3 ms·

Are we at the point where any criticism of domestic failure can be described as 'Kremlin talking points'? Ohio train derailment was turned into a major story,

Are we at the point where any criticism of domestic failure can be described as 'Kremlin talking points'? Ohio train derailment was turned into a major story, it was certainly bad optics for Biden to spend time overseas at that moment. Pointing this out is not evidence of foreign interference nor allegiance to any foreign power. It's ominous that this piece goes on to warn against the weakness of social media in policing this alleged foreign interference, implying that further state oversight of such platforms would be necessary, a tactic straight from the page no1 of the authoritarian playbook

eesmith 4y ago
I don't see how any of your comment reflects the linked-to essay. This isn't about "any criticism of domestic failure", it's specifically concerning: ] Some of the claims pushed by the pro-Russian accounts were verifiably false, such as the suggestion that the news media had covered up the disaster or that environmental scientists traveling to the site had been killed in a plane crash. But most were more speculative, seemingly designed to stoke fear or distrust. Examples include unverified maps showing widespread pollution, posts predicting an increase in fatal cancers and others about unconfirmed mass animal die-offs. It's quite valid to criticize false and highly-misleading criticism. > it was certainly bad optics for Biden to spend time overseas at that moment. Pointing this out is not evidence of foreign interference Which might be what the article didn't use that as an example of a Kremlin-influenced talking point. FWIW, I think it's bad policy that rail workers should have no sick days, and disagree with Biden's support for blocking a rail strike on the topic. That's not "bad optics", that's bad policy. > implying that further state oversight of such platforms would be necessary I don't see the implications in that. I see ] “With no one at home in Twitter’s product safety department, Russia will continue to meddle in US elections and in democracies around the world,” Kartte said. The implication is that pre-Musk Twitter would have done a better job.

eesmith 4y ago

I don't see how any of your comment reflects the linked-to essay. This isn't about "any criticism of domestic failure", it's specifically concerning: ] Some of the claims pushed by the pro-Russian accounts were verifiably false, such as the suggestion that the news media had covered up the disaster or that environmental scientists traveling to the site had been killed in a plane crash. But most were more speculative, seemingly designed to stoke fear or distrust. Examples include unverified maps showing widespread pollution, posts predicting an increase in fatal cancers and others about unconfirmed mass animal die-offs. It's quite valid to criticize false and highly-misleading criticism. > it was certainly bad optics for Biden to spend time overseas at that moment. Pointing this out is not evidence of foreign interference Which might be what the article didn't use that as an example of a Kremlin-influenced talking point. FWIW, I think it's bad policy that rail workers should have no sick days, and disagree with Biden's support for blocking a rail strike on the topic. That's not "bad optics", that's bad policy. > implying that further state oversight of such platforms would be necessary I don't see the implications in that. I see ] “With no one at home in Twitter’s product safety department, Russia will continue to meddle in US elections and in democracies around the world,” Kartte said. The implication is that pre-Musk Twitter would have done a better job.