57 ms·

Not too long ago, we (America) were bragging about our ability to influence foreign elections[1]. Everyone seems to conveniently forget that whenever Russian "m

by radcon 7y ago

Not too long ago, we (America) were bragging about our ability to influence foreign elections[1]. Everyone seems to conveniently forget that whenever Russian "meddling" comes up these days. http://content.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19960715,00.html http://content.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19960715,00.html

moorhosj 7y ago
Does Time magazine represent America in this comment?
- dangerface 7y ago
  Yes, along with the rest of American media is how America is represented to non Americans.
  - moorhosj 7y ago
    American media runs the ideological spectrum (Mother Jones to The Atlantic to National Review to Fox News). They aren’t a unified voice, so that representation would include contradicting messages. It seems like people just choose the one that helps their strawman and labels that as “AMERICA”.
    - luckylion 7y ago
      > American media runs the ideological spectrum Very few of them are openly against using the military, cultural, economic power the US has to force others to bend to their will. They may disagree on what direction to push others in, but they agree that they have the right (or even duty) to push them. Which is totally understandable. Very few people see themselves as villains, pretty much everybody wants to make the world a better place. What "better" means and how to get there, that's where they part ways.
      - shakyshakyshaky 7y ago
        The Jacobin has always been a fan of calling out US imperialism.
        luckylion 7y ago
        Sure, I'm not claiming that the US media landscape is unified and doesn't include any dissenting voices. It's just that the super majority mostly agrees on the fundamentals, even if they don't on the details. The same is true for most politicians as well. I don't believe that it's very different in other countries, it's just a lot less visible, because most countries don't have the same amount of power.
  - mistermann 7y ago
    If you think about it, media is also largely how America is represented to Americans themselves. Think of the typical American's mental model of America (and the rest of the world) - where does the actual content of the model we hold in our brain come from? A mixture of personal experiences, conversations, TV, internet, books, as well as the brain itself - automatically (and without our knowledge) filling gaps, adding color and detail, based on a complex set of heuristic processes that we barely understand. Take the Russia hacking the election meme for example - next time you read someone making an assertion one way or another, ask them what the source of their information is, the conclusive and specific physical evidence that proves their belief. In my experience, at best, you will get a link to an x00 page report filled with allegations, you won't even be able to get a vague description of any specific details that was conclusively proven, because that isn't stored in their mental model. (edit: or, as seen in this very thread when others have asked such a question, "evidence" that is not even remotely conclusive, but believed without question, as well as examples of historic non-conclusive evidence planting. In my experience, no amount of demonstration of this happening will ever change people's thinking on the matter - most humans will always continue to believe what their brain tells them, without hesitation - it just feels too real to not believe it, and this is why propaganda is so easy and effective.) In the linked story, it appears the FBI agent is trying to plant this meme into the minds of 8chan users, hoping it will take root and spread organically there as easily as it has in the broad public.
    - _dczq 7y ago
      ==Take the Russia hacking the election meme for example== Isn't it possible that you are the one falling victim to the exact type of thinking you describe? You admit yourself that propaganda is easy and effective. Have you explored that possibility? ==most humans will always continue to believe what their brain tells them, without hesitation== The embedded assumption in this post is that you have risen above the misinformation, bad mental models and propaganda to assess the "real" truth. How have you managed to overcome the weaknesses that others fall victim to?
      - mistermann 7y ago
        It most definitely is a possibility, and your type of thinking is exactly what we need more of. I assure you I have and continue to explore the possibility, which is why I often reach out to people who seem to believe they have witnessed specific, concrete evidence, to share the specific information they have seen. Alas, despite no shortage of such people, I have yet to encounter one who is willing and able to provide anything beyond a link to an x00 page report full of allegations. > The embedded assumption in this post is that you have risen above the misinformation, bad mental models and propaganda to assess the "real" truth. How have you managed to overcome the weaknesses that others fall victim to? Apologies if I have given that impression, it was definitely not my intent. I am simply pointing out that there are plenty of people who make strong and specific assertions, but are unable to provide any strong, specific evidence. I have not formed any final conclusions, but the longer this drags on, and the more specific claims I read in the news that are not backed by supporting evidence, it seems fairly reasonable to suspect that the story is not true, if not actually faked (as we now know the Iraq WMD story was faked). I have no particular theory on what the underlying motive might be if this is the case. If you know of anything I've overlooked, please post here so we can all become more informed.
- alexandercrohde 7y ago
  Are you just picking on a technicality here or do you genuinely believe that the vast majority of the executive would/should feel it's wrong for the US to meddle in foreign elections?
  - _dczq 7y ago
    I think it is a stretch to claim that an article from Time magazine about how four American political consultants helped Boris Yeltson win an election is the same as state-sponsored election hacking and interference. I also don't see how this article is equivalent to the entire US "bragging" about anything. One involves multiple crimes being committed at state-scale (DNC hack [1], RNC hack [2], identity fraud [3]) the other was a consulting contract. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/how-the-russians-hacked-the-dnc-and-passed-its-emails-to-wikileaks/2018/07/13/af19a828-86c3-11e8-8553-a3ce89036c78_story.html?utm_term=.de7d5b8b9137 https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/how-t... [2] https://www.thedailybeast.com/report-russian-hackers-had-rnc-data-but-didnt-release-it https://www.thedailybeast.com/report-russian-hackers-had-rnc... [3] https://www.wired.com/story/russian-trolls-identity-theft-mueller-indictment/ https://www.wired.com/story/russian-trolls-identity-theft-mu...
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
- darkpuma 7y ago
  That's what I was raised to believe as a child in America. Time Magazine is right up there with apple pie.

