories that back up their opinions. I don't really see much of a difference between what Russia was doing on the internet and what every other government uses the internet for. Maybe the troll farms were an extreme version of this, but its been well known for a long time that US allies do the same thing. Think Israel, for example, and the way their trolls have helped to exacerbate islamophobia worldwide. You are correct. But as citizens we should not accept this reality as our future. We are inviting a 1984ish propaganda nightmare into our homes and saying “Well all the other countries do it, so I guess Russia isn’t that big of a deal.” It shouldn’t be so hard for the average citizen to figure out which news is real or cut through the noise. If this becomes the norm for the next generation, democracy as a form of government is completely fucked. We won't make it.
Its not that Russia doing it isn't a big deal, its a huge deal for the reasons that you said, its just not Russia that's the problem, its society, the internet - probably education too. There's a whole lot of issues feeding into this that to just focus on Russia as the big bad is missing the point.
People brainwash themselves largely - fake news and trolls just help them along the way.
|
United States41992 Posts
On March 28 2019 01:48 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2019 01:01 Plansix wrote:On March 28 2019 00:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 00:30 KwarK wrote:On March 28 2019 00:28 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 00:14 JimmiC wrote:
I was listening to Joe Rogan's pod cast on a super long drive and he was talking about the Russian troll farms and how they actively attempted to divide America and did work to get Trump elected.
I understand that there is argument on whether or not Trump knew about this and helped with it. But I am correct that everyone agree's that this happened. Correct?
Or do people think that the Russian troll farms are also fake news? Although I agree that these 'troll farms' did happen and some of them did come from Russia, there are also many, many examples of the same phenomenon coming from elsewhere. Eastern European and balkan countries were a huge source of fake news circa 2015/16 if i remember correctly. This wasn't all about political interference. Much of the problem was due to the fact that these fake news stories went viral incredibly quickly, thus they were a great source of income for teenagers in countries with low average incomes. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38168281Many of the fake news websites that sprang up during the US election campaign have been traced to a small city in Macedonia, where teenagers are pumping out sensationalist stories to earn cash from advertising.
The young man sitting in the cafe looks barely more than a boy - he hasn't shaved for a few days, yet he's a long way off achieving designer stubble. The hair on his chin and cheeks is still soft and his smart navy blazer and clean white shirt make him look as if he's in school uniform.
It's not the image that 19-year-old university student, Goran, sitting far back in his chair with one leg crossed over the other wants to portray.
"The Americans loved our stories and we make money from them," he boasts, making sure I see the designer watch he's fiddling with. "Who cares if they are true or false?" The troll farms were Twitter, Reddit, news comments etc groups that deliberately worked to shape narratives, not fire and forget Facebook forwards. The ones where there was no profit motive and the individuals doing it had to be getting a paycheck. While fake news was used by troll farms they’re not the same thing. Fair point. I think it all blurs into one to be honest. As I see it, the troll farms were doing the same thing that the fake news sites were, the same thing that often mainstream media outlets in this sense. Controlling the narrative is easy when you are looking at a population who is uncritical of stories that back up their opinions. I don't really see much of a difference between what Russia was doing on the internet and what every other government uses the internet for. Maybe the troll farms were an extreme version of this, but its been well known for a long time that US allies do the same thing. Think Israel, for example, and the way their trolls have helped to exacerbate islamophobia worldwide. You are correct. But as citizens we should not accept this reality as our future. We are inviting a 1984ish propaganda nightmare into our homes and saying “Well all the other countries do it, so I guess Russia isn’t that big of a deal.” It shouldn’t be so hard for the average citizen to figure out which news is real or cut through the noise. If this becomes the norm for the next generation, democracy as a form of government is completely fucked. We won't make it. Its not that Russia doing it isn't a big deal, its a huge deal for the reasons that you said, its just not Russia that's the problem, its society, the internet - probably education too. There's a whole lot of issues feeding into this that to just focus on Russia as the big bad is missing the point. People brainwash themselves largely - fake news and trolls just help them along the way.
I disagree. Radicalization isn’t a passive result that individuals are responsible for preventing, it’s an active attack that perpetrators are responsible for. The average consumer of media can’t be expected to understand that their media has been selected for them to deny them a broader context because the bias is too pervasive to let them get to that point.
The problem is bigger than a specific hostile actor but hostile actors should still be treated as such.
|
On March 28 2019 01:48 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2019 01:01 Plansix wrote:On March 28 2019 00:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 00:30 KwarK wrote:On March 28 2019 00:28 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 00:14 JimmiC wrote:
I was listening to Joe Rogan's pod cast on a super long drive and he was talking about the Russian troll farms and how they actively attempted to divide America and did work to get Trump elected.
I understand that there is argument on whether or not Trump knew about this and helped with it. But I am correct that everyone agree's that this happened. Correct?
