Petition: Facebook should tell users how they were exposed to Russian propaganda

Topic

New Reply

I just signed it. Suggest you do, too. Facebook enabled Russian interference in the United States election in 2016, but refuses to provide a full acco
[See the full post at: Petition: Facebook should tell users how they were exposed to Russian propaganda]

3 users thanked author for this post.

SueW, AJNorth, MrBrian

Reply | Quote

Replies

I’m so glad I don’t do Facebook!

5 users thanked author for this post.

SueW, AJNorth, Microfix, BobbyB, EyesOnWindows

Reply | Quote

Hi Woody,

Actually, I think the evidence of supposed Russian meddling is very scant, for example here is a good article on the topic:

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/10/10/russia-gate-jumps-the-shark/

Indeed, the US meddles in other countries elections far more than Russia does. We put a lot more money into it (our military budget is something like 7 or 8 times that of Russia’s).

The intelligence agencies pushing the Russia story are the same ones who pushed the WMD story before we invaded Iraq, which all turned out to be fabricated. I am not sure why anyone would trust what they say. Their job is to manage perception and misdirect people’s attention.

John

2 users thanked author for this post.

HiFlyer, lurks about

Reply | Quote

Manipulation of weak minds is the currency of political power. Rather than dwelling on this go borrow a copy of Leo Tolstoy’s “War and Peace” from your local library and read it (the translation by Anthony Briggs is excellent) or watch PBS’s recent “The Vietnam War” online if you missed it.

HP Compaq 6000 Pro SFF PC / Windows 10 Pro / 22H2
Intel®Core™2 “Wolfdale” E8400 3.0 GHz / 8.00 GB
HP ProDesk 400 G5 SFF PC / Windows 11 Pro / 23H2
Intel®Core™ “Coffee Lake” i3-8100 3.6 GHz / 16.00 GB

3 users thanked author for this post.

SueW, Fred, AJNorth

Reply | Quote

Thank you for the thoughts and link;
In general it is good to realize that all the political systems are meddling the truth and try to manipulate. It’s never too late to think for oneself.
Though 1984 has passed in time, but the effects are superseeded by these times; perhaps there will be a point of return, someday(?).

* _ ... _ *

1 user thanked author for this post.

wdburt1

Reply | Quote

All mainstream media networks in this country, without exception, are 100% propaganda. Totally, completely, propaganda. There isn’t any evidence for Russia interfering in the election, but Trump was probably helping the Russian mafia smuggle money. That’s the only intriguing Russia/Trump connection that seems to be a distinct possibility. We don’t need Russia to hack our elections. America does a fine job of that all by itself.

Reply | Quote

Facebook and Twitter Deleted Data Tied to Russian Accounts That Targeted 2016 Election Voters

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote

Heh, what about all the outright b***** propaganda (I’m looking at you, CNN) and so on that people were exposed to from your OWN country? Including straight from your own government. Even to the points of directly feeding lines to mouthpieces purely for manipulation of your own populace: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrdFD-SdpiM

As jrmoffet mentioned too, America’s govt meddles far more in everyone else’s elections than the “big bad Russia” does. (Of course Russia is guilty too, but America is far from innocent in this).

In fact the majority of what you see on the Internet will be propaganda from someone, or just outright paid advertising masquerading as information. Especially with those “studies” that newspaper sites like to “report” on. Even the smaller local ones are at it.

Type “suffer lack of meat syndrome” into Google:

“Brett Miller, manager of The Birley Hotel, said: “We’ve long suspected that men don’t just love meat – they actually need it, and struggle when they go without it.””
(Sheffield Star)
http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/half-of-sheffield-men-suffer-lack-of-meat-syndrome-1-7611690

“Charlotte Grieveson, manager of Sizzling Pub the Flying Childers on Nostell Place said: “We’ve long suspected that men don’t just love meat – they actually need it, and struggle when they go without for long periods of time.””
(Thorne and District Gazette)
http://www.thornegazette.co.uk/news/half-of-doncaster-men-suffer-lack-of-meat-syndrome-1-7614215

“We’ve long suspected that men don’t just love meat – they actually need it, and struggle when they go without for long periods of time” said Job Hudson, from Sizzling pubs”
(Meatinfo.co.uk) http://meatinfo.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/19108/Over_half_the_UK_male_population_suffer_from_Lack_of_Meat_Syndrome.html

And a whole lot more:
http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/life/623716/Men-suffering-lack-of-meat-syndrome-causes-tired-anger-stressed-out

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/whats-on/food-drink-news/coventry-men-suffering-lack-meat-10562818

http://www.southportvisiter.co.uk/whats-on/southport-men-suffering-lack-meat-10604687

http://home.bt.com/lifestyle/health/healthy-eating/do-you-have-lack-of-meat-syndrome-11364028129379

Funny that, isn’t it. All those different people saying EXACTLY the same quote, for something that men in specifically the location the paper is writing about suffer.

