7 ms·

I really don't get this whole Russian interference moral panic. Like sure, maybe there are some people paid by foreign governments to target people on social me

I really don't get this whole Russian interference moral panic. Like sure, maybe there are some people paid by foreign governments to target people on social media, but at the point people are susceptible to that they're already so addled by other factors it's basically irrelevant surely? I feel like I must be missing something obvious? For instance here in the UK there's a huge amount of pearl clutching about Russian disinformation leading to the vote to leave the EU (Brexit). But I really don't believe some older folks saw a few adverts on Facebook and that was it. Radicalisation, such as it is, set in decades before through a news media that was overwhelmingly anti EU, incredibly biased to the point of being propaganda and often with no basis in fact. The idea some Russian millenials in a St Petersburg basement lead to Brexit, or Trump, or whatever else they're being blamed for now seems utterly fanciful. Radicalisation for these people set in long before any of this and it was bought in the shop as a newspaper or delivered as part of your cable package.

mc32 7y ago
The only reason it’s a panick is because they are contrarians. If they were astroturfing for the mainstream candidates, you wouldn’t hear much. Do we hear about other efforts that likely go on but are in support of non-contrarian candidates? I have not. I doubt it’s because no one is doing it. I mean I’d be surprised. Now, I agree foreigners should not meddle in the elections of others, but some of that stuff is blurry. Would China’s mr. Xi saying he’d wish Bernie would win “interference”? Is a candidate delivering a political speech on foreign soil interference?
- pochamago 7y ago
  Especially on the internet, which, for all that individual countries may not like, is an international platform. Citizens from every country are encouraged to use every mainstream form of social media. And in every major country people are paid to make certain posts. That it's now political just seems like the natural evolution.
ardit33 7y ago
It is real... not just a figment of imagination of politicians... Hang around in forums of countries, where they are trying to actively create chaos and you will see it.... Ways it comes into forums: 1. Asking question: "Is the EU good for Albania, Montenegro, Northern Macedonia, etc", then you see puppet accounts saying the EU is bad and it is being taken over by socialist/nationalist and doesn't want those countries. etc.. etc.. 2. Spreading information about how USA foreign policy is bad... etc.. etc.. and why is NATO needed, (Macedonia is trying to get into NATO. Albania is already in). 3. Soros, somehow is being turned into a Boogeyman, (this was especially championed by the Orban's wanna bees), and a symbol of the 'corrupt west' Russian comments sometimes are obvious, but sometimes are hard to spot. But, they can be spotted as they often speak with a weird language, probably straight out of Google Translate. What are they trying to do? Try to create as much as discontent amount countries of the west, so people are busy and not paying attention on what Putin is doing in the east. Very much Cold War propaganda into the 21st century....
- ng12 7y ago
  Your evidence that Russian interference is real is that some people on the internet post anti-EU comments? Until I see some credible evidence that Russian trolls are A. state-sponsored and B. any more ubiquitous than the trolls hired by other government agencies (the Hillary campaign hired content farms in 2016) I still think it's pretty alarmist.
  - arwhatever 7y ago
    Or C. Anywhere near spacing the ubiquity of naturally existing trolls...
  - ardit33 7y ago
    Clear russian troll accounts, posting in Albanian forums, on how X Western entity is bad (by X, it is usually EU/NATO/US). It is a monthly pattern. A couple of times, it can be a coincidence, monthly repeated occurrences? It is not. Are they getting paid by the government, or just doing on their own, that I don't know. But it is clear Russian activity. (btw, Albania is not a slavic country, and albania is a mediterranean country and has nothing to do with Russians, and these are not just random folks dropping in asking for the usual tourist info, or just sheer curiosity.... ) If "by clear evidence" you mean a video of the people actually typing these comments, located in some Russian building, with clear "Troll Farm Company sponsored by Putin and the Russian Government" marking, sorry, I don't have that.
jessedhillon 7y ago
If you understand that the goal is only to move a small number of people from unlikely voter to likely voter (or vice versa) over the course of several months, given targeting tools that are capable of a high-degree of precision, it doesn't seem implausible at all. An entire industry exists to take people from complete ignorance to paying advocate, and I don't see anyone arguing that the concept of advertising is an "utterly fanciful", "basically irrelevant" proposition. Voting costs nothing but your time, all you need to do is convince someone that their ideas matter.
- malvosenior 7y ago
  What makes you think "Russian trolls" would be more effective at this than hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign financing from the candidates themselves?
- mistermann 7y ago
  Has it actually happened though, that's the part that seems a bit fanciful. How have they measured it?
  - lkrubner 7y ago
    If Russia launched a missile at a Western nation, but it turned out the missile was a dud, so when it hits it does almost no damage, would anyone have the slightest doubt that this was an act of war? It doesn’t matter if the missile does damage, the mere effort of launching is an act of war. Likewise, it does not matter if a Russian intelligence operation is successful.
    - mistermann 7y ago
      Ok, so is a single internet troll post by someone from another country sufficient to be considered an act of war? And if so, does this apply to all countries, or only Russia?
      - lkrubner 7y ago
techslave 7y ago
What you’re missing is that democracies only work with an informed electorate. But it turns out most western countries have passed the point where the average citizen is smart enough to tell fact from fiction. All of these people whose sole source of information about brexit (or US presidential candidates) comes from tv, blogs, and social networks — all 3 designed to sell ads — are easily manipulated. When this manipulation comes from outside sources who have a vested interest in the destruction or degradation of democratic institutions, it’s a problem that needs to be worried about. That you don’t get it, shows short term thinking. These are chickens that are going to come home to roost 50 years later.
- fit2rule 7y ago
  >What you’re missing is that democracies only work with an informed electorate. You can't have that in a state that priorities protecting its own secrets as a matter of security. "Finally, another important right in any free society is the liberty to contribute to the Public Good. But for this to happen, it must be possible to make the state of affairs in society known to one and all, and everyone must be free to express their thoughts about it. Where this is lacking, liberty is not worth its name." - Peter Forsskål
tim333 7y ago
I'm not sure it's a moral panic so much as annoyance at a sketchy foreign power trying to screw with our democracy.
lkrubner 7y ago
If Russia launched a missile at a Western nation, but it turned out the missile was a dud, so when it hits it does almost no damage, would anyone have the slightest doubt that this was an act of war? It doesn’t matter if the missile does damage, the mere effort of launching is an act of war. Likewise, it does not matter if a Russian intelligence operation is successful.
sammorrowdrums 7y ago
This happened to some degree with WWII, and the accusation is less that people are radicalised and more that they are given a target for their frustration. This TED talk summarises it well. You are correct that certain media in the UK very much laid decades of foundations, and also the government with its austerity measures arguably created much of the environment conducive to radicalisation. https://www.ted.com/talks/carole_cadwalladr_facebook_s_role_in_brexit_and_the_threat_to_democracy https://www.ted.com/talks/carole_cadwalladr_facebook_s_role_... I guess I want to say that the fact the situation is far more nuanced than "the Russians did it" neither excuses it nor does it render those actions irrelevant. They seem to be a fairly clear piece of the puzzle. I'm also sure that all our secret services have been at similar games for years so it's ok to have little sympathy too, but Facebook targeting did get in the way of scrutiny and oversight of these messages which is really problematic for democracy. [edit] fix typo
- sammorrowdrums 7y ago
  A good parallel is how fad diets slip into the zeitgeist. People were already looking for a magic cure for their weight problems. When that cure falls on their lap many people fall end up with a new (frequently self-destructive) solution. The key is the finding susceptible people and giving them the solution they were already looking for and it'll almost feel obvious.