Or do people think that the Russian troll farms are also fake news? Although I agree that these 'troll farms' did happen and some of them did come from Russia, there are also many, many examples of the same phenomenon coming from elsewhere. Eastern European and balkan countries were a huge source of fake news circa 2015/16 if i remember correctly. This wasn't all about political interference. Much of the problem was due to the fact that these fake news stories went viral incredibly quickly, thus they were a great source of income for teenagers in countries with low average incomes. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38168281Many of the fake news websites that sprang up during the US election campaign have been traced to a small city in Macedonia, where teenagers are pumping out sensationalist stories to earn cash from advertising.
The young man sitting in the cafe looks barely more than a boy - he hasn't shaved for a few days, yet he's a long way off achieving designer stubble. The hair on his chin and cheeks is still soft and his smart navy blazer and clean white shirt make him look as if he's in school uniform.
It's not the image that 19-year-old university student, Goran, sitting far back in his chair with one leg crossed over the other wants to portray.
"The Americans loved our stories and we make money from them," he boasts, making sure I see the designer watch he's fiddling with. "Who cares if they are true or false?" The troll farms were Twitter, Reddit, news comments etc groups that deliberately worked to shape narratives, not fire and forget Facebook forwards. The ones where there was no profit motive and the individuals doing it had to be getting a paycheck. While fake news was used by troll farms they’re not the same thing. Fair point. I think it all blurs into one to be honest. As I see it, the troll farms were doing the same thing that the fake news sites were, the same thing that often mainstream media outlets in this sense. Controlling the narrative is easy when you are looking at a population who is uncritical of stories that back up their opinions. I don't really see much of a difference between what Russia was doing on the internet and what every other government uses the internet for. Maybe the troll farms were an extreme version of this, but its been well known for a long time that US allies do the same thing. Think Israel, for example, and the way their trolls have helped to exacerbate islamophobia worldwide. You are correct. But as citizens we should not accept this reality as our future. We are inviting a 1984ish propaganda nightmare into our homes and saying “Well all the other countries do it, so I guess Russia isn’t that big of a deal.” It shouldn’t be so hard for the average citizen to figure out which news is real or cut through the noise. If this becomes the norm for the next generation, democracy as a form of government is completely fucked. We won't make it. Its not that Russia doing it isn't a big deal, its a huge deal for the reasons that you said, its just not Russia that's the problem, its society, the internet - probably education too. There's a whole lot of issues feeding into this that to just focus on Russia as the big bad is missing the point. People brainwash themselves largely - fake news and trolls just help them along the way.
This is a weirdly fatalistic response and I'm not sure you meant it that way. But addressing the problem with how Russia uses the internet and social media to drive division in the US will help address the other problems in the US and abroad.
|
You have some serious balls writing this right after the Russia conspiracy nonsense and Mueller investigation blew up in your face. Dare we ask who is really the conspiracy theorist?
I've posted a total of 13 times on this website since November, and exactly zero of those posts have had anything to do with the Mueller investigation.
I most assuredly haven't engaged anyone in-depth about political discussions here recently, and definitely haven't engaged with you in any meaningful way over it. It's simply not worth it with your blatant lack of integrity. You post pseudo-intellectual bullshit and then conveniently disappear when you get humiliated, only to reappear weeks later pretending that it never happened.
You're the one showing blatant hypocrisy and double standards in these debates. If you had any shred of intellectual honesty left, you'd be ashamed of yourself.
|
On March 28 2019 01:54 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2019 01:48 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 01:01 Plansix wrote:On March 28 2019 00:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 00:30 KwarK wrote:On March 28 2019 00:28 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 00:14 JimmiC wrote:
I was listening to Joe Rogan's pod cast on a super long drive and he was talking about the Russian troll farms and how they actively attempted to divide America and did work to get Trump elected.
I understand that there is argument on whether or not Trump knew about this and helped with it. But I am correct that everyone agree's that this happened. Correct?
Or do people think that the Russian troll farms are also fake news? Although I agree that these 'troll farms' did happen and some of them did come from Russia, there are also many, many examples of the same phenomenon coming from elsewhere. Eastern European and balkan countries were a huge source of fake news circa 2015/16 if i remember correctly. This wasn't all about political interference. Much of the problem was due to the fact that these fake news stories went viral incredibly quickly, thus they were a great source of income for teenagers in countries with low average incomes. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38168281Many of the fake news websites that sprang up during the US election campaign have been traced to a small city in Macedonia, where teenagers are pumping out sensationalist stories to earn cash from advertising.
The young man sitting in the cafe looks barely more than a boy - he hasn't shaved for a few days, yet he's a long way off achieving designer stubble. The hair on his chin and cheeks is still soft and his smart navy blazer and clean white shirt make him look as if he's in school uniform.