What looks like an innocent report on a “study”, is simply a paid for advert, they clarify this NO-WHERE. However they’re very sure to remind us that Sizzling Pubs has over 320 pubs nationwide, including blablabala.

Now what about that “Sources said” ey?

Not taking sides here, but don’t cherry pick only what you don’t like, as it just looks like childish whining. You’re exposed to adverts and propaganda every day in real-life too, just when walking down the street. Some of that may be even from a big bad Russian owner…

2 users thanked author for this post.

SueW, EyesOnWindows

Reply | Quote

I certainly won’t excuse the US government’s actions. But this case seems quite clearcut – and it would be a point of contention with any government’s influence being deleted from Facebook.

2 users thanked author for this post.

AJNorth, SueW

Reply | Quote

Doesn’t it say, right above the Reply To: section,

Please follow the – Lounge Rules– no personal attacks, no swearing, and politics/religion are relegated to the Rants forum.” ?

Or am I going blind?

 

2 users thanked author for this post.

HiFlyer, Clairvaux

Reply | Quote

Exactly. One more case of one rule for commenters, and another one for the blog author.

Mind you, I support that petition, and I resent Russian propaganda. But am I allowed to comment further ? Obviously, if I did, I would need to get quite political. And quite controversial, too.

So, is it permitted to air political opinions on that thread because the author implicitly suspended the rule without saying so ? Is it permitted as long as they align with the author’s opinions ? But how do we know about them, since usually political discussions are out of bonds ?

Also, this thread is exactly the type that would attract professional Russian trolls, and I already see at least one comment that might qualify. Usually forbidding political discussions, and suddenly allowing one on a specific thread, is not conducive to the kind of vigilance that allows the blog author, and the blog community, to detect and dissuade such interference.

It’s true in all human communities where there’s some hierarchy involved : either don’t set any rules, and keep everyone guessing, or set a few ones, and have the boss respect them too. Unless you want trust and good will to disappear, that is.

Reply | Quote

I see this as a business question – Facebook removing information that should remain public. The details – which country, what circumstances – are secondary to Facebook removing the data.

Although there are certainly political overtones in this particular situation, the act of removing access to what should be public data is the core problem.

Reply | Quote

Common Woody! You’re way better than this brother. <shakes head>

Reply | Quote

Probably would be better to just quit using Facebook.  I never used it .

1 user thanked author for this post.

wdburt1

Reply | Quote

? says:

facebook was duped?

facebook gained what?

personally, i enjoy Leni Riefenstahl’s in your face variety of manufactured fact for fun and profit.

 

Reply | Quote

woody wrote:

I certainly won’t excuse the US government’s actions. But this case seems quite clearcut – and it would be a point of contention with any government’s influence being deleted from Facebook.

They’d all be clearcut if they tried hard enough heh. Problem is they want the US’ actions swept under the carpet, while focusing everyone on the boogeyman instead.

It’s just like the arguments about brexit over here, about everyone being “swayed” by the claim about the NHS on a bus. Vast majority of people voting will have voted because of what they wanted regardless. It’s just reality that with anything like this there will be propaganda everywhere, from all sides.

My govt even paid MILLIONS of our taxpayer’s money to have a nice glossy “information” booklet produced and sent to every home, “informing” people why they should vote only the way that the government wanted them to. Fortunately most people ignored it anyway heh. Tell me this ain’t propaganda: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160813202542/https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk

 

Of COURSE Russia will have done some meddling. When one candidate is more favourable & friendly to them than the other, and the other pretty much threatened WW3, of course they’re going to meddle. They’re humans too and will naturally look out for their own interests using whatever mediums make that possible, just as America does..

Now as to private companies deleting data to hide from laws and investigations etc, simply punish them for that. But you can do it without the whole political boogeyman angle.

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote

My reaction to this subdued because I have long understood that Facebook was all about spying, and thus do not use it.

Reply | Quote

Google also found evidence of Russian influence in US election

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote

Lawmakers unveil bill to thwart Russian election ads on social media

Reply | Quote

Political ads on Twitter will now be labeled with lots of spending data

Reply | Quote

Facebook has long been sneaky about a number of things, including the types of images they will allow, who they will ban and who they won’t, allowing underage people and people with pseudonyms to have active accounts, having different rules in different countries, allowing various kinds of censorship in different places, how they handle “news articles” (in general, not just about the election or whatever) and their ranking and dissemination, how they feed off of news organizations for content but don’t share with them much of the value garnered from that external work, etc.

I’m not surprised in the least that they have buried this Russian-interference information, aren’t being transparent, and are trying to sully the data.

In my view, a consumer petition is not going to make any difference to their actions, ethics, worldview, sense of entitlement, misunderstandings.

