Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 2nd Nov 2017 09:35 UTC
Legal

As part of this week's hearings into how Russia has used social media to influence American opinion, House lawmakers released several Facebook and Instagram ads linked to Kremlin meddling online. Although lawmakers have not yet released the full cache of ads, which includes about 3,000 examples provided to Congress by Facebook, the so-far disclosed ads offer one of the closest looks yet at the Russian operation.

Some of these ads and fake accounts are quite fascinating - they're clearly designed not just to promote Trump, but also to rile up different groups - from the LGBT community to proponents of the US 2nd amendment - against each other. Oh, and also to pitch a fight between Clinton and Jesus.

Order by: Score:
observations
by feamatar on Thu 2nd Nov 2017 09:59 UTC
feamatar
Member since:
2014-02-25

Truth to be told, the Russians use more sophisticated methods than the West used in Lybia ;)

Reply Score: 3

v What's the point?
by arsa on Thu 2nd Nov 2017 10:26 UTC
RE: What's the point?
by Kochise on Thu 2nd Nov 2017 11:30 UTC in reply to "What's the point?"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Cyber attack and use of social media (who said fake news ?) to control election in a foreign country to favorite a friendly candidate.

That said, it's been US usage to do so for ages, so I find this quite amusing when it happens to them and have their own elections rigged ;)

"Come get some (democracy) !"

However it has been proven before that there's no need of foreign implication to get quite shady results (remember Bush vs. Gore ?)

Edited 2017-11-02 11:46 UTC

Reply Score: 9

Theire idea was simple.
by dusanyu on Thu 2nd Nov 2017 13:55 UTC
dusanyu
Member since:
2006-01-21

And Sadly it worked. And I am not talking about who is in the White house. They were looking to kick the hornets nest and cause division in the U.S. What better way to weaken a nation than convince it's people that they all Hate each other.

Reply Score: 6

RE: Theire idea was simple.
by charlieg on Fri 3rd Nov 2017 14:55 UTC in reply to "Theire idea was simple."
charlieg Member since:
2005-07-25

It worked? It was a drop in the ocean. Hillary Clinton spent a BILLION DOLLARS. You think $150k worth of Facebook ads did anything, half of which was spent after the election!?

This whole Russia thing is a distraction. The Clinton campaign paid for information from Russia too. Trump's business dealings with Russia (and Saudi Arabia etc) are more relevant but this whole matter of collusion is a huge red herring as the corporate class and the politicians and consultants that survive on it are trying to distract you from the real problem in America - that its political system has been corrupted and both parties represent their donors instead of voters. It's a big club, and you ain't in it.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Theire idea was simple.
by slashdev on Fri 3rd Nov 2017 16:27 UTC in reply to "RE: Theire idea was simple."
slashdev Member since:
2006-05-14

First, these ad drops from Facebook is just the tip of the iceburg, I cant wait to see the information from google (which has ad-sense, and youtube) and twitter. These orgs have been warned since at least 2014 about things like bot accounts (russian twitterbots), etc. Also, I would love to know how many 4chan accounts are run from the kremlin.
If you want a look, here is a good primer from 2014:
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/the-kremli...


Second, These what-about-isms are really getting played out. If you think Hilary, the DNC or anyone else isnt being investigated, you've been played by whatever news you are ingesting. Due to the Comey firing we now have to hear INCESSANTLY (yay Trump, yay 24 hour news cycle) about the special counsel Muller's specific investigation. That does not mean the FBI is not investigating other leads, or other national security issues. Its a large law enforcement org with a big budget.

EDIT-removed a double negative!

Edited 2017-11-03 16:29 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Theire idea was simple.
by Kochise on Fri 3rd Nov 2017 19:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Theire idea was simple."
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03
RE[3]: Theire idea was simple.
by bugjacobs on Sat 4th Nov 2017 01:37 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Theire idea was simple."
bugjacobs Member since:
2009-01-03

"the Atlantic" ? ...

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: Theire idea was simple.
by slashdev on Sun 5th Nov 2017 02:23 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Theire idea was simple."
slashdev Member since:
2006-05-14

"the Atlantic" ? ...


_rant_
While you've been downvoted, I think you bring up an excellent (yet troubling) point. There is a shift in the way people seem to consume news. Thinking that somehow being from fox or cnn or britebart or theatlantic means "fake news".

News Outlets have always has a bias or specific motivations, whether its to get at a particular subject from a different view point, create/mold common identity (usually state/public run), sow confusion about a topic, or a mercenary drive for views/viewers at all costs. The hope of a "free press" is that out of all that chaos comes a coherent narrative about facts and events. /rant

I have been reading breitbart before it became vogue to bash them...they are as to political news as wccftech is to tech and gaming news, and guess what? I remembered they ALSO covered the russian pys ops and troll farms, as did nytimes and the guardian.