It's not the image that 19-year-old university student, Goran, sitting far back in his chair with one leg crossed over the other wants to portray.
"The Americans loved our stories and we make money from them," he boasts, making sure I see the designer watch he's fiddling with. "Who cares if they are true or false?" The troll farms were Twitter, Reddit, news comments etc groups that deliberately worked to shape narratives, not fire and forget Facebook forwards. The ones where there was no profit motive and the individuals doing it had to be getting a paycheck. While fake news was used by troll farms they’re not the same thing. Fair point. I think it all blurs into one to be honest. As I see it, the troll farms were doing the same thing that the fake news sites were, the same thing that often mainstream media outlets in this sense. Controlling the narrative is easy when you are looking at a population who is uncritical of stories that back up their opinions. I don't really see much of a difference between what Russia was doing on the internet and what every other government uses the internet for. Maybe the troll farms were an extreme version of this, but its been well known for a long time that US allies do the same thing. Think Israel, for example, and the way their trolls have helped to exacerbate islamophobia worldwide. You are correct. But as citizens we should not accept this reality as our future. We are inviting a 1984ish propaganda nightmare into our homes and saying “Well all the other countries do it, so I guess Russia isn’t that big of a deal.” It shouldn’t be so hard for the average citizen to figure out which news is real or cut through the noise. If this becomes the norm for the next generation, democracy as a form of government is completely fucked. We won't make it. Its not that Russia doing it isn't a big deal, its a huge deal for the reasons that you said, its just not Russia that's the problem, its society, the internet - probably education too. There's a whole lot of issues feeding into this that to just focus on Russia as the big bad is missing the point. People brainwash themselves largely - fake news and trolls just help them along the way. I disagree. Radicalization isn’t a passive result that individuals are responsible for preventing, it’s an active attack that perpetrators are responsible for. The average consumer of media can’t be expected to understand that their media has been selected for them to deny them a broader context because the bias is too pervasive to let them get to that point.
This is why I said that education is the problem here. Like it or not, the way we consume news has changed dramatically and educating people on how to adapt to that is incredibly important.
The problem is bigger than a specific hostile actor but hostile actors should still be treated as such.
The problem is how you would define hostile actors in this context. There are multiple examples of our own governments feeding false or misleading information deliberately to the mainstream press. Does this mean that hostile actors in this case includes all governments and most big media outlets?
Sometimes this isn't even done deliberately but is a result of the way these institutions have evolved naturally. Could we define the whole of society as a hostile actor in that case?
I often think about how people are brainwashed to accept our current systems of governance and economics. This isn't quite radicalization but people's reluctance to change things drastically even though the same people are being genuinely fucked over by the system we live in is a consequence of the same thing - small messages consumed through daily media that give a falsely positive impression of whatever the political consensus is at that time.
|
On March 28 2019 02:04 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2019 01:54 KwarK wrote:On March 28 2019 01:48 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 01:01 Plansix wrote:On March 28 2019 00:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 00:30 KwarK wrote:On March 28 2019 00:28 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 00:14 JimmiC wrote:
I was listening to Joe Rogan's pod cast on a super long drive and he was talking about the Russian troll farms and how they actively attempted to divide America and did work to get Trump elected.
I understand that there is argument on whether or not Trump knew about this and helped with it. But I am correct that everyone agree's that this happened. Correct?
Or do people think that the Russian troll farms are also fake news? Although I agree that these 'troll farms' did happen and some of them did come from Russia, there are also many, many examples of the same phenomenon coming from elsewhere. Eastern European and balkan countries were a huge source of fake news circa 2015/16 if i remember correctly. This wasn't all about political interference. Much of the problem was due to the fact that these fake news stories went viral incredibly quickly, thus they were a great source of income for teenagers in countries with low average incomes. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38168281Many of the fake news websites that sprang up during the US election campaign have been traced to a small city in Macedonia, where teenagers are pumping out sensationalist stories to earn cash from advertising.
The young man sitting in the cafe looks barely more than a boy - he hasn't shaved for a few days, yet he's a long way off achieving designer stubble. The hair on his chin and cheeks is still soft and his smart navy blazer and clean white shirt make him look as if he's in school uniform.
It's not the image that 19-year-old university student, Goran, sitting far back in his chair with one leg crossed over the other wants to portray.
