4 ms·

‘Rigged’ details long history of Russian and U.S. electoral interference

19 points by georgecmu 6y ago

michael1999 6y ago
I am surprised that Shimer and others aren't more careful to distinguis outright fraud (fake votes, faked totals) from illegal foreign influence that would be completely legal if executed by a citizen. Americans calling the the 2016 Russian propaganda a "hack" are just silly, especially in the aftermath of Citizens United.
- Mc_Big_G 6y ago
  You'd think being here on "Hacker News", you'd know that the term "hack" has a variety of usages and meanings. In the case of Americans calling the 2016 Russian propaganda a "hack", it isn't a literal computer hack, it's leveraging Facebook to brainwash the populace into believing an alternate reality in which Clinton is running an underground pedo ring or whatever nonsense conservatives will buy into these days. You know...Obama is coming to take your guns and put you in FEMA camps. It's a hack because it achieves the goal indirectly. Additionally, you're glossing over the literal computer hacking of Clinton's emails and the DNC.
  - michael1999 6y ago
    Good propaganda is definitely a hack, but I do not believe that’s the connotation of the newspapers. And they certainly don’t call it a hack when the Koch brothers or the DNC do it. It’s just called campaigning, pr, issues advocacy, etc.
- guilhas 6y ago
  After 2016 election the MSM stated that all states were literally hacked by Russian hackers. And several outlets did investigative journalism on how easy it was to hack the election machines. Also the DNC servers. After millions spent on investigation the best they could do was 'influence' from some miserable facebook ads. But there was very clear allegations of hacking, with mysterious and secret evidence of Russians and Putin himself involved, as there always is... The distinction you're saying appeared in the MSM only after Biden win. Together with claims that all USA elections were beyond reproach, and that this was the most secure election ever, to cast Trump allegations of fraud as fantasy. Not one month later we have SolarWinds. After all the entire government was compromised all along. This would be a great plot for a movie.
RcouF1uZ4gsC 6y ago
> They manipulated voter rolls, falsified vote counts, and spread massive amounts of propaganda — things like posters, pamphlets, and leaflets — to manipulate people’s views. The last one is not like the first two. I think it is uncontroversial that the first two are bad. However, the last one is very vague and runs up into issues of free speech and free press. Throughout history, opponents of a government have been silenced by saying that they are just mouthpieces of a foreign government. For example, should a Canadian be banned from writing an op-ed during a US election. If John Oliver makes fun of a political candidate, is it foreign election interference, given he is not an American citizen? If a media company that has a significant amount of stock owned by a Chinese or Saudi or Japanese company, criticizes a candidate, is that also foreign election interference?
- ganoushoreilly 6y ago
  Oliver is a naturalized citizen of the US.
barbacoa 6y ago
The media spent years hyperventilation over the allegation that Russians were running troll farms of people who were paid to post content on the internet to push their agenda. It's interesting that the media completely ignored that according to wikileaks the Clinton campaign was running their own troll farms. There is/was a DNC super pac called Correct The Record paying people to manipulate public opinion through narrative control. Leaked emails showed Clinton was directly coordinating their activities despite doing so being illegal. Is it better to be manipulated by a foreign government or your own?

19 points by georgecmu 6y ago

michael1999 6y ago

I am surprised that Shimer and others aren't more careful to distinguis outright fraud (fake votes, faked totals) from illegal foreign influence that would be completely legal if executed by a citizen. Americans calling the the 2016 Russian propaganda a "hack" are just silly, especially in the aftermath of Citizens United.

Mc_Big_G 6y ago
You'd think being here on "Hacker News", you'd know that the term "hack" has a variety of usages and meanings. In the case of Americans calling the 2016 Russian propaganda a "hack", it isn't a literal computer hack, it's leveraging Facebook to brainwash the populace into believing an alternate reality in which Clinton is running an underground pedo ring or whatever nonsense conservatives will buy into these days. You know...Obama is coming to take your guns and put you in FEMA camps. It's a hack because it achieves the goal indirectly. Additionally, you're glossing over the literal computer hacking of Clinton's emails and the DNC.
- michael1999 6y ago
  Good propaganda is definitely a hack, but I do not believe that’s the connotation of the newspapers. And they certainly don’t call it a hack when the Koch brothers or the DNC do it. It’s just called campaigning, pr, issues advocacy, etc.
guilhas 6y ago
After 2016 election the MSM stated that all states were literally hacked by Russian hackers. And several outlets did investigative journalism on how easy it was to hack the election machines. Also the DNC servers. After millions spent on investigation the best they could do was 'influence' from some miserable facebook ads. But there was very clear allegations of hacking, with mysterious and secret evidence of Russians and Putin himself involved, as there always is... The distinction you're saying appeared in the MSM only after Biden win. Together with claims that all USA elections were beyond reproach, and that this was the most secure election ever, to cast Trump allegations of fraud as fantasy. Not one month later we have SolarWinds. After all the entire government was compromised all along. This would be a great plot for a movie.

RcouF1uZ4gsC 6y ago

> They manipulated voter rolls, falsified vote counts, and spread massive amounts of propaganda — things like posters, pamphlets, and leaflets — to manipulate people’s views. The last one is not like the first two. I think it is uncontroversial that the first two are bad. However, the last one is very vague and runs up into issues of free speech and free press. Throughout history, opponents of a government have been silenced by saying that they are just mouthpieces of a foreign government. For example, should a Canadian be banned from writing an op-ed during a US election. If John Oliver makes fun of a political candidate, is it foreign election interference, given he is not an American citizen? If a media company that has a significant amount of stock owned by a Chinese or Saudi or Japanese company, criticizes a candidate, is that also foreign election interference?

ganoushoreilly 6y ago
Oliver is a naturalized citizen of the US.

barbacoa 6y ago

The media spent years hyperventilation over the allegation that Russians were running troll farms of people who were paid to post content on the internet to push their agenda. It's interesting that the media completely ignored that according to wikileaks the Clinton campaign was running their own troll farms. There is/was a DNC super pac called Correct The Record paying people to manipulate public opinion through narrative control. Leaked emails showed Clinton was directly coordinating their activities despite doing so being illegal. Is it better to be manipulated by a foreign government or your own?