4 ms·

while they are doing it to their own citizens! That's not what the story is saying. The FCC didn't create any fake comments. From one we know so far, one "gras

while they are doing it to their own citizens! That's not what the story is saying. The FCC didn't create any fake comments. From one we know so far, one "grassroots" marketing company has been identified as creating fake comments. Their client hasn't been identified, but likely is an ISP, or an ISP lobbying group. This is bad behavior, but far from the Government psyops on its own citizens. edit: yes, multiple industry lobbying groups have been identified. The FCC wasn't behind this, this isn't an example of a government psyop against its own citizens.

murph-almighty 7y ago
> likely is an ISP, or an ISP lobbying group The devil is in the details here- consider the current state of regulatory capture of the FCC, where Ajit Pai is arguably representing the interests of his previous employer, Verizon. It's not a giant leap to argue that the placement of Pai and the comments on the net neutrality board were 1) orchestrated by Verizon and 2) strategically use the government as a proxy to hide the exercise of their will. I wouldn't say this is a case of `the government is doing psyops`, but rather `some entity is using the government to gaslight the people`. I don't blame the structure for this problem, but the people who corrupted it.
- kazagistar 7y ago
  I certainly blame the structure, as in, the Citizens United supreme court decision that the constitution protects spending unlimited money convincing politicians to do what you want. It's just not something you can change without clarifying or modifying the constitution, and thus corruption is fundamentally a inevitable outcome of our current political structure.
- WillPostForFood 7y ago
  I agree completely. And I'd go a little further, and say that allowing unaccountable commenting is incompetent or negligent. If there is going to be government sponsored public comment, there needs to a penalty for fraud.
calibas 7y ago
Did you not read the article? It was two marketing companies, Media Bridge and LCX Digital, working for Broadband for America. According to their site, they represent "the hundreds of millions of Americans who are literally connected through broadband", which is a flat out lie. They're a lobbyist group that works for AT&T, CenturyLink, Charter, Comcast, and Cox, among others. Now it's easy to say it's not such a big deal because it's private businesses and their right to "free speech", except for one enormous glaring issue that makes all that moot. The actual human beings are the same, the private businesses and the government are theoretically separate, but literally the same people. This isn't even up for argument, it's the "elephant in the room". Ajit Pai, head of the FCC, used to be a lawyer for Verizon, a member of Broadband for America. The group paying to fraudulently manipulate the FCC and subvert the democratic process is directly connected to the head of the FCC. Verizon is fucking regulated by one of it's former lawyers! Now that the lines have been blurred between government and private business, we're also crossing the lines between advertising and propaganda, which is psyops.
- WillPostForFood 7y ago
  Pai worked as Associate General Counsel at Verizon from 2001 to 2003, over 15 years ago. Neither Pai nor the FCC didn't orchestrated or have anything to do with the comment campaign. FCC paying the marketing company for fake comments would be psyops. What happened is a problem, but not what the OP was suggesting.
  - calibas 7y ago
    Of course the FCC didn't pay for it, they just looked the other way while it happened. There's just enough separation that people like you can make the argument that it's technically not "psyops". The FCC is complicit in the whole damned thing, so the result is the same and the industry got it's way. We can argue semantics though...
    - WillPostForFood 7y ago
      FCC didn't plant it, didn't pay for it, didn't orchestrate it, so not really complicit. The worst you can say is they didn't do enough to stop it because it was supporting what they wanted. Guilty of confirmation bias, certainly. Psyops? no.

murph-almighty 7y ago

> likely is an ISP, or an ISP lobbying group The devil is in the details here- consider the current state of regulatory capture of the FCC, where Ajit Pai is arguably representing the interests of his previous employer, Verizon. It's not a giant leap to argue that the placement of Pai and the comments on the net neutrality board were 1) orchestrated by Verizon and 2) strategically use the government as a proxy to hide the exercise of their will. I wouldn't say this is a case of `the government is doing psyops`, but rather `some entity is using the government to gaslight the people`. I don't blame the structure for this problem, but the people who corrupted it.

kazagistar 7y ago
I certainly blame the structure, as in, the Citizens United supreme court decision that the constitution protects spending unlimited money convincing politicians to do what you want. It's just not something you can change without clarifying or modifying the constitution, and thus corruption is fundamentally a inevitable outcome of our current political structure.
WillPostForFood 7y ago
I agree completely. And I'd go a little further, and say that allowing unaccountable commenting is incompetent or negligent. If there is going to be government sponsored public comment, there needs to a penalty for fraud.

calibas 7y ago

Did you not read the article? It was two marketing companies, Media Bridge and LCX Digital, working for Broadband for America. According to their site, they represent "the hundreds of millions of Americans who are literally connected through broadband", which is a flat out lie. They're a lobbyist group that works for AT&T, CenturyLink, Charter, Comcast, and Cox, among others. Now it's easy to say it's not such a big deal because it's private businesses and their right to "free speech", except for one enormous glaring issue that makes all that moot. The actual human beings are the same, the private businesses and the government are theoretically separate, but literally the same people. This isn't even up for argument, it's the "elephant in the room". Ajit Pai, head of the FCC, used to be a lawyer for Verizon, a member of Broadband for America. The group paying to fraudulently manipulate the FCC and subvert the democratic process is directly connected to the head of the FCC. Verizon is fucking regulated by one of it's former lawyers! Now that the lines have been blurred between government and private business, we're also crossing the lines between advertising and propaganda, which is psyops.

WillPostForFood 7y ago
Pai worked as Associate General Counsel at Verizon from 2001 to 2003, over 15 years ago. Neither Pai nor the FCC didn't orchestrated or have anything to do with the comment campaign. FCC paying the marketing company for fake comments would be psyops. What happened is a problem, but not what the OP was suggesting.
- calibas 7y ago
  Of course the FCC didn't pay for it, they just looked the other way while it happened. There's just enough separation that people like you can make the argument that it's technically not "psyops". The FCC is complicit in the whole damned thing, so the result is the same and the industry got it's way. We can argue semantics though...
  - WillPostForFood 7y ago
    FCC didn't plant it, didn't pay for it, didn't orchestrate it, so not really complicit. The worst you can say is they didn't do enough to stop it because it was supporting what they wanted. Guilty of confirmation bias, certainly. Psyops? no.