5 ms·

> And if reports are to believed, Russia's meddling is behind Brexit... D'oh. There was me thinking I made the decision on my own, I even researched loads of t

by malza 9y ago

> And if reports are to believed, Russia's meddling is behind Brexit... D'oh. There was me thinking I made the decision on my own, I even researched loads of topics by buying books and stuff, only to find out on HN that those meddling Ruskies did it all along. I will agree with you on pipelines though.

russian_agent 9y ago
The EU also proposed (and implemented?) its own online propaganda army long before Brexit, so the Russians might not be the only ones to interfere in public opinion. "In order to reverse the perception that 'Europe is the problem', we need to communicate that the answer to existing challenges... is 'more Europe' not 'less Europe'."[1] [1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/9845442/EU-to-set-up-euro-election-troll-patrol-to-tackle-Eurosceptic-surge.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/9845442/...
- zigzigzag 9y ago
  lol, username checks out. The EU uses propaganda so routinely people don't even notice it anymore. Like how federalists always refer to the EU as "Europe" even though Europe is a continent with several non-EU countries in it, and the EU is a political arrangement. It's a subtle word trick but it plants the feeling of permanence in people's minds. Also, the way it charges countries huge sums of money to trade with it tariff free and then dishes out the money to projects ... but only on the condition that they erect giant signs with the EU flag and saying the EU paid for it. The EU of course, produces nothing itself, it's the countries that paid for it, but putting the actual flags of the nations that paid might lead to people feeling loyalty to actual European countries instead of the EU institutions. And then there is the actual propaganda. Including, ironically, propaganda targeted at Russia: http://collections.internetmemory.org/haeu/content/20160313172652/http://eeas.europa.eu/top_stories/2015/261115_stratcom-east_qanda_en.htm http://collections.internetmemory.org/haeu/content/201603131... http://collections.internetmemory.org/haeu/content/20160313172652/http://eeas.europa.eu/ru/index_ru.htm http://collections.internetmemory.org/haeu/content/201603131...
  - ornitorrincos 9y ago
    I don't know ehere you live but in here when a project is being built it's fairly normal to have a big sign with details like, * what is being done * starting date and expected end date * maybe a map to show are being worked on * company doing the work * How much it costs * A series of logos with every entity that funded the work, with a decreasinz size depending how much they funded) I'd not really call that propaganda.
    - zigzigzag 9y ago
      This isn't whilst a project is being built. It's after it's been built, in perpetuity, to constantly remind people that the thing in question was "paid for by the EU". The logos of the actual entities that paid for it, the countries, are not shown of course.
pm90 9y ago
Heh, I find it rather amusing when citizens of UK and the US are shocked, utterly shocked when a foreign actor interferes in their local politics when their respective govt. have been doing the same for centuries. Karma is a bitch, as someone likes to say.
- nbevans 9y ago
  He was being sarcastic... He wasn't shocked; he was mocking the idea that Russia caused Brexit. They didn't. The UK citizens themselves voted for Brexit because they're fed up with all the shit the EU brings with it.
  - kelnage 9y ago
    Except that's a terrible argument (I wasn't swayed by Russian interference, therefore no-one was). Yes, the citizens of the UK voted (just) for Brexit - because it was a referendum - that's how they work (assuming no ballot stuffing etc). Would everyone have voted the same way without the (alleged) interference? Possibly not.
    - nbevans 9y ago
      There was no Russian interference though. Show us a microgram of evidence? Even Infowars-style speculative evidence would be permissable at this point?
      - narrowrail 9y ago
        While agree with you to some extent, do you think propagandists have somewhat recently realized how to exploit current communications tech to deploy their message(s)? If the financials of FB and GOOG tell us anything, it's that advertising on the internet is very effective, and advertising is just corporate propaganda. Most people just don't have the time/interest/energy to fact check, and many are just out to confirm their preconceived ideas/ whatever helps assuage their sense of guilt.

by malza 9y ago

russian_agent 9y ago

The EU also proposed (and implemented?) its own online propaganda army long before Brexit, so the Russians might not be the only ones to interfere in public opinion. "In order to reverse the perception that 'Europe is the problem', we need to communicate that the answer to existing challenges... is 'more Europe' not 'less Europe'."[1] [1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/9845442/EU-to-set-up-euro-election-troll-patrol-to-tackle-Eurosceptic-surge.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/9845442/...

zigzigzag 9y ago
lol, username checks out. The EU uses propaganda so routinely people don't even notice it anymore. Like how federalists always refer to the EU as "Europe" even though Europe is a continent with several non-EU countries in it, and the EU is a political arrangement. It's a subtle word trick but it plants the feeling of permanence in people's minds. Also, the way it charges countries huge sums of money to trade with it tariff free and then dishes out the money to projects ... but only on the condition that they erect giant signs with the EU flag and saying the EU paid for it. The EU of course, produces nothing itself, it's the countries that paid for it, but putting the actual flags of the nations that paid might lead to people feeling loyalty to actual European countries instead of the EU institutions. And then there is the actual propaganda. Including, ironically, propaganda targeted at Russia: http://collections.internetmemory.org/haeu/content/20160313172652/http://eeas.europa.eu/top_stories/2015/261115_stratcom-east_qanda_en.htm http://collections.internetmemory.org/haeu/content/201603131... http://collections.internetmemory.org/haeu/content/20160313172652/http://eeas.europa.eu/ru/index_ru.htm http://collections.internetmemory.org/haeu/content/201603131...
- ornitorrincos 9y ago
  I don't know ehere you live but in here when a project is being built it's fairly normal to have a big sign with details like, * what is being done * starting date and expected end date * maybe a map to show are being worked on * company doing the work * How much it costs * A series of logos with every entity that funded the work, with a decreasinz size depending how much they funded) I'd not really call that propaganda.
  - zigzigzag 9y ago
    This isn't whilst a project is being built. It's after it's been built, in perpetuity, to constantly remind people that the thing in question was "paid for by the EU". The logos of the actual entities that paid for it, the countries, are not shown of course.

pm90 9y ago

Heh, I find it rather amusing when citizens of UK and the US are shocked, utterly shocked when a foreign actor interferes in their local politics when their respective govt. have been doing the same for centuries. Karma is a bitch, as someone likes to say.

nbevans 9y ago
He was being sarcastic... He wasn't shocked; he was mocking the idea that Russia caused Brexit. They didn't. The UK citizens themselves voted for Brexit because they're fed up with all the shit the EU brings with it.
- kelnage 9y ago
  Except that's a terrible argument (I wasn't swayed by Russian interference, therefore no-one was). Yes, the citizens of the UK voted (just) for Brexit - because it was a referendum - that's how they work (assuming no ballot stuffing etc). Would everyone have voted the same way without the (alleged) interference? Possibly not.
  - nbevans 9y ago
    There was no Russian interference though. Show us a microgram of evidence? Even Infowars-style speculative evidence would be permissable at this point?
    - narrowrail 9y ago
      While agree with you to some extent, do you think propagandists have somewhat recently realized how to exploit current communications tech to deploy their message(s)? If the financials of FB and GOOG tell us anything, it's that advertising on the internet is very effective, and advertising is just corporate propaganda. Most people just don't have the time/interest/energy to fact check, and many are just out to confirm their preconceived ideas/ whatever helps assuage their sense of guilt.