5 ms·

This is great. Please, please let this concept enter the general public's mind.

genericone 8y ago
Do you mean the concept that: "Any/all organizations can/do seed a particular narrative to serve their strategic purposes" ?
- Lionsion 8y ago
  I doubt it, since that's not at all what the paper describes. Here's a quote from the abstract: > In contrast to prior claims, we show that the Chinese regime's strategy is to avoid arguing with skeptics of the party and the government, and to not even discuss controversial issues. We show that the goal of this massive secretive operation is instead to distract the public and change the subject, as most of the these posts involve cheerleading for China, the revolutionary history of the Communist Party, or other symbols of the regime.
  - noobermin 8y ago
    The method is different perhaps, which is interesting. I think that is an interesting point of discussion. In terms of intent or morality or whatever, it's just a different method for propaganda. I don't see this as a different category for what other governments have done in the past.
  - Sangermaine 8y ago
    Don Draper: "If you don't like what's being said, change the conversation."
    - ngold 8y ago
      It's toasted.
Lionsion 8y ago
I agree. Distraction can be really disruptive to having meaningful, productive discussions. I think many people even do it reflexively even if they're not getting paid or instructed to. There was a recent HN post about terrible reeducation camps in Xinjiang [1]. Almost no one talked about the heartbreaking story or what it might mean, as most of the comments were tired derails into "the US is bad, too" territory and responses to them. I'm pretty sure the story got quickly buried because the flame-war detector got tripped. I'm sure the Chinese censors' hearts would flutter a little if they learned about that. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17091072 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17091072
- Sangermaine 8y ago
  When I read that thread, I wondered at those comments. They always come up in these discussions. I always wonder how many are genuine and how many are actual government FUD.
- creaghpatr 8y ago
  Whether you are correct or not about the re-education camps post, accusing the government of sending groups of real (let's define real as regular HN contributors with at least 10 karma pts) people to deflect/defend on a HN post is a technically a conspiracy theory. >Almost no one talked about the heartbreaking story or what it might mean, as most of the comments were tired derails into "the US is bad, too" territory and responses to them. I saw that thread and I agree with your take, but unfortunately that's just a normal product of online discourse, not special to China-related topics. My guess is that people who live in the US saw an opportunity to call attention to prison reform rather than Chinese who wanted to deflect attention from the original article.
  - Lionsion 8y ago
    > accusing the government of sending groups of real (let's define real as regular HN contributors with at least 10 karma pts) people to deflect/defend on a HN post is a technically a conspiracy theory. I never claimed that in my comment, you should read it more closely. What I did claim is that regular HN posters will often comment (for their own reasons) in a way that would make the Chinese propagandists and censors happy.
Barrin92 8y ago
>Please, please let this concept enter the general public's mind. Especially salient because the idea of censorship in the form of bookburning or restricting speech is still way too dominant (especially in American culture). Information overflow and deflection through a sheer barrage of garbage and misinformation seems to be the new (and much more effective) MO.
- DmenshunlAnlsis 8y ago
  Oh Dear! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8moePxHpvok https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8moePxHpvok Information/Tragedy buffer overflow attacks basically.
- ss248 8y ago
  >Information overflow and deflection through a sheer barrage of garbage and misinformation seems to be the new Nothing new actually. The whole concept is pretty old. Looks like after trying to follow "guidelines" from Orwell's "1984", we are just trying Huxley's "Brave New World".
  - xster 8y ago
    > Looks like after trying to follow "guidelines" from Orwell's "1984", we are just trying Huxley's "Brave New World". This guy gets it. I absolutely agree that China needs the searing scrutiny of the world for the sake of its people and the world but China is also still in absolute infantile stages of propaganda sophistication. Straight up censorships and news suppressions are things the West did in WWI. Astroturfing is a step up but operating under the premise of a palatable freedom of information and political choice while being inundated with what to think without ever receiving 'literal fake news' is light-years ahead of China.
    - pteredactyl 8y ago
      Yea, I'd argue the whole goal of Western government operators is to create a well-oiled propaganda machine. Everything else is a negotiation.
- 8y ago
hungryhobo 8y ago
please, just look at things like cambridge analytica, the west is way ahead, not just in its own countries, but others as well.
xster 8y ago
I definitely hope so. I also hope this awareness doesn't stop at our borders since this type of astroturfing is exactly the official playbook in various ShareBlue/Media Matters type PACs https://i.redd.it/oij2wau47fdy.jpg https://i.redd.it/oij2wau47fdy.jpg (though with better use of euphemisms, a game at which China is still in an infantile stage). It is as deeply ingrained as it can get in American public online discourse https://www.fec.gov/data/disbursements/?two_year_transaction_period=2016&disbursement_purpose_categories=other&data_type=processed&committee_id=C00578997&min_date=01%2F01%2F2015&max_date=08%2F05%2F2016 https://www.fec.gov/data/disbursements/?two_year_transaction...

