49 ms·
Information operations directed at Hong Kong
- 29_29 7y agoI was recently in Beijing and noticed when posting on Instagram many bot accounts posting "Shame on Hong Kong" in Chinese. This is a Facebook problem too. If you work at facebook please help!
- 29_29 7y agoYou could probably still view these using any geotag of a major Chinese city.
- bertil 7y agoFlag all the accounts that seem suspicious. The more signal, the easier for Threat Intelligence to identify them.
- 29_29 7y agoI did, but I feel like this could be solved with machine learning.
- alephnan 7y agoSeems like flagging the accounts should, in theory, feed back as data points into their machine learning models?
- jimbokun 7y agoThat is how supervised machine learning works. Give it know examples, and it extrapolates to identify other instances in new data.
- lucb1e 7y agoFlagging bot accounts does not strike me as something a computer would be able to do. If they notice that the machine learned to recognize keywords, they'll use different ones; if they notice it recognizes IP addresses, they'll use different ones; etc. It seems very similar to spam classification to me.
- envy2 7y agoFacebook made a similar announcement today: https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2019/08/removing-cib-china/ https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2019/08/removing-cib-china/
- doubleunplussed 7y agoWow, those posts. They are so unsubtle.
- ggg3 7y agowith 200k accounts on Twitter alone, the press teams on Twitter and facebook had plenty to choose from... or china adapter the content to facebook audience? would be interesting to dig the data they released to create a profile of the profile china have for those audiences
- traek 7y agoHN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20740626 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20740626
- alephnan 7y agoI immediately thought to lookup Twitter's company about section. Under Values: > We believe in free expression and think every voice has the power to impact the world. Edit: I didn’t realize I appeared to be supporting the trolls. No, I meant it’s good to know Twitter would support the Hong Kong protestors.
- djohnston 7y agoauthentic voice, not paid gov't troll armies.
- magduf 7y agoDevil's advocate: what if the "troll army" is actually a whole army of people from that country who are brainwashed to believe the party line? Is that not "authentic" if they really believe it?
- djohnston 7y agonot if they're being paid to produce the content (wumao pawns are). if they're NOT being paid, i would guess you are right, but frankly we should have disconnected china from the free world a long time ago and only given them logistics software. it's frustrating that they shut the west out but constantly try and infect the west with their backwards ideas
- Shinobi881 7y agoBut yeah “every voice”. May have to start explicitly excluding government propaganda and/or “troll armies”.
- Bhilai 7y agoI am curious to know how do companies like Facebook control this kind of activity on WhatsApp where there is end-end encryption. I see a lot of propaganda on Whats App being circulated everyday and people keep forwarding such messages into various groups.
- nobodyshere 7y agoCan you seriously trust WhatsApp's security now that it belongs to Facebook?
- mullen 7y agoA lot more than I trust China.
- checktheorder 7y agoIn fairness to Facebook (which is a phrase I never thought I'd type) Whatsapp's Signal-derived end-to-end encryption was implemented almost a year after Facebook bought it. Of course, there's still the flaw of backups to Google Drive being unencrypted. But fortunately that's not the default setting.
- the_watcher 7y agoIt's hard, and it's an explicit tradeoff made when deciding to prioritize secure communication. One thing Facebook did with WhatsApp was limit group size and monitoring forwarding behavior (which can be done via metadata without needing to know the content), but it's an imperfect solution at best.
- FabHK 7y agoI don't see how you can control it. Which makes it very worrying that lots of people get their "news" from social media now.
- debt 7y agoI absolutely love that they shared the dataset. Hopefully deters future bad actors as the raw data itself will be shared with the greater public and hopefully for greater analysis.
- groundlogic 7y agoI don't think HN is immune to these kinds of CCP ops.
- vkou 7y agoThe problem is that calling someone a paid, or unpaid shill on HN is unproductive. There's a world of difference (But little way for a third party to tell apart) between: A paid shill. An unpaid troll. Someone who genuinely believes what they are posting, because they do not have the same information you do. Someone who genuinely believes what they are posting, despite having the same information as you, because they prioritise different bits of that information differently. That is called a 'political opinion'. For reference, I have been called a CCP shill at least once. I have never been to China, I have no affiliation with the CCP, I am not trolling, and I have not received a penny for posting nonsense here.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- lucb1e 7y agoThe difference between a paid person and an unpaid person may not be so large. I heard from someone who looked into the anti-vax accounts on Facebook (in ~2013, when the comments on HN about this news would have been about preserving free speech on Twitter rather than good on them for doing this) that she found some people believed it so strongly that they wrote bots to respond to public messages that use certain keywords. These weren't government sockpuppets, they were concerned citizens. I'm pretty sure this was the podcast where I heard that: https://samharris.org/podcasts/145-information-war/ https://samharris.org/podcasts/145-information-war/ (Relatively near the beginning of where the guest comes into the podcast, if I remember correctly.)
- kelnos 7y agoI doubt HN is even on the CCP's radar. Not only are we a low-value target, we're much harder to subvert.
- mortenjorck 7y agoThe elephant left standing in the room is not the spam and bot accounts, but the official, state-actor accounts such as Xinhua News that pay for promoted tweets carrying the same message. Granted this is likely beyond the scope of Twitter’s safety team, but this completely sidesteps the issues raised here: https://techcrunch.com/2019/08/19/twitter-is-blocked-in-china-but-its-state-news-agency-is-buying-promoted-tweets-to-portray-hong-kong-protestors-as-violent/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/08/19/twitter-is-blocked-in-chin...
- martey 7y agoSee https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2019/advertising_policies_on_state_media.html https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2019/advertisi..., which was posted to the Twitter blog at approximately the same time as this post.
- davedx 7y agoVery curious which entities get blocked by this policy. Fox News? The Telegraph?
- bardworx 7y agoIt’s in the article, you should read the content as your comment is coming off partisan. Perhaps you know more than I about how different news orgs are funded and can contribute afterwards.
