4 ms·

NYT has their head in the sand and is in full on damage control over the Mueller indictment of a dozen internet trolls. The so-called “troll factory” is pretty

by zaroth 9y ago

NYT has their head in the sand and is in full on damage control over the Mueller indictment of a dozen internet trolls. The so-called “troll factory” is pretty old news, reported widely in Russia last year. [1] They just keep writing these articles trying to “fact check” or otherwise disassemble a qualified primary source inside FB which goes against their narrative. NYT talks about the “millions of dollars” that Russia spent on the troll factory (how many millions? I’ve read that would be $2) to “influence the election”. The majority of which was spent after the election. The great Russian stolen election comes down to this? Either the Russians are exponentially better at advertising than the best minds in the DNC, or maybe the Russian boogeyman story is losing its shine. The NYT (and MSM media in general) is doing Russia’s job for them, which I have to assume is more than Moscow could have ever dreamed of. This is why Trump tweets they are laughing their asses off. People are desperate to see Trump’s election as illegitimate rather than confront the much scarier reality of why he won. Personally I rather hope the DNC figures this out sooner than later, and finds a candidate and a platform that is electable by 2024. [1] - https://www.rbc.ru/magazine/2017/11/59e0c17d9a79470e05a9e6c1 https://www.rbc.ru/magazine/2017/11/59e0c17d9a79470e05a9e6c1

gandhium 9y ago
> The so-called “troll factory” is pretty old news Why it's old news if they're still trolling? > Either the Russians are exponentially better at advertising than the best minds in the DNC No, just their labour is exponentially cheaper.
- zaroth 9y ago
  The Internet, and social media in general, is just a trolls playground. Why do I care about a few dozen trolls in particular? Spending a few hundred thousand dollars promoting stories into news feeds. This is like worrying about my camp fire contributing to global warming. I can understand the desire to want to blame some great evil force for corrupting democracy, when it’s so much harder to look in the mirror. Personally I think the overall vitriol against Trump is the single biggest reason he won. Telling someone they’re a shitstain for their political beliefs is the surest-fire way to get them out to vote against you.
  - gandhium 9y ago
    Wow. Looks like you're actively try to downplay this fact.
    - zaroth 9y ago
      In an election when the two parties combined spent almost $2 billion, I'm not particularly concerned with an alleged ad buy of "thousands of dollars per month" [1] The same group, by the way, which was promoting "Not My President" stories after the election. [2] This is a story of Russia sowing discord, but since the MSM played directly into their hands in that regard, they don't want to report it accurately. Even 538 [3] can't get it right. In their analysis of whether IRA had any impact on the election ("Who Can Say?") they claim the IRA had a monthly operating budget the equivalent of $1.25 million USD. In fact what the indictment actually claims is; "By in or around September 2016, the ORGANIZATION’s monthly budget for Project Lakhta submitted to CONCORD exceeded 73 million Russian rubles (over 1,250,000 U.S. dollars), including approximately one million rubles in bonus payments" [4] But in the paragraph immediately above; "CONCORD funded the [IRA] as part of a larger CONCORD-funded interference operation that it referred to as “Project Lakhta.” Project Lakhta had multiple components, some involving domestic audiences within the Russian Federation and others targeting foreign audiences in various countries, including the United States." So when 538 writes "The indictment alleges that an organization called the Internet Research Agency had a monthly budget of approximately $1.25 million toward interference efforts by September 2016" this is simply false. In a story attempting to assess the reach and impact of Russian interference in the election, IMO this is a fatal flaw in their reporting. Now that the "collusion" narrative is dead, the new buzzword is "interference". But personally I'm not convinced "thousands of dollars of ad spend" are convincing evidence of interference. No doubt Russia loves sowing discord in the US and has done so for decades. The story simply hasn't lived up to the narrative, and it's playing into Russia's hand to try to make it bigger than it really was. I guess maybe we're just about ready to move on from anger to bargaining. Really, this has gone on long enough. [1] - https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4380504/The-Special-Counsel-s-Indictment-of-the-Internet.pdf https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4380504/The-Speci... -- Paragraph #35 on Pg 14 [2] - Indictment, Paragraph #57 [3] - https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-did-russian-interference-affect-the-2016-election/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-did-russian-in... [4] - Indictment, Paragraph #11(b)
- monocasa 9y ago
  > No, just their labour is exponentially cheaper. The DNC's labor is primarily volunteers, so I find that hard to believe.

by zaroth 9y ago

gandhium 9y ago

> The so-called “troll factory” is pretty old news Why it's old news if they're still trolling? > Either the Russians are exponentially better at advertising than the best minds in the DNC No, just their labour is exponentially cheaper.

zaroth 9y ago
The Internet, and social media in general, is just a trolls playground. Why do I care about a few dozen trolls in particular? Spending a few hundred thousand dollars promoting stories into news feeds. This is like worrying about my camp fire contributing to global warming. I can understand the desire to want to blame some great evil force for corrupting democracy, when it’s so much harder to look in the mirror. Personally I think the overall vitriol against Trump is the single biggest reason he won. Telling someone they’re a shitstain for their political beliefs is the surest-fire way to get them out to vote against you.
- gandhium 9y ago
  Wow. Looks like you're actively try to downplay this fact.
  - zaroth 9y ago
    In an election when the two parties combined spent almost $2 billion, I'm not particularly concerned with an alleged ad buy of "thousands of dollars per month" [1] The same group, by the way, which was promoting "Not My President" stories after the election. [2] This is a story of Russia sowing discord, but since the MSM played directly into their hands in that regard, they don't want to report it accurately. Even 538 [3] can't get it right. In their analysis of whether IRA had any impact on the election ("Who Can Say?") they claim the IRA had a monthly operating budget the equivalent of $1.25 million USD. In fact what the indictment actually claims is; "By in or around September 2016, the ORGANIZATION’s monthly budget for Project Lakhta submitted to CONCORD exceeded 73 million Russian rubles (over 1,250,000 U.S. dollars), including approximately one million rubles in bonus payments" [4] But in the paragraph immediately above; "CONCORD funded the [IRA] as part of a larger CONCORD-funded interference operation that it referred to as “Project Lakhta.” Project Lakhta had multiple components, some involving domestic audiences within the Russian Federation and others targeting foreign audiences in various countries, including the United States." So when 538 writes "The indictment alleges that an organization called the Internet Research Agency had a monthly budget of approximately $1.25 million toward interference efforts by September 2016" this is simply false. In a story attempting to assess the reach and impact of Russian interference in the election, IMO this is a fatal flaw in their reporting. Now that the "collusion" narrative is dead, the new buzzword is "interference". But personally I'm not convinced "thousands of dollars of ad spend" are convincing evidence of interference. No doubt Russia loves sowing discord in the US and has done so for decades. The story simply hasn't lived up to the narrative, and it's playing into Russia's hand to try to make it bigger than it really was. I guess maybe we're just about ready to move on from anger to bargaining. Really, this has gone on long enough. [1] - https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4380504/The-Special-Counsel-s-Indictment-of-the-Internet.pdf https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4380504/The-Speci... -- Paragraph #35 on Pg 14 [2] - Indictment, Paragraph #57 [3] - https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-did-russian-interference-affect-the-2016-election/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-did-russian-in... [4] - Indictment, Paragraph #11(b)
monocasa 9y ago
> No, just their labour is exponentially cheaper. The DNC's labor is primarily volunteers, so I find that hard to believe.