by radcon 7y ago

moorhosj 7y ago

Does Time magazine represent America in this comment?

dangerface 7y ago
Yes, along with the rest of American media is how America is represented to non Americans.
- moorhosj 7y ago
  American media runs the ideological spectrum (Mother Jones to The Atlantic to National Review to Fox News). They aren’t a unified voice, so that representation would include contradicting messages. It seems like people just choose the one that helps their strawman and labels that as “AMERICA”.
  - luckylion 7y ago
    > American media runs the ideological spectrum Very few of them are openly against using the military, cultural, economic power the US has to force others to bend to their will. They may disagree on what direction to push others in, but they agree that they have the right (or even duty) to push them. Which is totally understandable. Very few people see themselves as villains, pretty much everybody wants to make the world a better place. What "better" means and how to get there, that's where they part ways.
    - shakyshakyshaky 7y ago
      The Jacobin has always been a fan of calling out US imperialism.
      - luckylion 7y ago
        Sure, I'm not claiming that the US media landscape is unified and doesn't include any dissenting voices. It's just that the super majority mostly agrees on the fundamentals, even if they don't on the details. The same is true for most politicians as well. I don't believe that it's very different in other countries, it's just a lot less visible, because most countries don't have the same amount of power.
- mistermann 7y ago
  If you think about it, media is also largely how America is represented to Americans themselves. Think of the typical American's mental model of America (and the rest of the world) - where does the actual content of the model we hold in our brain come from? A mixture of personal experiences, conversations, TV, internet, books, as well as the brain itself - automatically (and without our knowledge) filling gaps, adding color and detail, based on a complex set of heuristic processes that we barely understand. Take the Russia hacking the election meme for example - next time you read someone making an assertion one way or another, ask them what the source of their information is, the conclusive and specific physical evidence that proves their belief. In my experience, at best, you will get a link to an x00 page report filled with allegations, you won't even be able to get a vague description of any specific details that was conclusively proven, because that isn't stored in their mental model. (edit: or, as seen in this very thread when others have asked such a question, "evidence" that is not even remotely conclusive, but believed without question, as well as examples of historic non-conclusive evidence planting. In my experience, no amount of demonstration of this happening will ever change people's thinking on the matter - most humans will always continue to believe what their brain tells them, without hesitation - it just feels too real to not believe it, and this is why propaganda is so easy and effective.) In the linked story, it appears the FBI agent is trying to plant this meme into the minds of 8chan users, hoping it will take root and spread organically there as easily as it has in the broad public.
  - _dczq 7y ago
    ==Take the Russia hacking the election meme for example== Isn't it possible that you are the one falling victim to the exact type of thinking you describe? You admit yourself that propaganda is easy and effective. Have you explored that possibility? ==most humans will always continue to believe what their brain tells them, without hesitation== The embedded assumption in this post is that you have risen above the misinformation, bad mental models and propaganda to assess the "real" truth. How have you managed to overcome the weaknesses that others fall victim to?
    - mistermann 7y ago
      It most definitely is a possibility, and your type of thinking is exactly what we need more of. I assure you I have and continue to explore the possibility, which is why I often reach out to people who seem to believe they have witnessed specific, concrete evidence, to share the specific information they have seen. Alas, despite no shortage of such people, I have yet to encounter one who is willing and able to provide anything beyond a link to an x00 page report full of allegations. > The embedded assumption in this post is that you have risen above the misinformation, bad mental models and propaganda to assess the "real" truth. How have you managed to overcome the weaknesses that others fall victim to? Apologies if I have given that impression, it was definitely not my intent. I am simply pointing out that there are plenty of people who make strong and specific assertions, but are unable to provide any strong, specific evidence. I have not formed any final conclusions, but the longer this drags on, and the more specific claims I read in the news that are not backed by supporting evidence, it seems fairly reasonable to suspect that the story is not true, if not actually faked (as we now know the Iraq WMD story was faked). I have no particular theory on what the underlying motive might be if this is the case. If you know of anything I've overlooked, please post here so we can all become more informed.
alexandercrohde 7y ago
Are you just picking on a technicality here or do you genuinely believe that the vast majority of the executive would/should feel it's wrong for the US to meddle in foreign elections?
- _dczq 7y ago
  I think it is a stretch to claim that an article from Time magazine about how four American political consultants helped Boris Yeltson win an election is the same as state-sponsored election hacking and interference. I also don't see how this article is equivalent to the entire US "bragging" about anything. One involves multiple crimes being committed at state-scale (DNC hack [1], RNC hack [2], identity fraud [3]) the other was a consulting contract. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/how-the-russians-hacked-the-dnc-and-passed-its-emails-to-wikileaks/2018/07/13/af19a828-86c3-11e8-8553-a3ce89036c78_story.html?utm_term=.de7d5b8b9137 https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/how-t... [2] https://www.thedailybeast.com/report-russian-hackers-had-rnc-data-but-didnt-release-it https://www.thedailybeast.com/report-russian-hackers-had-rnc... [3] https://www.wired.com/story/russian-trolls-identity-theft-mueller-indictment/ https://www.wired.com/story/russian-trolls-identity-theft-mu...
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
darkpuma 7y ago
That's what I was raised to believe as a child in America. Time Magazine is right up there with apple pie.