- isostatic 7y agoit’s in TFA “This policy will apply to news media entities that are either financially or editorially controlled by the state. It has been informed by established academic and civil society leaders in this space. Sources include Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index, Freedom House, the Economist Intelligence Unit Democracy Index, the European Journalism Centre’s Media Landscapes Report, the Committee to Protect Journalists, and UNESCO's framework to assess media development and independence.” Fox News is not controlled by the state (if anything it’s the other way round) Neither is the telegraph Neither is the BBC
- theirkf 7y agoSo this has become the norm now. Social media products who’s primary utility is to share information between people are now being used by governments to sow discord.
- Shinobi881 7y agoNothing new except the medium.
- imnotlost 7y agoThe speed and reach makes it different. You wouldn't say that flying is like walking faster - it's fundamentally different.
- novok 7y agoYour basically complaining that paper can be used to write whatever you want on it, by you and by people you don't like.
- ssully 7y agoNot even close to an accurate comparison. It's not just paper - it's a printing press that can push your message directly to a device into the pocket of people who belong to specific groups that you want to target.
- i_cant_speel 7y agoHow is that different from spreading false information through newspapers when that was the primary source of people's information?
- laughinghan 7y agoIt's like the difference between the bow-and-arrow and handguns. Lower barrier to entry, greater potential for harm.
- 7y ago
- b_tterc_p 7y agoMaybe one day our cyberpunk corporate overlords will be able to fine governments for this kind of shit.
- crispyambulance 7y agoAin't gonna happen. In reality, our cyberpunk overlords will fall over themselves to provide the best level of service to the highest paying autocratic government customers.
- jessaustin 7y agoIs there a meaningful difference between a "fine" levied on the state by a firm and a fee the state pays the firm for a service? I'm reminded of Joe Nacchio... there's a guy who didn't understand this business.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- ryanchankh 7y agoHongKonger here. I have some friends in China posting similar anti-protest posts on WeChat social media. It's like the news they read has a completely different story than what it's being told in legitimate new sources. The problem of fake news does become very apparent, and I hope people in China can eventually gain awareness or at least start to question the validity of their news sources.
- ggg3 7y agosame in brazil and crimea and before that arabspring. the obvious fake content on youtube and facebook was reported and removed, but all it did was hide the traces of the content that flooded private whatsapp groups.
- rjf72 7y agoInteresting. Are the images shared from this article suggesting that protesters are destroying property and engaging in other such behavior fake or somehow being taken out of context?
- JumpCrisscross 7y ago> Are the images shared from this article suggesting that protesters are destroying property and engaging in other such behavior fake or somehow being taken out of context? Yes. Some protesters destroyed property. But the Hong Kong protests have been overwhelmingly peaceful. Almost shockingly peaceful. Millions of people are mobilizing in cramped quarters. Very few cultures have the restraint to coördinate so massively with barely any mistakes. Contrast this with the counter-protesters, in Hong Kong [1] and overseas [2]. Pro-Xi protesters are violent at about the same frequency as (if not higher than) Hong Kong's protesters. This despite there being far fewer pro-Xi protesters on the ground. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-49066982 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-49066982 [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/30/world/australia/hong-kong-china-queensland-protests.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/30/world/australia/hong-kong...
- spectramax 7y ago
- sp332 7y agoThis doesn't really explain the money they took from Xinhua News to promote certain tweets that lied about the protests being violent or unwanted by the majority of HK residents. https://twitter.com/pinboard/status/1162711159000055808 https://twitter.com/pinboard/status/1162711159000055808 https://www.businessinsider.com/twitter-is-running-paid-ads-china-criticising-the-hong-kong-protests-2019-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/twitter-is-running-paid-ads-...
- camgunz 7y agoIt's just a little further down: https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2019/advertising_policies_on_state_media.html https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2019/advertisi...
- sp332 7y agoThanks. That's pretty clearly motivated by recent disinformation campaigns, but doesn't mention them at all. Kinda lets them off the hook in my opinion, not to mention keeping the money. Edit: Facebook, for example, calls them out directly. https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2019/08/removing-cib-china/ https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2019/08/removing-cib-china/
- completelylegit 7y agoThis sounds like convenient achievement to establish that they’re tough on shenanigans they don’t like.
- ktln2 7y agoChina has been doing this for a while, not only on social media, but traditional media / institutions too. It's about time to get serious about this problem. https://www.hoover.org/news/china-exerting-sharp-power-influence-american-institutions https://www.hoover.org/news/china-exerting-sharp-power-influ...
- prewett 7y agoIt's inherent in all communist states (that have existed). There is a document called "Chapter NN", where NN is some number, I think in the teens, from eastern Europe that describes the dynamic. Unfortunately I have no idea how to search for it, so if someone could post a link I'd be grateful. If I recall correctly, the problem is that the State claims to represent the people, but in fact it does not represent the people. Thus, it must lie in everything it says, otherwise it could not claim to represent the people.
- xt00 7y agoWas in China when the first protest happened and the news coverage was mostly saying things like that the people are clueless in Hong Kong and don’t understand the law about extradition. They had various experts all saying similar things and they would also point to random weibo posts about totally not on the payroll “people” saying they want their city back from the protesters.. I mean it’s one thing if China’S central government wants Hong Kong to be a certain way but dressing it up as “lots of ordinary folks agree with them” is pretty disingenuous and it seems very fair for any platform to call the government out on it—-especially non-Chinese owned platforms.
- derefr 7y ago> but dressing it up as “lots of ordinary folks agree with them” is pretty disingenuous I wouldn't say it's disingenuous... given that there's nothing legally preventing mainland-Chinese from choosing to live in HK, and then being quoted as people who want "their" city back. Odd to think, but HK is now experiencing a real Red Scare, the likes of which the US only ever imagined in the depths of paranoid delusion. There are real (CCP) Communists, living amongst the HK citizenry, nudging HK's democracy (such as it is) toward their agenda by appearing to stand for "public sentiment"!