"The Americans loved our stories and we make money from them," he boasts, making sure I see the designer watch he's fiddling with. "Who cares if they are true or false?" The troll farms were Twitter, Reddit, news comments etc groups that deliberately worked to shape narratives, not fire and forget Facebook forwards. The ones where there was no profit motive and the individuals doing it had to be getting a paycheck. While fake news was used by troll farms they’re not the same thing. Fair point. I think it all blurs into one to be honest. As I see it, the troll farms were doing the same thing that the fake news sites were, the same thing that often mainstream media outlets in this sense. Controlling the narrative is easy when you are looking at a population who is uncritical of stories that back up their opinions. I don't really see much of a difference between what Russia was doing on the internet and what every other government uses the internet for. Maybe the troll farms were an extreme version of this, but its been well known for a long time that US allies do the same thing. Think Israel, for example, and the way their trolls have helped to exacerbate islamophobia worldwide. You are correct. But as citizens we should not accept this reality as our future. We are inviting a 1984ish propaganda nightmare into our homes and saying “Well all the other countries do it, so I guess Russia isn’t that big of a deal.” It shouldn’t be so hard for the average citizen to figure out which news is real or cut through the noise. If this becomes the norm for the next generation, democracy as a form of government is completely fucked. We won't make it. Its not that Russia doing it isn't a big deal, its a huge deal for the reasons that you said, its just not Russia that's the problem, its society, the internet - probably education too. There's a whole lot of issues feeding into this that to just focus on Russia as the big bad is missing the point. People brainwash themselves largely - fake news and trolls just help them along the way. I disagree. Radicalization isn’t a passive result that individuals are responsible for preventing, it’s an active attack that perpetrators are responsible for. The average consumer of media can’t be expected to understand that their media has been selected for them to deny them a broader context because the bias is too pervasive to let them get to that point.
This is why I said that education is the problem here. Like it or not, the way we consume news has changed dramatically and educating people on how to adapt to that is incredibly important. Show nested quote +The problem is bigger than a specific hostile actor but hostile actors should still be treated as such. Sometimes this isn't even done deliberately but is a result of the way these institutions have evolved naturally. Could we define the whole of society as a hostile actor in that case?
Then the institution is a hostile actor? Also, what does naturally mean? White Nationalist groups form "naturally" and they are very hostile. This whole line of reasoning has the language of treating human made systems like forces of nature that cannot be controlled.
|
On March 28 2019 02:07 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2019 02:04 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 01:54 KwarK wrote:On March 28 2019 01:48 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 01:01 Plansix wrote:On March 28 2019 00:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 00:30 KwarK wrote:On March 28 2019 00:28 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 00:14 JimmiC wrote:
I was listening to Joe Rogan's pod cast on a super long drive and he was talking about the Russian troll farms and how they actively attempted to divide America and did work to get Trump elected.
I understand that there is argument on whether or not Trump knew about this and helped with it. But I am correct that everyone agree's that this happened. Correct?
Or do people think that the Russian troll farms are also fake news? Although I agree that these 'troll farms' did happen and some of them did come from Russia, there are also many, many examples of the same phenomenon coming from elsewhere. Eastern European and balkan countries were a huge source of fake news circa 2015/16 if i remember correctly. This wasn't all about political interference. Much of the problem was due to the fact that these fake news stories went viral incredibly quickly, thus they were a great source of income for teenagers in countries with low average incomes. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38168281Many of the fake news websites that sprang up during the US election campaign have been traced to a small city in Macedonia, where teenagers are pumping out sensationalist stories to earn cash from advertising.
The young man sitting in the cafe looks barely more than a boy - he hasn't shaved for a few days, yet he's a long way off achieving designer stubble. The hair on his chin and cheeks is still soft and his smart navy blazer and clean white shirt make him look as if he's in school uniform.
It's not the image that 19-year-old university student, Goran, sitting far back in his chair with one leg crossed over the other wants to portray.
"The Americans loved our stories and we make money from them," he boasts, making sure I see the designer watch he's fiddling with. "Who cares if they are true or false?" The troll farms were Twitter, Reddit, news comments etc groups that deliberately worked to shape narratives, not fire and forget Facebook forwards. The ones where there was no profit motive and the individuals doing it had to be getting a paycheck. While fake news was used by troll farms they’re not the same thing. Fair point. I think it all blurs into one to be honest. As I see it, the troll farms were doing the same thing that the fake news sites were, the same thing that often mainstream media outlets in this sense. Controlling the narrative is easy when you are looking at a population who is uncritical of stories that back up their opinions. I don't really see much of a difference between what Russia was doing on the internet and what every other government uses the internet for. Maybe the troll farms were an extreme version of this, but its been well known for a long time that US allies do the same thing. Think Israel, for example, and the way their trolls have helped to exacerbate islamophobia worldwide. You are correct. But as citizens we should not accept this reality as our future. We are inviting a 1984ish propaganda nightmare into our homes and saying “Well all the other countries do it, so I guess Russia isn’t that big of a deal.” It shouldn’t be so hard for the average citizen to figure out which news is real or cut through the noise. If this becomes the norm for the next generation, democracy as a form of government is completely fucked. We won't make it. Its not that Russia doing it isn't a big deal, its a huge deal for the reasons that you said, its just not Russia that's the problem, its society, the internet - probably education too. There's a whole lot of issues feeding into this that to just focus on Russia as the big bad is missing the point. People brainwash themselves largely - fake news and trolls just help them along the way. I disagree. Radicalization isn’t a passive result that individuals are responsible for preventing, it’s an active attack that perpetrators are responsible for. The average consumer of media can’t be expected to understand that their media has been selected for them to deny them a broader context because the bias is too pervasive to let them get to that point.
