3 ms·
If the actions are well precedented and widely known such that normal people would not find them shocking, I suppose. So things which we’ve made it since the be
by bandyaboot 3y ago
If the actions are well precedented and widely known such that normal people would not find them shocking, I suppose. So things which we’ve made it since the beginning of the English language without finding the need to call them “psyops” and thereby assigning them fake intrigue. An article saying wrong things about the job market: no. Cambridge Analytica: sure.
- xupybd 3y agoI think you could replace "psyop" with "marketing campaign" for most of the times the expression is used today.
- cm2012 3y agoCambridge Analytica is also entirely fake, in the sense that it's highly unlikely any votes were affected by it.
- bandyaboot 3y agoI doubt I would ever utter the word seriously to describe something, but operations can fail, no? If it indeed didn’t have any effect, the operation was still pretty shocking and intriguing.
- cm2012 3y agoNot really. It was more a marketing gimmick for the company. The kind of advertising targeting Cambridge did (based on cheap 2010s Era fb personality quiz responders) had absolutely no targeting value. It just sounded like techno magic to journalists. Like imagine a developer consultancy said they used latex to fizzbuzz people's computers to get them to vote for Trump. If you understand advertising targeting, CA makes just as much sense as that.