- prewett 7y agoI believe that mainland people have to apply for a special permit to even cross the border into HK. I would expect it to be even harder to live there as a mainlander. So while they may be posing as HK residents on Twitter, I don't think they are in reality.
- yomly 7y agoHow old is your knowledge? China changes fast - my impression was that it was quite straightforward to go to HK. At least for people in SZ...
- robocat 7y agoShenzhen is a special economic zone, which had its own border with mainland China until early 2018. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/policies-politics/article/2128370/bring-down-wall-china-officially-scraps-border-around https://www.scmp.com/news/china/policies-politics/article/21...
- rjf72 7y agoThis seems like a very slippery slope. Recently Jackie Chan and Liu Yifei are a couple of higher profile individuals have expressed support for the mainland or condemnation of the protesters' riotous behavior. Jackie Chan is a Hong Kong national - Lieu Yifei is Chinese American. The reason that this is relevant is because we live in the day and age where holding the wrong opinion is increasingly frequently grounds for getting black listed or worse. They feel strongly enough that they're willing to risk an immense amount, just to share their views and values. They they feel so strongly about this issue is reasonable evidence that many others also likely feel strongly about this issue, and not necessarily in support of the protesters. Consequently, there are undoubtedly large numbers of people expressing genuine negative views against the protesters. How many of these individuals ended up getting banned? It's twitter. A huge chunk of the userbase posts like bots. There's not exactly a whole lot of insightful discussion going on with 140 characters + memes. When you get into political talking points where real people are simply repeating the same talking points at one another, this gets even more extreme.
- sephamorr 7y agoI just looked through Jackie Chan's movies for the past few years, and they're almost exclusively produced by mainland Chinese film companies. I understand he's a Hong Kong national, but it seems that he is toeing the line for the movie industry he's working for. Considering how the Chinese have cracked down on Cathay Pacific (forcing them to fire employees who have participated in the protests), I doubt a mainland movie star could get away with saying anything else.
- rjf72 7y agoHere [1] is Chan's filmography. He's very active in the American industry still. Using the fact he also acts in Chinese films against him is not very reasonable. And Liu Yifei is American Chinese and literally just got her big break playing the lead in Mulan. It seems increasingly disturbing to me that people seem to want to assume that anybody who holds a different view from them must be a "troll" or some sort of secret government conspirator or whatever else. Social media echo chambers are making people increasingly incapable of understanding that people can see the same information, without omission or ignorance, and come to different conclusions.
- tmux314 7y agoGood on Twitter and Facebook. On top of blocking thousands of websites (which includes Facebook, Google, Twitter) China's government employs thousands of government employees just to purge even the most mild criticism of the CCP on Weibo [1]. They also employ tens of thousands to export their propaganda overseas, using sock puppet accounts to push their worldview[2]. And their worldview is fiercely anti-democratic. The Internet cannot remain free if we allow governments to use their power to control narratives and suppress the truth. US-based Social media companies are not ideal judges, but at least they publish their methodology and allow public criticism of their platforms. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sina_Weibo#Censorship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sina_Weibo#Censorship [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party
- kypro 7y ago> The Internet cannot remain free if we allow governments to use their power to control narratives and suppress the truth. US-based Social media companies are not ideal judges, but at least they publish their methodology. Would it be too cynical to suggest the only reason they're doing this is because they don't operate in mainland China? Do you think they would write a report like this if they found the US government trying to push a pro-democracy narrative into China instead? This puts them on the right side of US regulators where as exposing a US propaganda campaign, not so much. It's not about truth, or what's morally right, it's about money.
- JumpCrisscross 7y ago> Do you think they would write a report like this if they found the US government trying to push a pro-democracy narrative into China instead? Yes. It might be framed differently. But besides being something that can be uncovered by a myriad of legal mechanisms (FOIA, state AG suits, sunshine laws, et cetera), it would almost certainly emerge in quarterly risk factor disclosures around political retribution.
- Canada 7y ago> Do you think they would write a report like this if they found the US government trying to push a pro-democracy narrative into China instead? Yes, they would. No doubt about it. > This puts them on the right side of US regulators where as exposing a US propaganda campaign, not so much. Which regulator do you think would object to such a revelation? > It's not about truth, or what's morally right, it's about money. Yeah, that's often true, but if it's true that Hong Kongers living under a system where due process is respected is also what's good for "money", then "money" and what's morally right happen to be aligned this time.
- sephamorr 7y agoIf you'd like to read a well researched book on the subversive goals of the CCP, I suggest you read "Silent Invasion"[1]. Note that there some critical reviews of this book, suggesting it's connecting dots where there isn't true motive, but little criticism of the evidence presented. I encourage you to read it and make up your own mind and draw your own narrative around the facts. [1]https://www.amazon.com/Silent-Invasion-Chinas-Influence-Australia/dp/1743794800 https://www.amazon.com/Silent-Invasion-Chinas-Influence-Aust...
- pastor_elm 7y agoCoordinated activity is banned on twitter? Has someone told Twitter?
- iserlohnmage 7y agohttps://reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/csk1z8/leaked_possible_ccp_propaganda_agenda_against_the/ https://reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/csk1z8/leaked_possibl...
