4 ms·

>when a supposedly free and democratic state does Create social media campaigns to promote social cohesion? I'm, er, actually okay with this? The article says

by toby- 7y ago

>when a supposedly free and democratic state does Create social media campaigns to promote social cohesion? I'm, er, actually okay with this? The article says "politicians’ statements, vigils and inter-faith events are also negotiated and planned in readiness for any terrorist attack". Nothing about that strikes me as particularly harmful; a government promoting social cohesion during times of turmoil is standard fare. What's upsetting about that?

atemerev 7y ago
With fake accounts, bot networks and hashtag stuffing? Welcome to Russia.
- toby- 7y ago
  Where in this article does it allege "fake accounts" or "bot networks" are employed? This article is from a dubious source, and is rather light on sources. Nowhere is it alleged the UK government is abusively creative accounts on social media.
  - atemerev 7y ago
    "pre-planning social media campaigns that are designed to appear to be a spontaneous public response" Can this be interpreted in any other way?
    - toby- 7y ago
      Yes...? I'm amazed if you drew from that single sentence that the UK is creating fake accounts on social media and using bot networks. There's 'filling in the gaps', but that leap you've managed to make is egregious. The third sentence further explains the false spontaneity: "In operations that contingency planners term 'controlled spontaneity', politicians’ statements, vigils and inter-faith events are also negotiated and planned in readiness for any terrorist attack." Basically: the UK government coordinates social media campaigns to promote social cohesion in the wake of terror attacks, and additionally coordinates with community leaders and politicians. That's all you can draw from the article, unless you have additional information or sources to the contrary.
      - atemerev 7y ago
        These are not "spontaneous public response". Hiring people to distribute flowers to look like spontaneous bystanders is. Marching with fake posters with fake hashtags to look like spontaneous gatherings is, these are already fake personas. If you add "on social media", you can infer all the rest.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

by toby- 7y ago

atemerev 7y ago

With fake accounts, bot networks and hashtag stuffing? Welcome to Russia.

toby- 7y ago
Where in this article does it allege "fake accounts" or "bot networks" are employed? This article is from a dubious source, and is rather light on sources. Nowhere is it alleged the UK government is abusively creative accounts on social media.
- atemerev 7y ago
  "pre-planning social media campaigns that are designed to appear to be a spontaneous public response" Can this be interpreted in any other way?
  - toby- 7y ago
    Yes...? I'm amazed if you drew from that single sentence that the UK is creating fake accounts on social media and using bot networks. There's 'filling in the gaps', but that leap you've managed to make is egregious. The third sentence further explains the false spontaneity: "In operations that contingency planners term 'controlled spontaneity', politicians’ statements, vigils and inter-faith events are also negotiated and planned in readiness for any terrorist attack." Basically: the UK government coordinates social media campaigns to promote social cohesion in the wake of terror attacks, and additionally coordinates with community leaders and politicians. That's all you can draw from the article, unless you have additional information or sources to the contrary.
    - atemerev 7y ago
      These are not "spontaneous public response". Hiring people to distribute flowers to look like spontaneous bystanders is. Marching with fake posters with fake hashtags to look like spontaneous gatherings is, these are already fake personas. If you add "on social media", you can infer all the rest.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]