This is why I said that education is the problem here. Like it or not, the way we consume news has changed dramatically and educating people on how to adapt to that is incredibly important. The problem is bigger than a specific hostile actor but hostile actors should still be treated as such. Sometimes this isn't even done deliberately but is a result of the way these institutions have evolved naturally. Could we define the whole of society as a hostile actor in that case? Then the institution is a hostile actor? Also, what does naturally mean? White Nationalist groups form "naturally" and they are very hostile. This whole line of reasoning has the language of treating human made systems like forces of nature that cannot be controlled.
Pretty much.
What I mean by naturally is that some media outlets simply rely on governments for information about too many things. So we get a situation where the media's biggest sources of information about a subject are governments, we have governments who use PR strategies to make every single message they send have a specific slant on it and thus the media without even trying to are distributing propaganda.
I don't know if its the same in the US but in the UK this is pretty much everywhere in every single mainstream media outlet. The government controls the message about so many things, and rather than this being a decision that was made in the press they just figured out that if they want to keep getting access to the government they have to give out the message that the government wants them too (the BBC and Cameron's threat to defund them was a great example of this).
Thus the problem is systemic and trying to figure out which actors are hostile is moot unless you first address the underlying systemic issue,
|
That is the opposite of naturally, since is relies on goverment artifice.
And I'm not seeing a systematic issue of news agencies reporting on what their goverment says. That is their job and not what we are discussing. What we are talking about are foreign goverment actors using social media to manipulate and create division in other nations. The problems at home cannot be addressed while actors abroad are actively trying to prevent those problems from being addressed.
|
On March 28 2019 02:23 Plansix wrote:
That is the opposite of naturally, since is relies on goverment artifice.
And I'm not seeing a systematic issue of news agencies reporting on what their goverment says. That is their job and not what we are discussing. What we are talking about are foreign goverment actors using social media to manipulate and create division in other nations. The problems at home cannot be addressed while actors abroad are actively trying to prevent those problems from being addressed.
To me, the problem is misinformation, and is a problem no matter who is perpetrating it.
|
On March 28 2019 02:32 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2019 02:23 Plansix wrote:
That is the opposite of naturally, since is relies on goverment artifice.
And I'm not seeing a systematic issue of news agencies reporting on what their goverment says. That is their job and not what we are discussing. What we are talking about are foreign goverment actors using social media to manipulate and create division in other nations. The problems at home cannot be addressed while actors abroad are actively trying to prevent those problems from being addressed. To me, the problem is misinformation, and is a problem no matter who is perpetrating it.
You and other citizens can deal with misinformation in your own country. You have zero power over a foreign goverment actor. Your goverment also has no power over them.
|
On March 28 2019 02:35 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2019 02:32 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 02:23 Plansix wrote:
That is the opposite of naturally, since is relies on goverment artifice.
And I'm not seeing a systematic issue of news agencies reporting on what their goverment says. That is their job and not what we are discussing. What we are talking about are foreign goverment actors using social media to manipulate and create division in other nations. The problems at home cannot be addressed while actors abroad are actively trying to prevent those problems from being addressed. To me, the problem is misinformation, and is a problem no matter who is perpetrating it. You and other citizens can deal with misinformation in your own country. You have zero power over a foreign goverment actor. Your goverment also has no power over them.
How is preventing foreign actors from spreading misinformation through facebook/twitter any different from preventing local actors from spreading misinformation through facebook/twitter.
I mean, I understand that we could pass a law that would allow the police to go and shut down local troll farms that spread information, whereas we cannot do that for troll farms that are in foreign (hostile) countries. But I really doubt sending the police to go and raid script kiddies is an effective, comprehensive solution to misinformation on the internet; local or foreign.
|
On March 28 2019 03:06 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2019 02:35 Plansix wrote:On March 28 2019 02:32 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 02:23 Plansix wrote:
That is the opposite of naturally, since is relies on goverment artifice.