- meerita 7y ago> Covert, manipulative behaviors have no place on our service While I celebrate this from them to kill manipulation, this sentence can be applied to their own bias towards conservative people who get banned and progressive don't, even saying worse things or using the service on massive organization to take down accounts. If both parties do harm, they should be take down. But both Twitter and Facebook do enormous efforts to shutdown voices. Including Google and Youtube.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- laughinghan 7y ago> their own bias towards conservative people who get banned and progressive don't Interesting, what leads you to believe this is the case? I've heard of this happening; I've also heard of the exact opposite happening, e.g. this post which cites examples of specific people and pieces of content that were banned as well as the specific dates and times and durations of the bans: https://medium.com/@thedididelgado/mark-zuckerberg-hates-black-people-ae65426e3d2a https://medium.com/@thedididelgado/mark-zuckerberg-hates-bla... I'm sure it is true that there are conservatives who've been banned and self-proclaimed "progressives" who've done as bad or worse things who haven't. Hopefully you also agree that the examples in that post, of progressives being banned while racists who should have been banned but weren't, probably really did happen. Due to scale, it wouldn't surprise me that all of those examples could be true without there being any systemic bias on their service. What leads you to believe that such a bias exists? From what I've read, there's actually some reason to believe the exact opposite bias exists: https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-hate-speech-censorship-internal-documents-algorithms https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-hate-speech-cens... Again, I think all those examples are probably true. But I think they could be consistent with a bias in any direction, due to scale.
- meerita 7y agoThere's plenty evidence, from internal emails calling "nazis" to some conservatives to presentations, hidden camera to a high level manager, etc. PrageU, some conservative voices are banned, and there are specific guidelines designed by them to ban them and shadow ban them. It is not news that Twitter, Facebook and Google shadowbans or directly demonetize or ban conservative voices.
- thecleaner 7y agoWay to go Twitter. Of course this is because they dont make ad money in China. But its a very very welcome step.
- guruz 7y agoThis makes total sense. It's in Twitter's business interest to have open unfiltered internet as much as possible. By keeping Hong Kong open (and possibly getting China to open at some point), they'll help their bottom line.
- guerrilla 7y ago.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- kryogen1c 7y agoThis shit is goddamn terrifying. Since when are american corporations the arbiters of accurate, international, and political, information? We just crossed the rubicon. Public, proactive action against a relatively hostile foreign power by a non-governmental entity. If this isnt proof positive we need to either bust these monopolies or completely overhaul our view of the power megacompanies wield, idk what is.
- JumpCrisscross 7y ago> Since when are american corporations the arbiters of accurate, international, and political, information? They're not and that's not what this story is about. These accounts were banned for violating Twitter's platform manipulation policy by spamming, co-ordinating activity across multiple accounts, creating fake accounts, mis-attributing their activity and evading bans. An individual from Hong Kong or China is free to post exactly what these accounts tweeted.
- jeremynixon 7y agoFrom FB: "We’re taking down these Pages, Groups and accounts based on their behavior, not the content they posted." https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2019/08/removing-cib-china/ https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2019/08/removing-cib-china/
- ganzuul 7y agoThe view is being overhauled, slowly. I scantly believed myself the school presentation I did on Menwith Hill in 1999. My classmates' blank stares were removed by degrees from any understanding of the subject. Today children in school here are being taught to be suspicious of what they read on the internet, and not bully each other through the medium, yet said institution is not willing to relinquish their illusion of authority and demand that the kids think for themselves even though what remains is such a small step. The TV series Max Headroom explored the subject over 30 years ago in quite some detail. It too was way ahead of its time. It's idea of TV viewership democracy is almost benign, compared to the reality of manufactured public opinion that we are waking up to. Another easily accessible but rage-teasing production is a three-part documentary called The Century of The Self. I recommend it warmly.
- JumpCrisscross 7y agoWhat can technically-savvy Americans with moderate resources on hand do to help the protesters?
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- lucb1e 7y ago(Or from any other place that is not HK, for that matter.)
- KerrickStaley 7y agoDo what you can to make democracy stronger at home. In the long run, what will help Hong Kong and other places that are at crossroads on the path to fully democratic rule is to have strong examples of thriving democracies that they can look to.
- ThinkBeat 7y agoAn analysis of information operations that caused and more importantly sustained the protests would be equally interesting. I am 90% certain that foreign intelligence services or service are actively involved in the riots. Probably funding it at least partially and inciting the crowd. Probably have assets in the group of protesters to direct their activity. I have written before that China has been far more lenient than the US would have been under similar circumstances. The moment someone had broken into congress they would most likely get shot, at least enough to stop them. Shutting down an airport would mean spending quite a bit of time at a "detainment camp". Often in warehouses created by law enforcement to hold a large number of people outside of regular courts and jails (See the DNC in Denver). The protesters are, for whatever reason, hell-bent on forcing China to act in a brutal manner. Any regime would.
- mythrwy 7y agoWhile that possibly might be, there are legitimate grievances when you see that many people in the street. I'd say this is almost certainly not instigated by foreign intelligence services and I'm skeptical they would risk trying to run it. (they probably aren't too broken up about it happening though).
- avip 7y agoMy YT overlord lately decided I should watch Jackie Chan commentates about the situation in Hong-Kong [0]. I was very surprised to see the English comments almost unanimously support China. Would have expected the opposite sentiment. [edit: stupid me, the uploader is CGTN, a well-known state propoganda channel] [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7rIg49I0yI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7rIg49I0yI
- mytailorisrich 7y agoJackie Chan is entitled to his opinions. During those protests there have been rioting and ransacking of the local Parliament with some expressing views that HK was not, or should not be, China. This can genuinely trigger feelings of patriotism and outrage. The lastest protest seems to have been peaceful and to have respected the authorities' restrictions as much as possible so it may be that they have understood that using violence was playing into the hands of the other side.
- avip 7y agoI did not say anything about his opinion, I was referring to the comments, which for a platform that should be blocked in China, are surprisingly pro-China.
- mytailorisrich 7y agoYes, but as I mentioned it is not surprising that there is genuine support even if some of the comments may not be real. There are many Chinese living abroad. I'm thinking it may also depends on which channel you're looking at. This one is essentially a government one and so may be followed by people who tend to be sympathetic. There are also quite a few negative comments.
- leppr 7y agoThe format of the top comments are all similar. 20-30 words staying under the "Read more" limit, “I am X, I support China", 200-250 upvotes. Replies are argumented with links to anti-US articles. Not very subtle, this was probably just homework for the interns.