Do you mean the concept that: "Any/all organizations can/do seed a particular narrative to serve their strategic purposes" ?

Lionsion 8y ago
I doubt it, since that's not at all what the paper describes. Here's a quote from the abstract: > In contrast to prior claims, we show that the Chinese regime's strategy is to avoid arguing with skeptics of the party and the government, and to not even discuss controversial issues. We show that the goal of this massive secretive operation is instead to distract the public and change the subject, as most of the these posts involve cheerleading for China, the revolutionary history of the Communist Party, or other symbols of the regime.
- noobermin 8y ago
  The method is different perhaps, which is interesting. I think that is an interesting point of discussion. In terms of intent or morality or whatever, it's just a different method for propaganda. I don't see this as a different category for what other governments have done in the past.
- Sangermaine 8y ago
  Don Draper: "If you don't like what's being said, change the conversation."
  - ngold 8y ago
    It's toasted.

Lionsion 8y ago

I agree. Distraction can be really disruptive to having meaningful, productive discussions. I think many people even do it reflexively even if they're not getting paid or instructed to. There was a recent HN post about terrible reeducation camps in Xinjiang [1]. Almost no one talked about the heartbreaking story or what it might mean, as most of the comments were tired derails into "the US is bad, too" territory and responses to them. I'm pretty sure the story got quickly buried because the flame-war detector got tripped. I'm sure the Chinese censors' hearts would flutter a little if they learned about that. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17091072 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17091072

Sangermaine 8y ago
When I read that thread, I wondered at those comments. They always come up in these discussions. I always wonder how many are genuine and how many are actual government FUD.
creaghpatr 8y ago
Whether you are correct or not about the re-education camps post, accusing the government of sending groups of real (let's define real as regular HN contributors with at least 10 karma pts) people to deflect/defend on a HN post is a technically a conspiracy theory. >Almost no one talked about the heartbreaking story or what it might mean, as most of the comments were tired derails into "the US is bad, too" territory and responses to them. I saw that thread and I agree with your take, but unfortunately that's just a normal product of online discourse, not special to China-related topics. My guess is that people who live in the US saw an opportunity to call attention to prison reform rather than Chinese who wanted to deflect attention from the original article.
- Lionsion 8y ago
  > accusing the government of sending groups of real (let's define real as regular HN contributors with at least 10 karma pts) people to deflect/defend on a HN post is a technically a conspiracy theory. I never claimed that in my comment, you should read it more closely. What I did claim is that regular HN posters will often comment (for their own reasons) in a way that would make the Chinese propagandists and censors happy.

Barrin92 8y ago

>Please, please let this concept enter the general public's mind. Especially salient because the idea of censorship in the form of bookburning or restricting speech is still way too dominant (especially in American culture). Information overflow and deflection through a sheer barrage of garbage and misinformation seems to be the new (and much more effective) MO.

DmenshunlAnlsis 8y ago
Oh Dear! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8moePxHpvok https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8moePxHpvok Information/Tragedy buffer overflow attacks basically.
ss248 8y ago
>Information overflow and deflection through a sheer barrage of garbage and misinformation seems to be the new Nothing new actually. The whole concept is pretty old. Looks like after trying to follow "guidelines" from Orwell's "1984", we are just trying Huxley's "Brave New World".
- xster 8y ago
  > Looks like after trying to follow "guidelines" from Orwell's "1984", we are just trying Huxley's "Brave New World". This guy gets it. I absolutely agree that China needs the searing scrutiny of the world for the sake of its people and the world but China is also still in absolute infantile stages of propaganda sophistication. Straight up censorships and news suppressions are things the West did in WWI. Astroturfing is a step up but operating under the premise of a palatable freedom of information and political choice while being inundated with what to think without ever receiving 'literal fake news' is light-years ahead of China.
  - pteredactyl 8y ago
    Yea, I'd argue the whole goal of Western government operators is to create a well-oiled propaganda machine. Everything else is a negotiation.
8y ago

hungryhobo 8y ago

please, just look at things like cambridge analytica, the west is way ahead, not just in its own countries, but others as well.

xster 8y ago

I definitely hope so. I also hope this awareness doesn't stop at our borders since this type of astroturfing is exactly the official playbook in various ShareBlue/Media Matters type PACs https://i.redd.it/oij2wau47fdy.jpg https://i.redd.it/oij2wau47fdy.jpg (though with better use of euphemisms, a game at which China is still in an infantile stage). It is as deeply ingrained as it can get in American public online discourse https://www.fec.gov/data/disbursements/?two_year_transaction_period=2016&disbursement_purpose_categories=other&data_type=processed&committee_id=C00578997&min_date=01%2F01%2F2015&max_date=08%2F05%2F2016 https://www.fec.gov/data/disbursements/?two_year_transaction...