And I'm not seeing a systematic issue of news agencies reporting on what their goverment says. That is their job and not what we are discussing. What we are talking about are foreign goverment actors using social media to manipulate and create division in other nations. The problems at home cannot be addressed while actors abroad are actively trying to prevent those problems from being addressed. To me, the problem is misinformation, and is a problem no matter who is perpetrating it. You and other citizens can deal with misinformation in your own country. You have zero power over a foreign goverment actor. Your goverment also has no power over them. How is preventing foreign actors from spreading misinformation through facebook/twitter any different from preventing local actors from spreading misinformation through facebook/twitter. I mean, I understand that we could pass a law that would allow the police to go and shut down local troll farms that spread information, whereas we cannot do that for troll farms that are in foreign (hostile) countries. But I really doubt sending the police to go and raid script kiddies is an effective, comprehensive solution to misinformation on the internet; local or foreign.
You start with the companies hosting the misinformation. The solution isn't going after the people creating the misinformation, but the forcing the companies who are distributing it through their services. None of this would have been this successful 10 years ago. The rise of social media and the engagement driven internet has allowed this stuff to flourish.
|
On March 28 2019 03:10 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2019 03:06 Acrofales wrote:On March 28 2019 02:35 Plansix wrote:On March 28 2019 02:32 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 02:23 Plansix wrote:
That is the opposite of naturally, since is relies on goverment artifice.
And I'm not seeing a systematic issue of news agencies reporting on what their goverment says. That is their job and not what we are discussing. What we are talking about are foreign goverment actors using social media to manipulate and create division in other nations. The problems at home cannot be addressed while actors abroad are actively trying to prevent those problems from being addressed. To me, the problem is misinformation, and is a problem no matter who is perpetrating it. You and other citizens can deal with misinformation in your own country. You have zero power over a foreign goverment actor. Your goverment also has no power over them. How is preventing foreign actors from spreading misinformation through facebook/twitter any different from preventing local actors from spreading misinformation through facebook/twitter. I mean, I understand that we could pass a law that would allow the police to go and shut down local troll farms that spread information, whereas we cannot do that for troll farms that are in foreign (hostile) countries. But I really doubt sending the police to go and raid script kiddies is an effective, comprehensive solution to misinformation on the internet; local or foreign. You start with the companies hosting the misinformation. The solution isn't going after the people creating the misinformation, but the forcing the companies who are distributing it through their services. None of this would have been this successful 10 years ago. The rise of social media and the engagement driven internet has allowed this stuff to flourish.
But that is independent of the foreign-local distinction. If we're going to go after facebook/google/whatever for spreading misinformation, does it matter if it's Johnny from Idaho or Igor from Omsk who is the originator of the pizzagate post?
Also, define misinformation. I'm generally a big fan of government intervention, but I'm not sure I trust the government as the arbiter of truth here.
|
On March 28 2019 03:15 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2019 03:10 Plansix wrote:On March 28 2019 03:06 Acrofales wrote:On March 28 2019 02:35 Plansix wrote:On March 28 2019 02:32 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 02:23 Plansix wrote:
That is the opposite of naturally, since is relies on goverment artifice.
And I'm not seeing a systematic issue of news agencies reporting on what their goverment says. That is their job and not what we are discussing. What we are talking about are foreign goverment actors using social media to manipulate and create division in other nations. The problems at home cannot be addressed while actors abroad are actively trying to prevent those problems from being addressed. To me, the problem is misinformation, and is a problem no matter who is perpetrating it. You and other citizens can deal with misinformation in your own country. You have zero power over a foreign goverment actor. Your goverment also has no power over them. How is preventing foreign actors from spreading misinformation through facebook/twitter any different from preventing local actors from spreading misinformation through facebook/twitter. I mean, I understand that we could pass a law that would allow the police to go and shut down local troll farms that spread information, whereas we cannot do that for troll farms that are in foreign (hostile) countries. But I really doubt sending the police to go and raid script kiddies is an effective, comprehensive solution to misinformation on the internet; local or foreign. You start with the companies hosting the misinformation. The solution isn't going after the people creating the misinformation, but the forcing the companies who are distributing it through their services. None of this would have been this successful 10 years ago. The rise of social media and the engagement driven internet has allowed this stuff to flourish. But that is independent of the foreign-local distinction. If we're going to go after facebook/google/whatever for spreading misinformation, does it matter if it's Johnny from Idaho or Igor from Omsk who is the originator of the pizzagate post? Also, define misinformation. I'm generally a big fan of government intervention, but I'm not sure I trust the government as the arbiter of truth here.
I mean like Alex Jones, for one, who existed for far to long on major platforms. But I will go one step further. If a popular youtuber with a million followers starts to discuss things like crisis actors like they are real things, it is time for the government to force youtube to step in. I don’t want the youtuber banned. I want Youtube to be forced to be a real media network and be held accountable for what their stars are saying.
|
On March 28 2019 03:30 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2019 03:15 Acrofales wrote:On March 28 2019 03:10 Plansix wrote:On March 28 2019 03:06 Acrofales wrote:On March 28 2019 02:35 Plansix wrote:On March 28 2019 02:32 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 02:23 Plansix wrote:
That is the opposite of naturally, since is relies on goverment artifice.