- spion 7y agoI can't help but think that shadow-flagging these accounts would be more useful than blocking or deleting them. Blocking/deletion looks like censorship, like someone is deliberately trying to hide something you're not supposed to know. Leaving the content available, but flagging it as suspicious and linking to more information why its suspicious seems a lot more effective.
- countryqt30 7y agoI strongly encourage Facebook and Instagram to follow suit!
- countryqt30 7y agoChinese people don't even have the most basic human rights. That's insane.
- acros 7y agoYes.But they also have different understanding in human rights. Most chinese think death penalty is necessary ; Or in public security, privacy right should make a concession. Westerns may think it's ridiculous.
- flying_sheep 7y agoI was living in HK for 30 years. What I want to say is that we all need to prepare for a new form of propaganda, which is partially based on partial fact but with twisted explanation. They are getting more logical, therefore more persuasive to middle-classes. If we do not have freedom or human rights in our minds, it will be very hard to deny those propaganda.
- mef 7y agoHistorically the most effective propaganda has been based partially on fact. Outright fabrication doesn't work as well as taking an accepted fact and twisting what came before or what will come after.
- flying_sheep 7y agoTrue. And this is getting worse because China is now rich. In old time, only brain-washed patriots believe those propaganda. But now CCP hires well-educated writers, Weibo opinion leaders to write seemingly objective articles that credit CCP exclusively with the economy growth. The middle classes in China has already believed in those propaganda faithfully because the messages match perfectly what they have experienced. We need to be afraid of them. Because even if the Great Firewall disappears now, they will continue to defend CCP and their authoritarian system.
- 886 7y ago"This is getting worse because US is now poor. In old time, only patriots believe those propaganda. But now the media hires well-educated writers, YouTube opinion leaders to write seemingly objective articles that credit Trump exclusively with the economy growth. The lower classes in the US has already believed in those propaganda faithfully because the messages match perfectly what they have experienced. We need to be afraid of them. Because even if neo-nazism disappears now, they will continue to defend Trump and his beliefs." Wondering if I am wrong? Even if I am wrong, how wrong???
- throwawaysea 7y agoWhat makes coordinated activity from government entities different from brigading performed in coordinated ways by non-government people with political or activist agendas? Isn’t that also manipulation? Or is it that Twitter just has its own political and economic agenda and their TOS/rules/blog posts are self-justification?
- woutr_be 7y agoIn my opinion; the main difference here is that the government entities used bots or paid people to post propaganda. While the pro-democracy non-government camp used their own account to share their views. This I'm okay with. But a good example on how not to do it is the /r/hongkong subreddit, it's filled with pro-democracy accounts who will delegitimise any posts that goes against the general sentiment. It's impossible to have a constructive discussion there without being marked as a troll, or a pro-china bot. That to me is just the same as spreading propaganda and preventing free speech. That's not ok.
- jancsika 7y agoA government from a wealthy nation can surreptitiously force Twitter off the internet indefinitely by [choose your favorite attack here]. A government from a wealthy nation could also send law enforcement into Twitter HQ at any time and force Twitter to shut down another government's propaganda campaign. In conclusion, "the ability to start WWIII" is an important, obvious, and relevant capability that "non-government people" do not possess.
- kerng 7y ago1.7 million were marching on the streets yesterday. Imagine, that's like every 4th resident of Hong Kong.
- AnthonyWnC 7y agoLet me guess, all pro-China tweeks are blocked but anti-China are not blocked. Keep toeing the party line Twitter.
- interpenetrate 7y agoyou gotta love the language: "coordinated state-backed operations" are banned. such careful language. what does that make USAID, who is undoubtedly responsible for shaping this discourse? perhaps an "uncoordinated" state-backed operation? and what does that make twitter? it's not enough to call everyone here "dumb" or "sheeps," because all of the middle-class americans on this wretched forum are specifically acting in their self-interest by helping (in whatever pathetic way they can) to topple china. just because they won't admit to this outright and instead take advantage of careful language ("democracy" etc.) doesn't make them dumb. historically it has made them a real threat and that it is exactly why china has to issue such tight command over this conflict (and the "uyghur problems", and "free tibet", and "tank man", and ...). luckily american hegemony is waning and the front against china will fail. just sit, wait and enjoy the shit show.
- mythrwy 7y agoI'd be surprised if many or any posters on this forum want to "topple China". Probably more just believe the current government of China should behave differently.
- interpenetrate 7y agoyes just like they just believed the government of libya should've behaved differently... the point is to provide an explanation as to why people here just happen to share the same opinion as those "uncoordinated" U.S.-led operations whose explicit goal is to topple china. also it's important to note that not everyone in the U.S. who is exposed to U.S. propaganda is going to develop the same opinion (specifically those internally colonized nations such as immigrants and people of color otherwise). so why the hacker news crowd, why reddit, why twitter? the answer is so obvious it hurts. so my comment cannot convince 99.9% of the people who read it but perhaps there are one or two people to whom i can offer some solace (such as the OP of this chain). not interested in debate
- AnthonyWnC 7y agoThe Western media basically surpassed any news of violence in the protests, barely mention any anti-protest rally in Hong Kong. What a surprise then that you have bunch of ignorant people who eat this up like a bunch of sheep.
- chibg10 7y agoThis isn't true at all, at least in the sources I was reading (NYT, WSJ). Entire paragraphs were devoted to protester violence in nearly every article. This weekend's protest was even described as peaceful in contrast to the previous weeks' protest.
- roddux 7y agoI'm curious if Twitter would publish such pieces if the US was favourable with China's position in this conflict. Makes you wonder. Or, to bring the issue home a bit: would Twitter post this information if they discovered the democrats running such a campaign? What about the republicans?
