3 ms·
One way to look at it: Why wouldn't they use this capability? (Moral qualms?) Powerful interests, including corporations and foreign powers, have long worked e
by mmooss 1mo ago
One way to look at it: Why wouldn't they use this capability? (Moral qualms?)
Powerful interests, including corporations and foreign powers, have long worked effectively to frame public perceptions, even when their access to the members of the public was as limited as newspapers and a few broadcast TV stations, and filtered through editors. And they did it effectively.
Have they stopped for some reason?
And would they be less effective for some reason? The new tools - direct access to billions of individuals, wide bandwidth, no filters - should make them far more effective.
It's amazing to me that the fact of them doing it isn't well-known (there is plenty of research and evidence) and assumed, but still a question even on HN. Bring it up to most people and they will ostracize/ridicule you - an odd response which I can't explain well, given the evidence, likelihood, and very serious consequences which those same people are unhappy with.
Interestingly, over the last several years powerful interests have worked - successfully - to shut down research on this issue, including at places like Stanford and Harvard.
- piloto_ciego 1mo agoMan, I would love to hear more about the Stanford and Harvard research chicanery.
- mmooss 1mo agoDo you mean, how they were shut down? It is well documented, including in the NY Times.
- mishellaneous 1mo ago> It's amazing to me that the fact of them doing it isn't well-known (there is plenty of research and evidence) and assumed, but still a question even on HN. Bring it up to most people and they will ostracize/ridicule you - an odd response which I can't explain well, given the evidence, likelihood, and very serious consequences which those same people are unhappy with. an explanation would be that these voices doing the ostracizing/ridiculing [anyone who tries to increase awareness of astroturf] are also astroturf. because astroturf is only effective while people are unaware of it. it also seems compatible with the shutdown of research you mention.
- mmooss 1mo ago> an explanation would be that these voices doing the ostracizing/ridiculing [anyone who tries to increase awareness of astroturf] are also astroturf. I've thought of that too: 1) I haven't seen evidence, and 2) the people who repeat it are so many and so unaware. That doesn't rule it out, but wow. I guess it shouldn't be surprising - people believe even transparently dangerous nonsense that costs lives by the hundreds of thousands.