Russian Disinformation

[F1fan]

As most of us know the Justice Dept has taken action against various people and domain sites for what they say is propaganda/disinformation.

A number were arrested for criminal activity, yes. There was evidence of them committing criminal activity.

What I don't know is what propaganda/disinformation was being promulgated.

Then you were likely the target of it, and you have been duped. That is their goal.

It's not that I don't trust the Justice Dept completly but they seem to have somewhat of a bad track record on their assessment of information given to the public.

According to disinformation, which you have a track record of using.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

As most of us know the Justice Dept has taken action against various people and domain sites for what they say is propaganda/disinformation.
What I don't know is what propaganda/disinformation was being promulgated.
It's not that I don't trust the Justice Dept completly but they seem to have somewhat of a bad track record on their assessment of information given to the public.

Do you have an actual press release or something from the Justice Dept?

 

[F1fan]

In today's day and age, when most people have access to a plethora of information and a wide variety of news sources, I can't see that there's anything stopping anyone from accessing other sources of information. If they choose to remain inside an echo chamber, it's their choice to do so.

Well they do make a decision, but not all human decisions are conscious and deliberate. This is how marketing and propaganda works, it learns hos people are exploited, and they are manipulated. Much of this is by words and images that exploit emotions like fear, which then activates the reward center of the brain. That tends to be hormones released into the blood and there is a slight euphoric feeling. This can become habitual, but like what addicts seeks. This is how Trump has succeeded in attracting and maintaining such a large base of followers despite him being a conman and convicted felon.

This is rather disturbing, actually.

New theory suggests that decisions are made unconsciously, then about half a second later become conscious

Consciousness is your awareness of yourself and the world around you. This awareness is subjective and unique to you. A researcher has developed a new theory of consciousness, explaining why it developed, what it is good for, which disorders affect it, and why dieting (and resisting other urges)...

www.sciencedaily.com

This one is interesting.

We make thousands of unconscious decisions every day. Here’s how your brain copes with that

There’s so much to process in our daily lives, we need habits to get us through and give the brain a break.

theconversation.com

 

[F1fan]

It already happens.
So much stuff about Putin and the War is unavailable in English. Only in Italian because we have basically no restrictions.

So lots of disinformation in Italian that isn't available in English. Excellent. There are plenty of reputable media sources that describe and explain what is going on in Ukraine, and about the war Russia started.

 

[Estro Felino]

So lots of disinformation in Italian that isn't available in English. Excellent. There are plenty of reputable media sources that describe and explain what is going on in Ukraine, and about the war Russia started.

Thank you.
And it's going better and better.
Last year just one party or two were pro-Russia. Now...many more than two.

Now...2024, Minister of Defense: Nobody has ever thought that Ukraine could defeat Russia.

Crosetto alla Festa del Fatto: "Nessuno ha mai pensato che l'Ucraina potesse sconfiggere la Russia. Solo un folle può pensarlo" - Il Fatto Quotidiano

Il ministro della Difesa Guido Crosetto, ospite della Festa del Fatto, ha risposto alle domande di Peter Gomez e Antonio Padellaro, ovviamente si è parlato del conflitto in Ucraina. “Nel momento in cui l’Europa e la Nato fanno una scelta o tu entri con i tuoi alleati e fino in fondo condividi la...

www.ilfattoquotidiano.it

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Thank you.
And it's going better and better.
Last year just one party or two were pro-Russia. Now...many more than two.

Now...2024, Minister of Defense: Nobody has ever thought that Ukraine could defeat Russia.

Crosetto alla Festa del Fatto: "Nessuno ha mai pensato che l'Ucraina potesse sconfiggere la Russia. Solo un folle può pensarlo" - Il Fatto Quotidiano

Il ministro della Difesa Guido Crosetto, ospite della Festa del Fatto, ha risposto alle domande di Peter Gomez e Antonio Padellaro, ovviamente si è parlato del conflitto in Ucraina. “Nel momento in cui l’Europa e la Nato fanno una scelta o tu entri con i tuoi alleati e fino in fondo condividi la...

www.ilfattoquotidiano.it

That is TV stuff. That is irrelevant, ridiculous and media falsehoods.

In effect I would like how the Minister proves such a negative:
Nobody has ever thought that Ukraine could defeat Russia.

 

[Estro Felino]

That is TV stuff. That is irrelevant, ridiculous and media falsehoods.

In effect I would like how the Minister proves such a negative:
Nobody has ever thought that Ukraine could defeat Russia.

You are an EU citizen.
You must think that EU interests come first.
EU geopolitical interests.
Ukraine is not in the EU, yet.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You are an EU citizen.
You must think that EU interests come first.
EU geopolitical interests.
Ukraine is not in the EU, yet.

I think that Europa's interests comes first, not just the EU.
So please don't tell me how to think.

 

[Estro Felino]

I think that Europa's interests comes first, not just the EU.
So please don't tell me how to think.

Absolutely not.
The EU treaties come first.

 

[Regiomontanus]

Again no specifics on what the disinformation was

Yeah and I have no idea, just what our government tells us (which is often BS).

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Absolutely not.
The EU treaties come first.

Well, that is your opinion. I take the UN ones to come first, then the general Europa ones, then the EU ones and then the Danish ones.

 

[tytlyf]

In today's day and age, when most people have access to a plethora of information and a wide variety of news sources, I can't see that there's anything stopping anyone from accessing other sources of information. If they choose to remain inside an echo chamber, it's their choice to do so.

Unless you're suggesting that someone is using some kind of secret mind-control ray or something.

In a closed society, where internet, media, and press are strictly controlled, you might have a point, but we're talking about media and internet in the U.S. here.