Here is an addendum to my primer:
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/06/03/journalists-g...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/02/putin-kremlin-inside-r...


an ex-employee of one of these troll farms sued one in RUSSIAN court, and won:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/18/woman-who-sued-pro-put...

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Theire idea was simple.
by zima on Sun 5th Nov 2017 00:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Theire idea was simple."
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

this whole matter of collusion is a huge red herring as the corporate class and the politicians and consultants that survive on it are trying to distract you from the real problem in America - that its political system has been corrupted and both parties represent their donors instead of voters. It's a big club, and you ain't in it.

Ultimately, the systems of governance are largely reflections of their populations. Perhaps the people of US get the gov they deserve... how many would, given the chance, say no to getting their slice of political cake / being in the "club"?

Reply Score: 3

Why bother?
by BlackV on Thu 2nd Nov 2017 13:55 UTC
BlackV
Member since:
2012-04-23

I don't quite get why everyone so excited by this. It virtually useless information. Even if it is presented in and by congress, it is virtually impossible to link to Russian state agencies just by IP addresses.
Even if it will be prooved that, yes, these post have been sponsored by Russian state, then what? Can some one proove that all these posts had any meaningful impact and 2016 president election?

And in the end it is not like USA have done nothing like this before. It just that Russians do not have multi-billion $ budget to sponsor hundreds on non-commercial organizations in foreign countries, like USA does, so they might have chosen less costly option of social networks.

Edited 2017-11-02 13:58 UTC

Reply Score: 10

RE: Why bother?
by No it isnt on Thu 2nd Nov 2017 22:39 UTC in reply to "Why bother?"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

Eh, it's important because it's something we need to defend against in the future, You can't have a hostile foreign power influence elections through disinformation campaigns, just like you don't want nigerian princes to make deals with your mom.

It's not really a mystery.

Reply Score: 6

RE: Why bother?
by slashdev on Fri 3rd Nov 2017 16:06 UTC in reply to "Why bother?"
slashdev Member since:
2006-05-14

A few things...

1) Some of these ads were actually paid for (some with rubles!!), so we have banking transactions to follow, not just "IP" addresses. We know with close to 100% certainty that these were russian psy ops.

2) Your cynical What-about-isms dont detract from the fact that every sovereign nation can and will defend against attacks and manipulation...from internal or EXTERNAL threats. The first line of defense (in a democracy) is an informed public to the nature of the attack.

3) from an academic standpoint; its fascinating to see how far psy ops via propaganda as come. Most (americans) have a passing familiarity with the "Call to Action" style posters and such of WWII and the anti/pro capitalism/communism psy ops of the first 20 years of the cold war. We (the west generally, Americans specifically) havent really been exposed to modern psy op/propagada methodology.

Reply Score: 4

v RE[2]: Why bother?
by bugjacobs on Sat 4th Nov 2017 01:37 UTC in reply to "RE: Why bother?"
RE[3]: Why bother?
by bugjacobs on Sun 5th Nov 2017 15:00 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why bother?"
bugjacobs Member since:
2009-01-03

Interesting how downvoted I became on that post ... Of course there are in house Psy Ops, its called Hollywood amongst others ..

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: Why bother?
by Kochise on Sun 5th Nov 2017 17:43 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Why bother?"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Amongst others. Spin doctors have been there like... always ? Remember how they, through ages, showed down citizens' throat the need for war all around the globe the "defend America's interests" as PR bullshit ? And for more undercover operations that were too blatantly wrong, just call the CIA for a secret ninja kill you can always blame on someone else, preferably an opponent/dissident/whatever and hide it under secret classification.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Why bother?
by slashdev on Mon 6th Nov 2017 17:40 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why bother?"
slashdev Member since:
2006-05-14

Amongst others. Spin doctors have been there like... always ? Remember how they, through ages, showed down citizens' throat the need for war all around the globe the "defend America's interests" as PR bullshit ?.....


Excellent, Sounds like we are on the same page that russia attacked the US using psy ops during the last election cycle. Thats what is being debated here, and you seem to agree!

No one is saying psy-ops are new, or somehow unique to russia. The current questions are what KINDS of psy-op tactics are being used by russia? who are they targeted at? have they been effective? What damage has been done? can we counteract them?

Glad we cleared that up!

