Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 1st Nov 2017 23:31 UTC
Legal

Top officials from Facebook, Google, and Twitter told a congressional panel Tuesday that their platforms hosted a disinformation campaign carried out over their networks by Russian state actors. The propaganda centered on the presidential election, immigration, gun rights, gay rights, and racial issues, the companies said. None of the three organizations said they supported proposed legislation requiring them to disclose who is buying political advertisements on their platforms, although these Web companies promised more public transparency about who is buying ads on their networks.

All political spending must be disclosed in some form or another in most countries, so I see no reason why ad spending on Facebook or Twitter should be any different. I also like the idea to make it illegal - or impossible - for foreign entities to buy ad space for political content; as in, a French entity would not be able to buy political ads in The Netherlands. It's already illegal in, say, the US for foreign entities to donate or spend money on candidates, so there's definitely precedent.

The real issue, however, is that it might be hard, though, to define what is a political ad, and what isn't.

Order by: Score:
Hearings on what exactly?
by missingxtension on Thu 2nd Nov 2017 03:19 UTC
missingxtension
Member since:
2011-01-14

I was watching them live and it doesn't seem like the problem is the platforms themselves. Sure you can regulate and should, but the feds knew this was going on. They knew very early on in the election that the Russians were engaged in this political theatrics. For God's sake, they were able to infiltrate Iran h a USB stick. The spooks could have easily stopped it at its tracks. Who kept their mouth shut!? Oyeah Obama and the fbi and everyone, trump knew it. That's why he asked for help. Now they wanna squeeze every little drop from the liberal silicon valley. This is all political, nothing is about the tech.
Hold your damn selves accountable, accept trump is a sham and get him out. He does not represent the American people, he represents the Russian propaganda machine.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by viton
by viton on Thu 2nd Nov 2017 07:44 UTC
viton
Member since:
2005-08-09

>> illegal in, say, US for foreign entities to donate or spend money on candidates
Obviously this rule doesn’t apply to Clinton.

https://theintercept.com/2016/08/25/why-did-the-saudi-regime-and-oth...

To receive a money “for charity” from medieval tyranny regime is so “liberal”.
US is fine with Saudi regime killing gays, ignoring women rights, supporting ISIS and all forms of islamic terrorism (including attacks of USA). Money don’t smell with blood.

Obama was not only pleased with destruction of Yemen, he is actively supported the slaughtering of this beautiful country. People in Yemen are dying from huge epidemies, lack of food and water and from american bombs.

But US is earning a lot of money on this war.

Edited 2017-11-02 07:54 UTC

Reply Score: 2

ostrich pose
by viton on Thu 2nd Nov 2017 08:25 UTC in reply to "Comment by viton"
viton Member since:
2005-08-09

So what is wrong with other opinion, Thom?
You are not the uberhumans who are always right. People are deeply affected by war and western exceptionalism propaganda from the earliest age, but as liberal, you need to be liberal with other people thoughts.
https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/exclusive-documents-expose-d...

You can rate this as Russian propaganda.
But if you close your eyes, Thom, and only keep listening to “echo-chamber” media you can entirely forget about US wars/coups/ CIA false flags/surveillance/propaganda. Don’t forget to shut down the brain :-)

Reply Score: 6

RE: Comment by viton
by jigzat on Thu 2nd Nov 2017 18:58 UTC in reply to "Comment by viton"
jigzat Member since:
2008-10-30

Also Twitter is basically a Saudi owned social network with a lot of influence over people.

Reply Score: 3

Comment by philcostin
by philcostin on Thu 2nd Nov 2017 18:23 UTC
philcostin
Member since:
2010-11-03

Don't forget Thom, the west "doesn't have propaganda". It never has.

How effective indeed, this propaganda must be, such that people would believe such a notion.

"But.. but Russia!"

Your political opinion seems to stem from the perspective of someone particularly susceptible to western propaganda.

Propaganda is everywhere. Come on, you know this. You can forget the concept of "reputable" journalism. Just forget it. Every sphere of western society is managed by gatekeepers - even if only for fear of loss of reputation. No different in any country.

Edited 2017-11-02 18:27 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE: Comment by philcostin
by Dr.Cyber on Thu 2nd Nov 2017 20:45 UTC in reply to "Comment by philcostin"
Dr.Cyber Member since:
2017-06-17

You got it all wrong! The west is the only place that does not use propaganda! The news in the West is always right, even the government is involved in it so it has to be! All threats to our liberty and justice come from outside so that is why we must let the government take away our liberty and justice so that they can protect us from the terrorists outside so that the terrorists outside cannot take our liberty and justice away from us!

We need more regulations to protect us from free speech and wrongthink! We need more regulations on the market! Both enforced by violence! For the sake of our human rights we need to get rid of our human rights!

The above two paragraphs are sarcasm.

Reply Score: 2