And I'm not seeing a systematic issue of news agencies reporting on what their goverment says. That is their job and not what we are discussing. What we are talking about are foreign goverment actors using social media to manipulate and create division in other nations. The problems at home cannot be addressed while actors abroad are actively trying to prevent those problems from being addressed. To me, the problem is misinformation, and is a problem no matter who is perpetrating it. You and other citizens can deal with misinformation in your own country. You have zero power over a foreign goverment actor. Your goverment also has no power over them. How is preventing foreign actors from spreading misinformation through facebook/twitter any different from preventing local actors from spreading misinformation through facebook/twitter. I mean, I understand that we could pass a law that would allow the police to go and shut down local troll farms that spread information, whereas we cannot do that for troll farms that are in foreign (hostile) countries. But I really doubt sending the police to go and raid script kiddies is an effective, comprehensive solution to misinformation on the internet; local or foreign. You start with the companies hosting the misinformation. The solution isn't going after the people creating the misinformation, but the forcing the companies who are distributing it through their services. None of this would have been this successful 10 years ago. The rise of social media and the engagement driven internet has allowed this stuff to flourish. But that is independent of the foreign-local distinction. If we're going to go after facebook/google/whatever for spreading misinformation, does it matter if it's Johnny from Idaho or Igor from Omsk who is the originator of the pizzagate post? Also, define misinformation. I'm generally a big fan of government intervention, but I'm not sure I trust the government as the arbiter of truth here. I mean like Alex Jones, for one, who existed for far to long on major platforms. But I will go one step further. If a popular youtuber with a million followers starts to discuss things like crisis actors like they are real things, it is time for the government to force youtube to step in. I don’t want the youtuber banned. I want Youtube to be forced to be a real media network and be held accountable for what their stars are saying.
In what way does the government do anything about content on "real media networks"? I mean. There's journalistic codes, and media companies self-regulate, but insofar as laws are concerned, there are laws against libel, and laws against indecency. But nothing about falsehoods. If Sean Hannity declares that the Apollo moon landing was a hoax and it was all filmed in Nevada with the help of reptilians, he is free to do so. Just as he is free to claim Seth Rich was murdered by a Democrat conspiracy who wanted to cover up the truth about an underground pedosexual network in the basement of a pizza restaurant, which *maybe* included Hillary Clinton, but who knows.
I mean, if public outcry becomes too much, Fox might kick him out. But the government won't.
|
Typically the youtubers with a million followers are the ones who are being "clever" about their grift. They are the classical liberals who just happen to support the most fascist candidate in every election you can think of. You can and should go after Alex Jones for sure but I'm more concerned with the people who you need to have been exposed to before you can consider anything Alex Jones says to be of worth.
Then again, it's also hard to say something like "ban fascism", because all the fascists will then say "I'm not a fascist, I'm just a traditionalist who likes Julius Evola's writings", as they already do, and then you have to differentiate between fascists and conservatives and that won't be easy. Then you have people like Pewdiepie who have been connected to the spread of far right views, but are so known for their other youtube activities that the idea is laughed at even in this thread where there are less far right people than in the average population. And Pewdiepie's audience is like, what, 10 to 14? Pretty easy to put a worldview in someone's head at that age, and make it stick. Generally people on Youtube are quite young and are very vulnerable to ideological propaganda.
Pretty hard to find a solution to this. It's not debate because none of this is based on who is correct, it's been extremely obvious that the far right isn't correct for a while now and it has never mattered to anyone. Probably requires some sort of Fairness doctrine, large scale deplatforming of demonstrably wrong ideas AND harmful ideas, and a lot of work on the details because that could easily turn into a bad form of censorship if we just trust a few people with that power. But first it requires a willingness to do something about it and that's not quite there yet, especially not as most countries have 20%+ of their populations that are either flirting with or entirely fine with all that shit.
|
On March 28 2019 03:51 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2019 03:30 Plansix wrote:On March 28 2019 03:15 Acrofales wrote:On March 28 2019 03:10 Plansix wrote:On March 28 2019 03:06 Acrofales wrote:On March 28 2019 02:35 Plansix wrote:On March 28 2019 02:32 Jockmcplop wrote:On March 28 2019 02:23 Plansix wrote:
That is the opposite of naturally, since is relies on goverment artifice.