mc32 7y ago

The only reason it’s a panick is because they are contrarians. If they were astroturfing for the mainstream candidates, you wouldn’t hear much. Do we hear about other efforts that likely go on but are in support of non-contrarian candidates? I have not. I doubt it’s because no one is doing it. I mean I’d be surprised. Now, I agree foreigners should not meddle in the elections of others, but some of that stuff is blurry. Would China’s mr. Xi saying he’d wish Bernie would win “interference”? Is a candidate delivering a political speech on foreign soil interference?

pochamago 7y ago
Especially on the internet, which, for all that individual countries may not like, is an international platform. Citizens from every country are encouraged to use every mainstream form of social media. And in every major country people are paid to make certain posts. That it's now political just seems like the natural evolution.

ardit33 7y ago

It is real... not just a figment of imagination of politicians... Hang around in forums of countries, where they are trying to actively create chaos and you will see it.... Ways it comes into forums: 1. Asking question: "Is the EU good for Albania, Montenegro, Northern Macedonia, etc", then you see puppet accounts saying the EU is bad and it is being taken over by socialist/nationalist and doesn't want those countries. etc.. etc.. 2. Spreading information about how USA foreign policy is bad... etc.. etc.. and why is NATO needed, (Macedonia is trying to get into NATO. Albania is already in). 3. Soros, somehow is being turned into a Boogeyman, (this was especially championed by the Orban's wanna bees), and a symbol of the 'corrupt west' Russian comments sometimes are obvious, but sometimes are hard to spot. But, they can be spotted as they often speak with a weird language, probably straight out of Google Translate. What are they trying to do? Try to create as much as discontent amount countries of the west, so people are busy and not paying attention on what Putin is doing in the east. Very much Cold War propaganda into the 21st century....