- beeschlenker 7y agoSome other information operations for public awareness: Obama rapes & kills 2 boys 15Jan in Buffalo. DeBlasio 5, Buttgieg 5, Cuomo 4, Murray 3, Dorsey 3, Thiel 3. Trump $4 billion to cover. Pel!osi $3 billion, Harris $1 billion, Schumer $2 billion, to help bring the boys over the border. Trump: $138 million to bypass 5th amendment BE SURE TO Listen! to previously unprocessed footage now available [Soros, 0bama child rapes 15Jan 4-6am], Obama around 524: "Why is there so much blood? Someone get me something to clean the blood off my dick..." 15JanCh3_347-528.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q8YeDzghf95FQrxBaMpXK4b-SfJYERs8/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q8YeDzghf95FQrxBaMpXK4b-SfJ... 15JanCh3_528-545.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavyRFWTRv4_teHYewpQMwMCq6LDzb6Y/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavyRFWTRv4_teHYewpQMwMCq6L... 15JanCh4_400-600.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavnBCyhq_JRmST2QH5qlojUE6dr5IWS/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavnBCyhq_JRmST2QH5qlojUE6d... See pages 18-23, 8, 11, 12, 35, 45, 61, 62, and update list at end of doc.. Having trouble getting traction. Getting censored/banned. Billions in bribes paid to Trump, Pelosi, Schumer, Harris to enable a Soros funded child raping ring to operate in the USA. Please listen to the links below. Turn up the volume and put headphones on. You will hear these people, and many other high profile people, incriminate themselves in unbelievable fashion. Full 76 page document [update 10Aug] filled with red handed evidence like this at the bottom. Go to pages 18 through 23 of this document and you will hear Dorsey and Thiel raping children. You will hear their screams. They both rape and kill three. Also at the "rape party" of note: Bill DeBlasio, Andrew Cuomo, Bill Murray, Peter Buttgieg, George Soros, Barack Obama. Please copy and paste this post and repost it. I keep getting censored by these people. Peter Thiel a1nd Jack Dorsey raping and killing three boys each. Turn the volume all the way up and put head phones on. https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv1/Overnight_14-17Jan/15JanCh3_100-200.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mzZrjobxhNIEf38M3xk-IeA5SeF4aUtB/view?usp=sharing O1bama admits to raping and killing boys here at about 547, with commentary from Peter Thiel, George Soros, Matt Porter: https://s3.wasabisys.com/out2/Out2/15JanCh3_0545.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LCDoc1kT7cfSeKQ1vniP_sx32_bRsHau/view?usp=sharing Trump demands $4 billion to "take a blind eye" at 1015++ (link missing from report, unsure how). Here's pieces of dialogue: 1015 The President requests four billion and henry Porter agrees to it. Some dialogue below. 1017 Donald Trump: Why don't you think about it. 1017 Henry Porter: I don't need to think about it. I'm ready for you to find out what we're really about. 1017 Gigi Hadid: I don't think it's a good idea Henry. 1017 Henry Porter: ...no shit. Jelena just stop talking about it. 1018 Gigi Hadid: About what? 1018 Henry Porter: The child raping. 1018 Donald Trump: What the fuck are you talking about? 1018 Gigi Hadid: Mr. President we are child rapists. 1018 Donald Trump: You cannot be serious. 1018 Donald Trump: You're gonna need $4 billion for me to take a blind eye. 1019 ?: People are laughing because they think four billion is too much. I think it's not a problem when you have $35 billion. 1022 Donald Trump: You better have that $4 billion or you can kiss this shit goodbye. https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv2/3Jan/3JanCh3_900-1100.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Grdr8xF2psKNsuYlEnl9dIRV-77YG0Vr/view?usp=sharing Trump wants $138 million to ensure smooth outcome for false judgment, as in no trial or hearing, simlpy entering in a judgement into the system thus bypassing the fifth amendment right of due process: https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv1/10JanCh3/10JanCh3_951-1033.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iSeGHDToFRoRdIht50Wii0i30mlw9INp/view?usp=sharing Obama explains the Illuminati with Jack Dorsey...At 230 a conversation is occurring on the embedded Porter camera system with Jack Dorsey, Peter Thiel, Barack Obama, Bill Murray, and the Porter's. Jack Dorsey provides a statement defining who their group is: "The Illuminati is an underground organization of child rapists and homosexuals." Matthew Porter: "We have to thin the herd, so Barack is going to explain a few things." At 232 Barack Obama says the following: "You people have to realize we are child rapists. The Illuminati are child rapists. As soon as you figure that out, you can decide what to do. Everybody is freaking out about what just happened [child raping event still going on]. This is who we are.": https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv1/Overnight_14-17Jan/15JanCh3_200-347.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ok1-9IvANULzKBOwADFgaiYCFi6yszfj/view?usp=sharing Full 76 page document [updated 10Aug]: https://s3.wasabisys.com/aviewmefirst/FBI_FinalDraft_26Jul2019_BSchlenker.pdf https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dXNjPQdQ8c-hFFLt9LT0GiSY5Vud0TzL/view?usp=sharing Please post this anywhere you can! Each google drive link is a backup to the wasabi link just in case one is "down". Getting blocked, censored, "downvoted" etc. These people are extremely wealthy and throw money to anyone who will help them cover up their child rapes & murders, corruption. Ironically, this is usually done through a receivership transfer, where you receive the funds after four or more day, and it can be pulled at the last second, whch is usually the case, after you've done them the "service". A word about the "f@\&&ot" usage: it was a necessary tool. It showed three things: they were not in control, if they were the usage would have be stopped. Everyone out there needed to see t%his. Two, it made it unpleasant for them to be in the headspace, which has obvious advantages. Three, it pointed out impersonators of BS because they would not call each other f@%%ot, thus helping to mitigate the spread of false information. Apologies for those unintentionally offended. Of special interest to the LGBT community, I give you Barack Obama in a foursome with Peter Thiel, Jack Dorsey, and Matthew Porter. It is on page 12 of the document where you can download the video containing audio footage of the "event". Link for the doc is just above under "Full 76 page document".
