3 ms·

This report presents conclusions, not evidence. There are quite a few commenters in this thread decrying the "absence of evidence," but that is simply the burd

by idm 10y ago

This report presents conclusions, not evidence. There are quite a few commenters in this thread decrying the "absence of evidence," but that is simply the burden of proof fallacy. I've performed my own analysis of election memes and I independently confirmed a staggering amount of Trump-related traffic with significantly above-average upvotes across several major media platforms. https://iandennismiller.github.io/election-memes/ https://iandennismiller.github.io/election-memes/ I wrote this 2 weeks before the election and even then, I was already looking closely at bot/sock puppet activity. I didn't connect everything at the time, but I now view the shockingly pro-Trump traffic in an even-more-skeptical light. For some, there will never be enough evidence to prove social media were subverted for the purpose of influencing the election. For my purposes, however, I appreciate the PDF linked in this thread because it is actually relevant to my social media research. I am happy to cite the intelligence report as context for the social media findings I reported on. I do not consider the book to be "closed" on this matter, but I do condemn all the commenters in this thread who are attempting to shut down the conversation by claiming there's not enough "evidence." In closing, I quote from the report: > This report is a declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this version does not include the full supporting information on key elements of the influence campaign.

jwtadvice 10y ago
The report does not establish that there was inflated social media brigading on behalf of Trump. Mostly the report establishes that the DNC was hacked and that they believe the information was leaked to Wikileaks. Then, they believe usual RT coverage was the primary venue for criticizing the fairness of the election and the electability of Clinton.
- idm 10y ago
  The report does establish that social media brigading occurred. https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf p. 4: > Russia used trolls as well as RT as part of its influence efforts to denigrate Secretary Clinton. This effort amplified stories on scandals about Secretary Clinton and the role of WikiLeaks in the election campaign. Continuing: > A journalist who is a leading expert on the Internet Research Agency claimed that some social media accounts that appear to be tied to Russia’s professional trolls—because they previously were devoted to supporting Russian actions in Ukraine—started to advocate for President-elect Trump as early as December 2015 I will use those two quotes to provide context for my research.
  - jwtadvice2 10y ago
    > The report does not establish that there was inflated social media brigading on behalf of Trump. > The report does establish that social media brigading occurred. There is a difference. But yeah. Of course Russia and the United States brigade social media. Glad to see the public finally waking up to (half of) it.
- dang 10y ago
  You've been using HN primarily for political purposes. That's an abuse of this site, and we ban accounts that do it. Indeed, we've already banned a couple of your other accounts for this. Using multiple accounts to get around HN moderation is also an abuse of this site. Please stop.

by idm 10y ago

jwtadvice 10y ago

The report does not establish that there was inflated social media brigading on behalf of Trump. Mostly the report establishes that the DNC was hacked and that they believe the information was leaked to Wikileaks. Then, they believe usual RT coverage was the primary venue for criticizing the fairness of the election and the electability of Clinton.

idm 10y ago
The report does establish that social media brigading occurred. https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf p. 4: > Russia used trolls as well as RT as part of its influence efforts to denigrate Secretary Clinton. This effort amplified stories on scandals about Secretary Clinton and the role of WikiLeaks in the election campaign. Continuing: > A journalist who is a leading expert on the Internet Research Agency claimed that some social media accounts that appear to be tied to Russia’s professional trolls—because they previously were devoted to supporting Russian actions in Ukraine—started to advocate for President-elect Trump as early as December 2015 I will use those two quotes to provide context for my research.
- jwtadvice2 10y ago
  > The report does not establish that there was inflated social media brigading on behalf of Trump. > The report does establish that social media brigading occurred. There is a difference. But yeah. Of course Russia and the United States brigade social media. Glad to see the public finally waking up to (half of) it.
dang 10y ago
You've been using HN primarily for political purposes. That's an abuse of this site, and we ban accounts that do it. Indeed, we've already banned a couple of your other accounts for this. Using multiple accounts to get around HN moderation is also an abuse of this site. Please stop.