ng12 7y ago
Your evidence that Russian interference is real is that some people on the internet post anti-EU comments? Until I see some credible evidence that Russian trolls are A. state-sponsored and B. any more ubiquitous than the trolls hired by other government agencies (the Hillary campaign hired content farms in 2016) I still think it's pretty alarmist.
- arwhatever 7y ago
  Or C. Anywhere near spacing the ubiquity of naturally existing trolls...
- ardit33 7y ago
  Clear russian troll accounts, posting in Albanian forums, on how X Western entity is bad (by X, it is usually EU/NATO/US). It is a monthly pattern. A couple of times, it can be a coincidence, monthly repeated occurrences? It is not. Are they getting paid by the government, or just doing on their own, that I don't know. But it is clear Russian activity. (btw, Albania is not a slavic country, and albania is a mediterranean country and has nothing to do with Russians, and these are not just random folks dropping in asking for the usual tourist info, or just sheer curiosity.... ) If "by clear evidence" you mean a video of the people actually typing these comments, located in some Russian building, with clear "Troll Farm Company sponsored by Putin and the Russian Government" marking, sorry, I don't have that.

jessedhillon 7y ago

If you understand that the goal is only to move a small number of people from unlikely voter to likely voter (or vice versa) over the course of several months, given targeting tools that are capable of a high-degree of precision, it doesn't seem implausible at all. An entire industry exists to take people from complete ignorance to paying advocate, and I don't see anyone arguing that the concept of advertising is an "utterly fanciful", "basically irrelevant" proposition. Voting costs nothing but your time, all you need to do is convince someone that their ideas matter.

malvosenior 7y ago
What makes you think "Russian trolls" would be more effective at this than hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign financing from the candidates themselves?
mistermann 7y ago
Has it actually happened though, that's the part that seems a bit fanciful. How have they measured it?
- lkrubner 7y ago
  If Russia launched a missile at a Western nation, but it turned out the missile was a dud, so when it hits it does almost no damage, would anyone have the slightest doubt that this was an act of war? It doesn’t matter if the missile does damage, the mere effort of launching is an act of war. Likewise, it does not matter if a Russian intelligence operation is successful.
  - mistermann 7y ago
    Ok, so is a single internet troll post by someone from another country sufficient to be considered an act of war? And if so, does this apply to all countries, or only Russia?
    - lkrubner 7y ago

techslave 7y ago

What you’re missing is that democracies only work with an informed electorate. But it turns out most western countries have passed the point where the average citizen is smart enough to tell fact from fiction. All of these people whose sole source of information about brexit (or US presidential candidates) comes from tv, blogs, and social networks — all 3 designed to sell ads — are easily manipulated. When this manipulation comes from outside sources who have a vested interest in the destruction or degradation of democratic institutions, it’s a problem that needs to be worried about. That you don’t get it, shows short term thinking. These are chickens that are going to come home to roost 50 years later.

fit2rule 7y ago
>What you’re missing is that democracies only work with an informed electorate. You can't have that in a state that priorities protecting its own secrets as a matter of security. "Finally, another important right in any free society is the liberty to contribute to the Public Good. But for this to happen, it must be possible to make the state of affairs in society known to one and all, and everyone must be free to express their thoughts about it. Where this is lacking, liberty is not worth its name." - Peter Forsskål

tim333 7y ago

I'm not sure it's a moral panic so much as annoyance at a sketchy foreign power trying to screw with our democracy.

lkrubner 7y ago

If Russia launched a missile at a Western nation, but it turned out the missile was a dud, so when it hits it does almost no damage, would anyone have the slightest doubt that this was an act of war? It doesn’t matter if the missile does damage, the mere effort of launching is an act of war. Likewise, it does not matter if a Russian intelligence operation is successful.

sammorrowdrums 7y ago

This happened to some degree with WWII, and the accusation is less that people are radicalised and more that they are given a target for their frustration. This TED talk summarises it well. You are correct that certain media in the UK very much laid decades of foundations, and also the government with its austerity measures arguably created much of the environment conducive to radicalisation. https://www.ted.com/talks/carole_cadwalladr_facebook_s_role_in_brexit_and_the_threat_to_democracy https://www.ted.com/talks/carole_cadwalladr_facebook_s_role_... I guess I want to say that the fact the situation is far more nuanced than "the Russians did it" neither excuses it nor does it render those actions irrelevant. They seem to be a fairly clear piece of the puzzle. I'm also sure that all our secret services have been at similar games for years so it's ok to have little sympathy too, but Facebook targeting did get in the way of scrutiny and oversight of these messages which is really problematic for democracy. [edit] fix typo

sammorrowdrums 7y ago
A good parallel is how fad diets slip into the zeitgeist. People were already looking for a magic cure for their weight problems. When that cure falls on their lap many people fall end up with a new (frequently self-destructive) solution. The key is the finding susceptible people and giving them the solution they were already looking for and it'll almost feel obvious.