4 ms·

I like the sarcasm but if you read the report that originally started this review (you can find it in the attached link) you'll find the propaganda in this spec

I like the sarcasm but if you read the report that originally started this review (you can find it in the attached link) you'll find the propaganda in this specific case didn't seem particularly effective. Quoting: > It also reveals a somewhat damning tidbit when talking about the reach and impact of these campaigns; according to the report, “the vast majority of posts and tweets we reviewed received no more than a handful of likes or retweets, and only 19% of the covert assets we identified had more than 1,000 followers.” What’s more, the two accounts with the most followers explicitly said they were tied to the US military. I’ll try not to think about how much all this cost when I’m paying my taxes next year. Had US social media agencies been fully in bed with the feds such a report would have never been produced in the first place. Remember, conspiracists always talk about shadowy organizations or groups of people with near omnipotent power - an idea these agencies themselves would like perpetuated to make it seem resistance is futile. https://www.theverge.com/2022/8/25/23322214/us-government-propaganda-campaign-twitter-facebook https://www.theverge.com/2022/8/25/23322214/us-government-pr...

the_jesus_villa 4y ago
>an idea these agencies themselves would like perpetuated to make it seem resistance is futile. Quite the opposite - the conspiratorial reaction is that these agencies want to be mistaken for bumbling bureaucracies, so they let reports of small-level stuff get out. That way we underestimate the real degree of their control and believe that if they ever tried to manipulate us, they would get caught anyway, and besides, they're just making unsuccessful tweets, right? Or even deeper, that these organizations are meant to distract us from much more powerful entities who they don't even realize they are controlled by. I don't believe any of this, but the conspiracy theorists deserve more credit for creativity that you are giving them!
pessimizer 4y ago
That's because it's meant to disrupt conversations, not be liked. None of it is liked, you just have to wade through mountains of it to follow a conversation. The content is shitty US propaganda that maybe 5% of people agree with without reservations. None of those people are on the threads where they're asking a woman how much she likes Putin's dick. The most damaging thing that they do is inflate the like counts and apparent engagement of government thinktank employees and unaware nationalists drunk on the dopamine hits of botted upvotes. I'm absolutely certain that the removal of downvotes from social platforms in general was a long term government project. edit: does anyone believe that this behavior can't be easily detected algorithmically? I don't know about other platforms, but Twitter is obviously a government partner, not a victim.
alldayeveryday 4y ago
> Had US social media agencies been fully in bed with the feds such a report would have never been produced in the first place. Ever heard of a limited hangout?

the_jesus_villa 4y ago

>an idea these agencies themselves would like perpetuated to make it seem resistance is futile. Quite the opposite - the conspiratorial reaction is that these agencies want to be mistaken for bumbling bureaucracies, so they let reports of small-level stuff get out. That way we underestimate the real degree of their control and believe that if they ever tried to manipulate us, they would get caught anyway, and besides, they're just making unsuccessful tweets, right? Or even deeper, that these organizations are meant to distract us from much more powerful entities who they don't even realize they are controlled by. I don't believe any of this, but the conspiracy theorists deserve more credit for creativity that you are giving them!

pessimizer 4y ago

That's because it's meant to disrupt conversations, not be liked. None of it is liked, you just have to wade through mountains of it to follow a conversation. The content is shitty US propaganda that maybe 5% of people agree with without reservations. None of those people are on the threads where they're asking a woman how much she likes Putin's dick. The most damaging thing that they do is inflate the like counts and apparent engagement of government thinktank employees and unaware nationalists drunk on the dopamine hits of botted upvotes. I'm absolutely certain that the removal of downvotes from social platforms in general was a long term government project. edit: does anyone believe that this behavior can't be easily detected algorithmically? I don't know about other platforms, but Twitter is obviously a government partner, not a victim.

alldayeveryday 4y ago

> Had US social media agencies been fully in bed with the feds such a report would have never been produced in the first place. Ever heard of a limited hangout?