How Shadowy Groups Manipulate Internet Opinion and Debate

[radiance]

http://consciouslifenews.com/paid-internet-shill-shadowy-groups-manipulate-internet-opinion-debate/1147073/

 

[sodderboy]

Sheesh.  Anyone using effbook before the US election knows that.  It was used as an echochamber for all sorts of dumbed-down political baloney.
Mike

 

[JohnRoberts]

I'm shocked... 

This is not news and I even wrote about the use of tracking cookies by the political campaigns to steer push messaging, to be all things to all people using social media.

The most shocking thing is that people are so gullible, i thought the younger generation were supposed to be hip to social media and such things.

There is some debate about the administration being soft on limiting personal tracking (privacy) because they were one of the biggest users/abusers. Of course both parties tried to use this, but one did a much better job with a 4 year head start.

This is just another symptom of the ends people will go to pursue a relatively low paying job (congress, president), because of all the money the federal government spends. Since this spending is increasing rapidly, the stakes driving this power chase are not diminishing. Good luck to us all.  As a far smarter economist than I opined, we can't possibly police all the spending so the only practical solution is to reduce government spending to only essential programs.

For example, while I have empathy for the resident of NY/NJ (I was born in NJ),  when did rebuilding after a natural disaster become a federal government responsibility? Emergency relief indeed, tens of $B for rebuilding, not so much. Last I checked NY/NJ was a pretty wealthy area. The government subsidized flood insurance is already bad enough for incentivizing building in low lying areas  that flood (duh). Since this money is being borrowed, why put it on my tab? We could always help them borrow to rebuild.

JR

PS: I actually liked Gov Christie before this storm. I appreciate him standing up for the folks but i thought he was more principled.

 

[Kingston]

As a really sad example of the ramifications of this kind of marketing, think about several paid shills on some media in a heated long lasting argument with each other. None of them realising the sock puppetry. And it's happening all the time, everywhere. ;D

Not that I ever felt sorry for the telemarketing folks either.

 

[JohnRoberts]

As a really sad example of the ramifications of this kind of marketing, think about several paid shills on some media in a heated long lasting argument with each other. None of them realising the sock puppetry. And it's happening all the time, everywhere. ;D

Not that I ever felt sorry for the telemarketing folks either.

This has been going on since long before social media and tracking cookies. It is generally a waste of time to watch the weekend opinion TV shows since there are a small army of partisan lieutenants from both corners armed with marching orders to press the talking points du jour. You would have to be unconscious to not know both sides talking points. There is never any intention to have a thoughtful discussion, and many talking points are crafted to stop discussion.

The biggest change with tracking cookies on the internet is that the talking points can now be personalized for each individual. This is a politician's wet dream, not being limited to a single message and risk offending any voter by saying where you really stand, and only presenting one position.

Caveat lector.

JR

 

[tchgtr]

It's called manufacturing consent. Yes, people are very gullible, and have been for a long time.
WMD in Iraq comes to mind.

 

[JohnRoberts]

It's called manufacturing consent. Yes, people are very gullible, and have been for a long time.
WMD in Iraq comes to mind.

A more recent example that comes to mind is the dog and pony show going on to manufacture support for new gun control legislation.

WMD is old news I'd rather not revisit even in the crystal clarity of hindsight, while I seem to recall some recent drama about poison gas in Syria. Oh-oh.
----
I notice a subtle change in governance where the administration seems to stay in campaign mode, appealing to the public to apply pressure on legislators, and continuing to discredit the opposition party long after the voting is finished. Our government is supposed to represent all of us, so IMO they should shut up and do the real work of government negotiating between themselves, not with us through the press.

There is a reason we only have elections every couple years... they are supposed to accomplish work with each other  between elections.


JR 

 

[dmp]

I notice a subtle change in governance where the administration seems to stay in campaign mode

The term 'permanent campaign' goes back a long ways - was prominent in Clinton's administration and since.

Just think of all the money and resources being thrown into all this political marketing! Seems like such a waste. Comes back to what the rich and powerful want people to believe.

 

[3nity]

Remember a guy called "Tucker", his name came to mind instantly when reading this!

 

[tv]

vote for democrats vote for democrats vote for democrats

-------------------
lunch break!
-------------------

vote for democrats vote for democrats vote for democrats

 

[okgb]

Or think they want to believe , which , for sure is NOT being poor
typical internet , try to find some info on anything and google keyword searches pops
up 80 % crap unrelated , 50 % that is related is someone dissing a competitor and their product to sell another product
and a few percent citizens thinking they're doing some good , the mirror reflects the world .

 

[tchgtr]

    My major complaint about the whole WMD experience is that the media were the ones who were supposed to catch that, and here we had Scott Ritter and Hans Blix telling us exactly what the true conditions were, and Rice, Powell, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al, telling us exactly the opposite, and the media not bothering to check, or in collusion. Cost us a lot of money and ruined our economy.
  I find it much easier to look into the past and see how things were manipulated, and watch for similar tactics in the present, than use the vague facts of the present (distorted by means akin to the subject of this thread) to reinforce my own opinions for public dissemination. I guess I'm not so smart...
 

