6 ms·

I consider myself a rather well-informed person, but this is the first time I've read about Harris Media involvement in the last German election and I'm German.

I consider myself a rather well-informed person, but this is the first time I've read about Harris Media involvement in the last German election and I'm German. All I can remember is indeed the "Russian interference" and how the AfD is supposedly financed out of Russia. But that Bloomberg Businessweek article [0] unearths some scary details: “We took that 300,000 (AfD likes), and Facebook created a model of them and used their lookalike audiences to find the closest 1 percent of German people to match that audience,” That "1 percent" sounds extremely familiar, particularly in a far-right context [1] It makes me wonder who originally came up with that concept, was it Harris Media or was it the idea of their client, the AfD? [0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-29/the-german-far-right-finds-friends-through-facebook https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-29/the-germa... [1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ein_Prozent_f%C3%BCr_unser_Land https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ein_Prozent_f%C3%BCr_unser_Lan...

oh_sigh 7y ago
One percent is just a small, round, common number that crops up in human thought frequently. What's the point of targeting 5% of the closest users if you might not even have luck converting the 1% closest users? Would you see this connection if it turns out they actually targeted the closest .96% of users? Do you think the one percenters that Bernie Sanders rallies against have anything in common with your [1]?
- freeflight 7y ago
  > Do you think the one percenters that Bernie Sanders rallies against have anything in common with your [1]? I don't know and I seriously doubt it. I didn't see Bernie Sanders stickers in the middle of Germany advertising for "We only need 1% to change the country", as the German identitarians do. But as you say: It's very likely just a coincidence.
TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
The next paragraph goes on to state they targeted 10.1 million people: In all, Harris Media created seven target groups, according to Canter, including mothers (2.6 million targets), business owners (1.1 million), and working-class people such as union members (6.4 million). The detail about the 1% is pretty much a non-sequitur; I don’t really follow why that is even mentioned.
spangry 7y ago
Why do you find this story scary? It seems like a sensible way for a political party to get votes: profile your current supporters, find other people who fit that profile, convince those people to vote for you too. As for Russian interference, the article you linked to says this: "The Russian meddling that German state security had been anticipating apparently never materialized. Instead, the foreign influence came from America."
- tempguy9999 7y ago
  > It seems like a sensible way for a political party to get votes Democracy was about educated voters, I thought. If you find this acceptable, we're on different planets. Perhaps ask a German about slippery political slopes? Or live long enough and find yourself in the middle of one. > the article you linked to says this: "The Russian meddling that German state security had been anticipating apparently never materialized. Instead, the foreign influence came from America." It also says "While the Russian episode involved ads bought under false identities by people with Kremlin ties" which you must have seen if you'd searched for 'russia'. How this statement links with the one you found, I don't know.
  - luckylion 7y ago
    > Democracy was about educated voters, I thought. So trying to convince voters is undemocratic because voters are supposed to be educated before they become potential voters (and therefore don't require convincing)? Or is it just that you shouldn't try to convince them with simplified messages that don't reflect the actual complexity of the universe? Or that you shouldn't do it via Facebook?
    - tempguy9999 7y ago
      > because voters are supposed to be educated before they become potential voters yes, in that they make up their own minds rather than be open to influence by those with most money. > Or is it just that you shouldn't try to convince them with simplified messages that don't reflect the actual complexity of the universe? Such messages tend to be of the form 'vote X! Y is crap!'. Or outright lies (qv. certain leaders) That's not even a simplified messages, the first is pure tribalistic emotive, the second, well, it misrepresent reality (aka 'wrong' or 'deceitful' or 'lie'). If the were factually based and told both sides I guess I'd be OK with it. > Or that you shouldn't do it via Facebook? No, facebook is just a tool. How that tool is used is what makes it right or wrong.
cm2012 7y ago
A 1% lookalike is the standard starting point for targeting pretty much any type of target audience on FB.

oh_sigh 7y ago

One percent is just a small, round, common number that crops up in human thought frequently. What's the point of targeting 5% of the closest users if you might not even have luck converting the 1% closest users? Would you see this connection if it turns out they actually targeted the closest .96% of users? Do you think the one percenters that Bernie Sanders rallies against have anything in common with your [1]?

freeflight 7y ago
> Do you think the one percenters that Bernie Sanders rallies against have anything in common with your [1]? I don't know and I seriously doubt it. I didn't see Bernie Sanders stickers in the middle of Germany advertising for "We only need 1% to change the country", as the German identitarians do. But as you say: It's very likely just a coincidence.

TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago

The next paragraph goes on to state they targeted 10.1 million people: In all, Harris Media created seven target groups, according to Canter, including mothers (2.6 million targets), business owners (1.1 million), and working-class people such as union members (6.4 million). The detail about the 1% is pretty much a non-sequitur; I don’t really follow why that is even mentioned.

spangry 7y ago

Why do you find this story scary? It seems like a sensible way for a political party to get votes: profile your current supporters, find other people who fit that profile, convince those people to vote for you too. As for Russian interference, the article you linked to says this: "The Russian meddling that German state security had been anticipating apparently never materialized. Instead, the foreign influence came from America."

tempguy9999 7y ago
> It seems like a sensible way for a political party to get votes Democracy was about educated voters, I thought. If you find this acceptable, we're on different planets. Perhaps ask a German about slippery political slopes? Or live long enough and find yourself in the middle of one. > the article you linked to says this: "The Russian meddling that German state security had been anticipating apparently never materialized. Instead, the foreign influence came from America." It also says "While the Russian episode involved ads bought under false identities by people with Kremlin ties" which you must have seen if you'd searched for 'russia'. How this statement links with the one you found, I don't know.
- luckylion 7y ago
  > Democracy was about educated voters, I thought. So trying to convince voters is undemocratic because voters are supposed to be educated before they become potential voters (and therefore don't require convincing)? Or is it just that you shouldn't try to convince them with simplified messages that don't reflect the actual complexity of the universe? Or that you shouldn't do it via Facebook?
  - tempguy9999 7y ago
    > because voters are supposed to be educated before they become potential voters yes, in that they make up their own minds rather than be open to influence by those with most money. > Or is it just that you shouldn't try to convince them with simplified messages that don't reflect the actual complexity of the universe? Such messages tend to be of the form 'vote X! Y is crap!'. Or outright lies (qv. certain leaders) That's not even a simplified messages, the first is pure tribalistic emotive, the second, well, it misrepresent reality (aka 'wrong' or 'deceitful' or 'lie'). If the were factually based and told both sides I guess I'd be OK with it. > Or that you shouldn't do it via Facebook? No, facebook is just a tool. How that tool is used is what makes it right or wrong.

cm2012 7y ago

A 1% lookalike is the standard starting point for targeting pretty much any type of target audience on FB.