- vallismortis 7y agoIt is about time they started calling out state actors. It doesn't even matter if they are taking active countermeasures as long as the public is made aware that this kind of thing is happening. It might be more effective if instead of shutting them down, they add a descriptive warning at the top of the post that states, "this message contains misinformation that is being deliberately disseminated by the government of China", along with a link to a relevant writeup of the issue. If they are going to point the finger, then they should point it at the instigator, not an "anonymous state actor". Finish growing a backbone, Twitter.
- Gabriel_Martin 7y agoI wonder what other sites are seeing this, Reddit and Instagram are pretty obvious Quora perhaps?
- markdown 7y ago/r/sino has been working overtime of late, and sending their minions all over reddit to push their message.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- frenchtoastto 7y agoSo they can do this for China but they can't ban the errly similar bots originating from the state actors in the US? Sounds to me like they are doing this as a stunt to shift the focus of what is going on there. Is it really even the platforms issues if people don't bother to verify a source from a _random article on the internet_...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- WhoTheFuckCares 7y ago互联网不是法外之地！
- kpU8efre7r 7y agoThis is so refreshing to see. Good on Facebook and Twitter for trying to be part of the solution.
- mrhappyunhappy 7y agoI wish they would do this for politicians too. I see hundreds, possibly thousands of accounts spamming political propaganda garbage right at home. It would be great if Reddit did the same too. Thousands of sock puppet accounts on Reddit.
- hker 7y agoFor those who want to understand the bigger picture of this propaganda campaign, check out this allegedly leaked instruction for how China controls media (picture in Chinese [1], transcribed in Chinese [2], google translated to English [3]). [1]: https://pincong.rocks/article/3572 https://pincong.rocks/article/3572 [2]: https://pastebin.com/anMtU0Lz https://pastebin.com/anMtU0Lz [3]: https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fpastebin.com%2FanMtU0Lz https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u...
- LilBytes 7y ago[3] - what a read. "5. Video images of excessive use of force by police from outside the country must be promptly blocked and deleted at the first time, and it is absolutely forbidden to spread on WeChat and any social media."
- hker 7y agoFor a better translation then the Google translate (i.e., [3] above), see the following Reddit comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/csj4ca/chinas_propaganda_strategy_for_the_hong_kong/ https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/csj4ca/chinas_pro...
- bouncycastle 7y agoOne of the strangest things I seen so far was not online but on the street in Sydney, Australia. There was an "anti-democracy protest" https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/anti-hong-kong-protest-in-sydney-marred-by-ugly-confrontation-20190817-p52i4f.html https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/anti-hong-kong-protest-in-... It looks people who oppose Hong Kongers really exist and truly hold on to their beliefs.
- ajdlinux 7y agoOn the street in several cities in Australia so far.
- diNgUrAndI 7y agoWhy not? Even within HK there are thousands pro-police anti-protest supporters. https://www.hongkongfp.com/2019/08/17/oppose-violence-save-hong-kong-476000-attend-pro-police-rally-organisers-say/ https://www.hongkongfp.com/2019/08/17/oppose-violence-save-h... Our opinions are shaped by what media are fed into our brains. I saw my friends divided into two camps because of the different media articles they read. How do you make sure you are not biased and only read what you believe? Rad more and find the opposing articles!
- chii 7y agoYou can't by just reading more. You also need to be able to read critically, and be able to spot manipulative arguments. It's actually quite hard. Historically, journalism is meant to take the impartial stance, but lately, this ethical stance seems to no longer apply as more and more "journalism" (both online and offline) swing towards bias and clickbait.
- bouncycastle 7y ago> Why not? Of course, Australia is a democracy so they are free to do so. The irony is that these "anti democracy" protestors are exercising their democratic right to protest! Perhaps there are probably ulterior motives for their behavior, eg. these people want to prove their loyalty to the party in order to gain a better acceptance/ranking, or there kinds of peer pressure. Others could be simply influenced by the CCP mouthpiece - it to has reached Australia. Finally, some could actually be paid - the stakes are high enough. I'm finding it difficult to accept these people actually believe that oppression of a minority is the right thing. Deep down, their beliefs are shallow and probably exist because nobody has challenged them. So engaging them rather than bannig or downvoting would be better
- diNgUrAndI 7y agoWhat about "pro-democracy" activists using twitter or fb smearing the police with their own version of truth? It seems like twitter judges which version of truth to allow based on whether twitter censorship team likes the arguments or not.
- dqpb 7y agoIt might seem like that if you don't read the article. If you did read the article, you would see this: > All the accounts have been suspended for a range of violations of our platform manipulation policies, which we define as: - Spam - Coordinated activity - Fake accounts - Attributed activity - Ban evasion
- diNgUrAndI 7y agoThere aren't always clear definitions of these types of accounts. Hypothetically, one ordinary twitter account saw the posts / GIFs / words that are close to the version they like, and retweet them. When the number of accounts is large, do you ban them all? When you remove the tweet, the real users retweeting the content loses the content and feels the platform is unfair. You bear the risk of banning real users. Also, how would you judge a post is inauthentic? You look at the content! Judging by the posting pattern alone is arguably not enough. This is why Twitter's claim that banning is not based on content is questionable.
- woutr_be 7y agoI think it depends, pro-China camp uses bots to share fake news, or out of context articles. While pro-Democracy are just individuals sharing posts where the truth is bend in their favour. I do find it surprising that the pro-Democracy camp is allowed to share the same post / image, but when pro-China does it, they're all marked as bots or "50cents". It's their way to delegitimise the posts.
- apo 7y ago> We are disclosing a significant state-backed information operation focused on the situation in Hong Kong, specifically the protest movement and their calls for political change. Two points: 1. The post presents no evidence that this is a "state-backed" operation. 2. Censorship seems like a wonderful tool when applied to your opponents. That support dries up pretty quickly when the censor targets you.