And I'm not seeing a systematic issue of news agencies reporting on what their goverment says. That is their job and not what we are discussing. What we are talking about are foreign goverment actors using social media to manipulate and create division in other nations. The problems at home cannot be addressed while actors abroad are actively trying to prevent those problems from being addressed. To me, the problem is misinformation, and is a problem no matter who is perpetrating it. You and other citizens can deal with misinformation in your own country. You have zero power over a foreign goverment actor. Your goverment also has no power over them. How is preventing foreign actors from spreading misinformation through facebook/twitter any different from preventing local actors from spreading misinformation through facebook/twitter. I mean, I understand that we could pass a law that would allow the police to go and shut down local troll farms that spread information, whereas we cannot do that for troll farms that are in foreign (hostile) countries. But I really doubt sending the police to go and raid script kiddies is an effective, comprehensive solution to misinformation on the internet; local or foreign. You start with the companies hosting the misinformation. The solution isn't going after the people creating the misinformation, but the forcing the companies who are distributing it through their services. None of this would have been this successful 10 years ago. The rise of social media and the engagement driven internet has allowed this stuff to flourish. But that is independent of the foreign-local distinction. If we're going to go after facebook/google/whatever for spreading misinformation, does it matter if it's Johnny from Idaho or Igor from Omsk who is the originator of the pizzagate post? Also, define misinformation. I'm generally a big fan of government intervention, but I'm not sure I trust the government as the arbiter of truth here. I mean like Alex Jones, for one, who existed for far to long on major platforms. But I will go one step further. If a popular youtuber with a million followers starts to discuss things like crisis actors like they are real things, it is time for the government to force youtube to step in. I don’t want the youtuber banned. I want Youtube to be forced to be a real media network and be held accountable for what their stars are saying. In what way does the government do anything about content on "real media networks"? I mean. There's journalistic codes, and media companies self-regulate, but insofar as laws are concerned, there are laws against libel, and laws against indecency. But nothing about falsehoods. If Sean Hannity declares that the Apollo moon landing was a hoax and it was all filmed in Nevada with the help of reptilians, he is free to do so. Just as he is free to claim Seth Rich was murdered by a Democrat conspiracy who wanted to cover up the truth about an underground pedosexual network in the basement of a pizza restaurant, which *maybe* included Hillary Clinton, but who knows. I mean, if public outcry becomes too much, Fox might kick him out. But the government won't.
They used to, like 30-40 years ago. There used to be discussions between networks, the FCC and congress about what was and wasn’t allowed. People like Mr. Rogers testified before congress for money for PBS. Congress used to be in it and having a back and forth dialogue with media as a whole. It wasn’t perfect in any way, but it existed. And Hanity peddling the Seth Rich conspiracy theory would likely never happen because the CEO of that network would be deathly afraid of a call from a senator or being dragged before congress to explain himself. Congress didn’t need pass laws all of the time. Showing the will to get involved at all was deterrent enough.
|
If I can get rich lying my ass off to the general idiots with no repercussions I'd do it too. Just need to come up with a crazy conspiracy theory, but not too crazy as to make it almost believable.
|
On March 27 2019 22:58 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2019 22:37 Stratos_speAr wrote:On March 27 2019 22:32 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On March 27 2019 21:58 xDaunt wrote:On March 27 2019 21:46 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:At what point did Hillary order all the foreign intelligence agencies to notice that Trump people were talking to russians they were surveilling though? Did Hillary order them to warn the US intelligence about this or was that Obama? /s GCHQ first became aware in late 2015 of suspicious “interactions” between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents, a source close to UK intelligence said. This intelligence was passed to the US as part of a routine exchange of information, they added.
Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump’s inner circle and Russians, sources said.
The European countries that passed on electronic intelligence – known as sigint – included Germany, Estonia and Poland. Australia, a member of the “Five Eyes” spying alliance that also includes the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand, also relayed material, one source said.
Another source suggested the Dutch and the French spy agency, the General Directorate for External Security or DGSE, were contributors. source This is one of the other big questions about all of this that many have been asking for a long time now: why are foreign intelligence finger prints all over this mess? We still don’t have an answer to it. ok this is where I leave the thread for a week I'm amazed that xDaunt has been allowed to peddle stuff like this for so long. He comes out with long tangential posts stating several things that have been refuted or are refuted shortly thereafter. He then disappears for a few days/weeks and then re-appears, attempting to say the same things again, in the hopes that everyone's memory is too short to remember that the stuff he is spewing is B.S. You have some serious balls writing this right after the Russia conspiracy nonsense and Mueller investigation blew up in your face. Dare we ask who is really the conspiracy theorist?
There was a hell of a lot of smoke, more than enough to warrant checking for a fire. You eagerly support thorough investigation of Hilary over matters with far less behind them. This one, for example.
And you are the real conspiracy theorist. You have demonstrated a woeful inability to apply the slightest critical thinking ability where it concerns Hilary Clinton. You will humour any theory, no matter how absurd, so long as it might tangentially maybe bring down Hilary Clinton if it turns out to be true. Benghazi, Fusion GPS, E-mails, it doesn't matter. You'll be there provided it might implicate Hilary Clinton.
|
|
|
|
|
|
15251
4130
1632
EPT