—
Some articles on their impact on the UK news industry, just from the month of October 2017:

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/digital-summit-news-uk-chief-says-press-must-fix-broken-relationship-with-online-platforms-or-face-end-of-independent-news/

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/facebook-pilot-scheme-removing-news-stories-from-main-feed-looks-like-shot-across-bows-of-grumbling-news-publishers/

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/google-news-chief-tells-press-gazette-web-giant-very-concerned-about-news-industry-and-plans-to-do-more-to-help/

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/whittingdale-google-and-facebook-should-fund-local-democracy-reporters-and-support-local-media/

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/facebook-and-google-say-they-want-to-help-the-news-industry-but-the-time-has-come-to-turn-words-into-actions/

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/culture-secretary-karen-bradley-defining-google-and-facebook-as-publishers-could-impact-civil-liberties/

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/end-of-googles-first-click-free-policy-hailed-as-victory-for-news-media-industry/

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/google-scraps-first-click-free-and-allows-paywalled-publishers-to-control-how-much-content-they-give-away/

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/facebook-admits-to-842m-turnover-in-the-uk-in-2016-but-true-figure-likely-to-be-much-higher/
“Accounts filed with Companies House for Facebook UK, covering the year to the end of 31 December, revealed the UK subsidiary made £58 million in operating profit. […] Facebook paid £5 million in corporation tax in the UK over the 12-month period.
…smaller client ad sales are still believed to be processed via Ireland, so do not appear in the UK accounts.
Press Gazette’s Duopoly campaign warns that Facebook and Google now take most of the £10 billion a year spent on digital advertising in the UK, and around 80 per cent of the growth.
The concern is their dominance will push news publishers out of business.”

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/ad-blocking-company-claims-to-be-outfoxing-facebook-in-game-of-cat-and-mouse-over-ads/

The Russian interference with Facebook was not just in the US:
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/culture-committee-chairman-writes-to-facebook-for-detail-on-russian-linked-activity-around-brexit-and-election-votes/

—-
P.T.

Reply | Quote

From Facebook says 126 million Americans may have seen Russia-linked political posts:

“Facebook Inc (FB.O) said on Monday that Russia-based operatives published about 80,000 posts on the social network over a two-year period in an effort to sway U.S. politics and that about 126 million Americans may have seen the posts during that time.

Facebook gave the details about the reach of Russian posts in written testimony it provided to U.S. lawmakers, which was seen by Reuters.

Twitter Inc (TWTR.N) separately has found 2,752 accounts linked to Russian operatives, a source familiar with the company’s written testimony said. That estimate is up from a tally of 201 accounts that Twitter reported in September.”

Reply | Quote

“Silicon Valley helped Russia sway the US election. So now what?”
by Emily Bell, director of the Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/oct/29/media-symbiotic-relationship-facebook-worry-democracy

excerpt
“Twitter has been so mortified by the possibility that uncontrolled bot armies on its platform might have swayed the vote that it is opening a “transparency centre” for future political advertising disclosures.
It also announced last week it was banning two Kremlin-supported media outlets, RT and Sputnik, from buying advertising.
Embarrassingly for Twitter, RT responded by immediately publishing details of meetings between RT and Twitter’s partnership teams before the 2016 election where Twitter brainstormed ad strategies with the Russians.
The details from RT are excruciating for Twitter in the current context, if they are accurate. The Russian broadcaster claims that Twitter approached RT with a comprehensive pre-election advertising plan. In order to entice RT to agree to the exclusive elections offer, Twitter promised a package of perks and bonuses.
The offer included such things as closed beta testing of new tools and products, a customised emoji hashtag that would help RT stand out with special election coverage; customised analytics and research solutions, and a dedicated team of Twitter experts to help with content curation and media strategy.
This kind of service is available from most platform “partner” teams at social media companies, whose job it is to encourage publishers to use their technologies and pay money to boost their presence on them.
Perhaps the most ironic aspect of Twitter banning RT and Sputnik from buying advertising is that both Russian media outlets still have active [Twitter] accounts serving, in RT’s case, more than 2.5 million followers.
And, to further highlight the problem with platform governance, they have accounts blue “verified” ticks.”

—-

P.T.

Reply | Quote

From http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/11/politics/president-donald-trump-vladimir-putin-election-meddling/index.html:

“President Donald Trump suggested on Saturday he’s done confronting Russian President Vladimir Putin over his country’s election meddling since it’s insulting to the Russian leader.

Trump said he took Putin at his word that Russia did not seek to interfere in the US presidential election last year, despite a finding from US intelligence agencies that it did. The fraught relations between the two leaders was underscored anew when Putin’s spokesman said election meddling did not come up when they spoke, even though Trump said it did.”

1 user thanked author for this post.

walker

Reply | Quote

Update on Twitter’s Review of the 2016 U.S. Election (updated on January 31, 2018)

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote