3 ms·

> Is the argument that this strategy is just completely lost on legacy incumbent politicians (because they're tech-illiterate, don't understand ads, whatever)

> Is the argument that this strategy is just completely lost on legacy incumbent politicians (because they're tech-illiterate, don't understand ads, whatever) The US's own politicians use targeted advertising as well this as well. There is a huge difference between American politicians using advertising techniques to spread their messages and a foreign state actor with a history of hostility to the US doing the same thing. Especially when the primary goal of that foreign state actor was to spread divisiveness, such as by organizing both protests and opposing counter-protests. Rather than pushing for any specific policy. https://www.businessinsider.com/russians-organized-pro-anti-trump-rallies-to-sow-discord-2018-2 https://www.businessinsider.com/russians-organized-pro-anti-... Activities such as this are legitimate threats, and many people are rightly concerned about them.

remarkEon 5y ago
I think you're kind of making my point for me, which is that if US democracy is so fragile that organizing facebook rallies is a "legitimate threat" we have some serious issues regarding the longevity of this system. If the solution we're implicitly talking about is just a blanket ban on social-media-organized political activity, I'd probably support that (obvious 1A issues aside for a moment). Perhaps the more interesting discussion to be had in that case is how well US-style democracy functions in the 21st century, with mass media and mass access to the internet.
- SonicScrub 5y ago
  Well in that case I do agree with you. I've been trying to wrap my head around squaring my beliefs in democratic systems with the idea that groups can be easily "nudged" into desired directions by outside actors. While this has always been the case, it's been accelerated by the laser-focused targeting enabled by our current technologies. It even begins to question the idea of "free-will" applied to large groups. I don't know what a solution looks like.

remarkEon 5y ago

I think you're kind of making my point for me, which is that if US democracy is so fragile that organizing facebook rallies is a "legitimate threat" we have some serious issues regarding the longevity of this system. If the solution we're implicitly talking about is just a blanket ban on social-media-organized political activity, I'd probably support that (obvious 1A issues aside for a moment). Perhaps the more interesting discussion to be had in that case is how well US-style democracy functions in the 21st century, with mass media and mass access to the internet.

SonicScrub 5y ago
Well in that case I do agree with you. I've been trying to wrap my head around squaring my beliefs in democratic systems with the idea that groups can be easily "nudged" into desired directions by outside actors. While this has always been the case, it's been accelerated by the laser-focused targeting enabled by our current technologies. It even begins to question the idea of "free-will" applied to large groups. I don't know what a solution looks like.