- ddlsmurf 7y agoIs there another actor than the state in China that can get unfiltered mainland IPs ?
- oefrha 7y agoIf you use Google Fi’s cellular data in China, you can access sites typically blocked by GFW (source: first hand experience). So I assume the answer is yes. Not sure which entities have such access though. Edit: IIRC some local friends from Peking University and Tsinghua University once told me that they could use Google and stuff (also typically out of reach) from their college dorms.
- selectodude 7y agoAll foreign roaming users can get through the GFW. The local carrier sends everything through what is basically a VPN to your home cell carrier so it can be properly billed. A popular way to get around GFW for those with money is to use an HK cell phone in China.
- ddlsmurf 7y agoBut then you don't have a mainland IP
- profalseidol 7y agoYeah, time to get Julian Assange and Snowden back to America (gitmo)! The land of the free (for non-natives)!
- shireboy 7y agoLesson being if you want to delegitimize an opinion, post en mass in favor of it from fake accounts.
- est 7y agoI roughly reviewed these accounts, looks like lots of anti-CCP accounts were banned as well. But I think twitter should remain a place for individuals not state actors.
- throwawayxx879 7y agoThis is a good start, but there are well coordinated manipulation networks for conflicts around the world, that seem to run with impunity, sometimes inciting violence and fomenting hate. Then there are verified account of journalists/commentators and public figures who seem to be paid to Tweet particular narratives. There are other verified accounts that serve as a nexus of hate on Twitter, whose large follower counts give them a patina of invincibility. It’s interesting that Twitter has the will to enforce its rules in some situations, but not in others.
- spyckie2 7y agoOne of the lessons learned in the modern era is that you just can't get away with this kind of stuff - everything comes back to bite you in the end. I don't know which government officials in the communist party thinks this kind of investment will be successful - and it may be short term successful - but you end up paying for it in the long run. Maybe said gov't official ran a business selling chinese goods on Amazon and used fake reviews to successfully grow the business by pawning off really poorly made products into consumer hands. He/she witnessed the success and applied that theory everywhere - you can always buy your way to a good impression. Well, it works (kinda) on Amazon because the blame and outrage still gets created, its just that there's no entity to ascribe the blame onto. The store is usually brandless, or can rebrand itself in an instant if things go south. BUT the blame just doesn't dissipate into thin air. No, it gets assigned to the first thing that does have a permanent brand - Chinese goods. And then, chinese culture. The US tried to use covert tactics in the 70s - 90s during the cold war era, in many places including the middle east. It was a time of naivety where "I can get away with doing illegal and immoral stuff" was an infectious attitude. Fast forward 30 years, and the winners are the people who immediately benefitted from those actions, but the losers (the AMERICAN GOV'T AND PUBLIC) are still paying the price via terrorism in the form of extra defense costs, safety concerns, tragedies and more. Again - blame and resentment doesn't disappear into thin air. It collects, like pollution, and you pay a price a long way down the road. China, you're not an anonymous store on Amazon. You're one of the strongest brands in the world with 5000 years of history. Your brand is larger than Amazon, Twitter, Facebook, and Google combined. This is just not worth it.
- Nec28 7y agoIt's so easy to tell lies and have people believe them. That's a big human flaw it seems :-/ that needs to be corrected, governments and corporations get away with public opinion manipulation way too easily. >:(
- spdmn 7y agoWhile respecting the attempt to be fair and nonpartisan by way of moderating this site I cant help but feel this soft-touch approach by mods is somewhat naive.
- EGreg 7y agoHow does a platform prevent coordinated activity if it allows end to end encryption?
- r1b 7y agoWould twitter, fb et al ever expose a Western intelligence operation with this tone? See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent Edit: In other words, is this post itself not an “information operation”?
- Schnitz 7y agoA foreign state actor is using a platform maintained by a US-based company to spread anti-democratic propaganda that goes against the values of the US. They got blocked and called out. Sounds like a no-brainer to me, especially after the 2016 election.
- dwd 7y agoThis is an even more disturbing trend... https://www.news.com.au/national/chinese-police-cars-parked-on-the-streets-of-australia-spark-alarm-amid-hong-kong-protests/news-story/4709b12e4c4eb8e42a958fc7e19e3b95 https://www.news.com.au/national/chinese-police-cars-parked-...
- aussieguy1234 7y agoThis amounts to cyberwarfare being directed from China at its own people in Hong Kong. The posts were designed to sow political discord, not calm things down. Governments are generally interested in promoting peace and stability. But not this one, apparently. Its good to see Facebook and Twitter coordinated with each other in blocking the bad actors, rather than tackling the issue individually. I'd like to see more of that in the future directed at Russian government sponsored troll bots, Nazis and the like. Since these kinds of attacks are generally done over more than one social network, sharing basic info like IP addresses etc could be a good start. These people are banned from Libr, the social network I built to replace Tumblr (https://librapp.com https://librapp.com).
- sytelus 7y agoI'm assuming they used some sort of distributed bot framework to create thousands of accounts. So wouldn't they just recreate them again? Is it even possible to prevent this from happening again?
- jokoon 7y agoAre you saying that the CIA is not trying to help the protests? I'm not trying to say that the CIA is involved, but I would be surprised to learn that the US is not trying to get involved to amplify the noise the protests are making. With Trump and his trade war, don't you think he would not ask the CIA to try to damage the reputation of chinese government by using protests? I don't like the PRC and their method, but I'm just curious to ask what the US is doing.
- yyhhsj0521 7y agoWho says anything about CIA? Please don't bring whataboutism into the discussion.
- jokoon 7y agoI'm not trying to downplay what the PRC is doing, I'm just asking about what is the us might be doing.
- standardcitizen 7y agoIs anyway else underwhelmed by the number of accounts?