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Why bother?
by Kochise on Mon 6th Nov 2017 20:33 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Why bother?"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Since they use the same tactics that each governments use to control their own citizens, there's nothing new at saying using "Dumb'n dumber" approach, not tickling the best of our intellect, but click-bait demagogy.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by galvanash
by galvanash on Thu 2nd Nov 2017 16:48 UTC
galvanash
Member since:
2006-01-25

Some of these ads and fake accounts are quite fascinating - they're clearly designed not just to promote Trump, but also to rile up different groups - from the LGBT community to proponents of the US 2nd amendment


We have provided an excellent example for them to learn from...

Seriously though, I get it. Russia messing with our elections like this is not cool. But you have to admit, they weren't really doing anything that our media, political campaigns, PACs, etc. haven't themselves been doing for decades.

Edited 2017-11-02 16:51 UTC

Reply Score: 9

Comment Title
by Dr.Cyber on Thu 2nd Nov 2017 20:26 UTC
Dr.Cyber
Member since:
2017-06-17

People are worrying about Russian propaganda while their belief systems are based on American propaganda.

If you consider the news to be gospel and have blind faith in it, then do not expect to learn what today's real propaganda is like. Propaganda needs to be hard to discover for what it is because otherwise it would not work. Reading the news and having blind faith in it is something many people do, so propaganda that can be discovered for what it is by doing that is not a threat and will quickly fail and disappear.

The real propaganda is not going to be revealed for what it is on the news any time soon. Those in power did not get that power by being complete idiots. They got it by being smarter than us.

Reply Score: 2

v RE: Comment Title
by icicle on Fri 3rd Nov 2017 20:12 UTC in reply to "Comment Title"
RE: Comment Title
by zima on Sun 5th Nov 2017 00:02 UTC in reply to "Comment Title"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

If "they" are smarter, perhaps "they" deserve to be on top... ;)

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment Title
by Dr.Cyber on Sun 5th Nov 2017 11:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment Title"
Dr.Cyber Member since:
2017-06-17

If "they" are smarter, perhaps "they" deserve to be on top... ;)

So I guess you have no problem with those Indian scammers who scam old people out of their life savings? Because 'If "they" are smarter, perhaps "they" deserve to be on top'.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Comment Title
by zima on Wed 8th Nov 2017 14:57 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment Title"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

You're doing a textbook strawman argument / that's different than politics (I'm surprised this needs to be pointed out to you...). Which shows the most just your twisted perceptions of politics...

So, you're for government formed by stupid people (the only alternative); that will work really well...

Offtopic: I get an ad in this article for "meet Russian ladies" ;) Somehow I think the ad matching in this case is quite poor / won't work. ;)

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Lorin
by Lorin on Fri 3rd Nov 2017 00:46 UTC
Lorin
Member since:
2010-04-06

We have always done that with VOA voice of america, meaningless

Reply Score: 1

FREE SPEECH ....
by cade on Fri 3rd Nov 2017 05:45 UTC
cade
Member since:
2009-02-28

What a waste of time and waste of brain-cell-usage.

Just consider this in the realm of "free speech" and as, always, never assume too much but analyse frequently.

Critical thinking is important but not practiced enough nowadays.

History has shown many examples where a "target" nation is made the "boogey-man" so that it becomes easier for that "target" nation to be attacked through sanctions, war, etc.

Today's "boogey-man" is Russia, kindly brought to you by (portions of) Europe and USA.

All this because ....
Hillary "The Butcher of Libya" Clinton
did not win the presidential election against
Donald "I Say What I Want" Trump.

Snap out of it.
It's all a game.

Reply Score: 1

"""Russia""" my ass
by tidux on Fri 3rd Nov 2017 07:36 UTC
tidux
Member since:
2011-08-13

Many of the images showed in that hearing were 4chan memes that got spread on Twitter and Facebook, notably the #DraftOurDaughters hashtag campaign. The Senate, and by proxy anyone who believes them, is retarded.

Reply Score: 2

Whoa
by Poseidon on Fri 3rd Nov 2017 22:34 UTC
Poseidon
Member since:
2009-10-31

There's truly a lot of media illiterate people commenting here.

The fact that the news media are for sale and money can get involved in politics is something that can be exploited by any foreign power more easily, be it directly or by shell companies seeking favors.

Anyone thinking that money in politics and "money above everything else" is not a problem and what drove this to happen, and that it did get influenced is just rehashing their ideology and ignoring all the investigations and evidence.

A good read would perhaps be specifically media investigations. There's a book called Media/Society: Industries, Images, and Audiences which is a very nice introductory and in depth view into these type of issues and how media influences society and vice versa and what has happened to get us to where we are with media.

Reply Score: 1

v US messing with elections
by bnolsen on Sat 4th Nov 2017 20:46 UTC