 

[JohnRoberts]

I notice a subtle change in governance where the administration seems to stay in campaign mode

The term 'permanent campaign' goes back a long ways - was prominent in Clinton's administration and since.

Just think of all the money and resources being thrown into all this political marketing! Seems like such a waste. Comes back to what the rich and powerful want people to believe.

The money and time wasted(?) on politics continues to grow.

I perceive a difference.  I don't recall Clinton using the bully pulpit as much as the current admin, but the term "bully pulpit" comes from a much earlier time so is not unique to modern politics.

Expanding government just makes the "prize" of controlling all this government spending more valuable, so worth pursuing even harder.

Of course i could be wrong...

JR

 

[JohnRoberts]

    My major complaint about the whole WMD experience is that the media were the ones who were supposed to catch that, and here we had Scott Ritter and Hans Blix telling us exactly what the true conditions were, and Rice, Powell, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al, telling us exactly the opposite, and the media not bothering to check, or in collusion. Cost us a lot of money and ruined our economy.
  I find it much easier to look into the past and see how things were manipulated, and watch for similar tactics in the present, than use the vague facts of the present (distorted by means akin to the subject of this thread) to reinforce my own opinions for public dissemination. I guess I'm not so smart...

My complaint about WMD would be experiencing the WMD.

Of course it's easier to look back. That is called hindsight.

However perceiving shenanigans in real time now, seems like it could be pretty useful right NOW..


JR

 

[tchgtr]

    Well, with all due respect, I never had any faith in that administration, and they pretty much proved me right. I never for one minute believed most of what they said because I was familiar with that cast of characters from previous administrations (yes, I'm old), and that's why I think the media dropped the ball, as they continue to do to this day.
    The media will do what they think is popular, to bring in the most ad money. They cleaned up in this last election by convincing everyone that the race was close, when in fact the race was over around the conventions.
    In a similar way, the politicians follow the money, appealing to their base groups in ways that seem fit to them. I think we all agree it stinks.
  So let's agree to encourage our reps to act, and ourselves vote to get the money out of politics, and make the media more responsible by reinstating FCC laws that have made the media so one-sided and blind. Hopefully we can agree on this no matter our ideological leanings.
    Back on topic---has anyone noticed how John is always on this forum and responds almost immediately to topics of all subjects, but particularly political content....?
    Just kidding John, your generosity and vast knowledge are always appreciated.

 

[thermionic]

I totally agree. Their products seem to get suspiciously good reviews at Gearslutz. Some people reckon it's really ugly, in a Frankenstein-esque kind of way. I smell a rat somewhere. 




edit - Oh dear. I thought the title read 'Shadow Hills'....

On a more relevant note: when I was working for an OEM a few yrs back, we were told on several occasions by distro's to make up accounts at groups for the purpose of posting bogus reviews of our gear...(I won't mention names - I don't need that kind of hassle). Why should political groups be any different?

 

[lassoharp]

Remember a guy called "Tucker", his name came to mind instantly when reading this!

Very first thing I thought of.  I remember that idiot well.  Thread is still around here. 


The way he meets his shadowy group sounds a little hokey but who knows.  If they really do behave that way when recruiting then I imagine that all of the stuff I've seen on History Channel, PBS, and HBO during past two pre election periods is really kept hush hush.  Not surprising since it was programs masquerading as real (as in objective and unbiased) documentaries.  There were some really stupid movies too by one certain group.  Some of the techniques were subtle and clever but ultimately clumsy, yet insidious to the unsuspecting and trusting viewer. 

 

[Kingston]

This has been going on since long before social media and tracking cookies. It is generally a waste of time to watch the weekend opinion TV shows since there are a small army of partisan lieutenants from both corners armed with marching orders to press the talking points du jour. You would have to be unconscious to not know both sides talking points. There is never any intention to have a thoughtful discussion, and many talking points are crafted to stop discussion.

In those shows every participant knows who gets paid to shout out their viewpoints. Indeed the word 'discussion' doesn't describe it. But the veil of anonymity sheds a new pale and sad depressive light on the jobs of all these salesmen.

 

[Kingston]

edit - Oh dear. I thought the title read 'Shadow Hills'....

That's a great example of a subconsciousness reading and responding autonomously!  ;D Happens to me all the time. I can't multitask. Someone comes and asks a question while a task with deep concentration is taking place. They get an answer directly from the subconsciousness. Only later I realise the answer wasn't exactly what the focused mind might have said.

 

[thermionic]

It was an (admittedly poor) attempt at humour, if truth be told, Kingston. But I take your point - I'm sure I'm as guilty as anyone at autonomous response - especially if I'm intoxicated