I do know that the most watched media on TV (Fox) likes to teach their viewers to never watch ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, etc.
Fox will demonize and propagandize when they talk about these outlets.
Many on this forum are also victims of this propaganda as they repeat the same wording Fox uses when talking about normal news outlets.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

In today's day and age, when most people have access to a plethora of information and a wide variety of news sources, I can't see that there's anything stopping anyone from accessing other sources of information. If they choose to remain inside an echo chamber, it's their choice to do so.

That's where you are wrong. For many people, it's not exactly a "choice".
They are kept within their echo chamber by the algoritms that control their newsfeeds. You know... "we think you might be interested in....."

People who aren't very tech savy or who don't understand how these internet things work, are literally not just kept in an information bubble, but are literally pushed deeper and deeper into it.

If I google "why did Putin invaded Ukraine" I will get immensly different results as compared to when someone like Estro googles that.

Many people consume all their "news" on social media "newsfeeds", thinking "It's the news and therefor unbiased". In reality, it's the platforms' algoritms that decide what they get to see, based on what they read previously. And these algoritms do NOT make any distinction between fake news and actual news.

And that's how troll farms from Russia manage to interfere in US elections.
That's how companies like Cambridge Analytica managed to feed countless lies to british nationals in the brexit campaign.

The fact is that most people don't properly vet their sources and they get fed misinformation 24/7.
That's who millions of americans have been convinced by all that Q nonsense and about supposed pedophile networks operated by democrates and "deep state" bs.

You are very naive about this, it seems to me.
Feeding misinformation to the masses has NEVER been as easy as it is today.

Unless you're suggesting that someone is using some kind of secret mind-control ray or something.

There's nothing magical or mysterious about it.

In a closed society, where internet, media, and press are strictly controlled, you might have a point, but we're talking about media and internet in the U.S. here.

Yes. Where there is zero regulation and where ALGORITMS from tech companies decide what you get to see and what not - without any fact checking whatsoever.

ALGORITMS of which the purpose is not to give you accurate intel, but instead of which the purpose is to exploit your human psychological weaknesses and to keep your eyes locked on the screen by whatever means necessary to generate ad revenue.

The teams that program these things literally have psychologists as team members, did you know that?
This, to make those services as addictive as possible. To exploit your psychology to make you keep watching the ads.
This is how the "like" button saw the light of day (positive feedback loop - the endless quest for "likes").
This is how the endless scrolling list saw the light of day (I wonder what I'll see next - and it just goes on and on and on)
This is how the "notifications" saw the light of day (I wonder what that beep was about - I'll better grab my phone and look)
....

 

[Stevicus]

Stop right there.

You do realise that having such a wealth of information and resources can actually lead to misinformation, right? There is no one "come here for the actual facts" source - the abundance of various news sites with various agendas, the vast number of pundits, think-tanks, channels, tweets, all of these things make it very difficult for a great number of people to really be able to parse misinformation from information. You can't just put all of this on individuals "choosing not to expose themselves to facts". The situation is more complicated. Being misinformed, especially in this day and age, is not always a voluntary act.

I realize that it's possible, yes, but this has always been one of the pitfalls of living in a society with free speech and freedom of the press. Just as with the free market, let the buyer beware. I've never particularly liked this kind of set up, as it seems to give an advantage to those who have the wealth and resources to make a louder splash and be a bigger influence. It's politics in a capitalist society, as it has been practiced for generations.

Of course, I also realize that the technology we're dealing with has been a major game-changer when it comes to political speech, news, and influence. But as with anything else, people have to learn how to navigate it and not believe everything they see or read. They should check their information from multiple sources if necessary. One can check news sources from other countries even. True, there may not be any one "come here for the actual facts" source, but that doesn't stop anyone from looking at multiple sources.

In the end, I can't help it if too many people don't put much of an effort in to get informed about the issues of the day. We have an electorate where large segments appear to be misinformed and misguided. Of course, we can explore the reasons how and why that situation came about, and I agree that the reasons are complicated. Far more complicated than some shadow organization flooding the internet with fake messages and people suddenly believing it.

Unless they aren't aware they're in an echo chamber, or if there are coercive factors preventing them from leaving that echo chamber, or if the internet services they use are set up in some way that actively dissuades them from leaving that echo chamber.

If people don't know they're in an echo chamber, I'm not sure what can be done to convince them. There are reasons they might choose to stay, regardless of whether they know they're in an echo chamber or not. The best way to fight an idea is with another idea.

Do you believe propaganda and misinformation influences people? Yes or no?

I consider propaganda to be along the lines of persuasive political speech and commercial advertising. The whole idea is to influence people to buy a product or go along with a certain political idea or candidate, so yes, propaganda can and does influence people. It can be slanted, but not necessarily outright lying. One has to be able to read between the lines. I remember speaking with some Russians who said they learned to read between the lines whenever reading anything in the Soviet press. Even if what they were reading was BS on the surface, they found ways of looking at it from different angles and making a reasonable postulate as to what was really going on.

It's all in the slant, the spin, and how information is presented. As with advertising techniques, some might use "weasel words" to qualify what they're saying. There's a lot of rhetorical tricks one might use, and one needs to learn to identify them.

And the US has absolutely no history of media control, bias, or businesses being entrenched in, say, social media?

Probably during WW2, that may have been a time when the media were more tightly controlled, as well as during the McCarthy era and the Hayes Code. But it was never completely controlled, and many of those restrictions started to loosen up in the 1950s and 60s. We've never been anything like North Korea or Nazi Germany in terms of absolute and total control of media.

Come on. Do you seriously want to argue that mass disinformation and propaganda is only a problem because people are CHOOSING to be misinformed?? If this were true, the solution would be as simple as explaining facts to people. But it isn't, so it isn't.

Don't be absurd.

All I can say is, if people want to get information from other sources, there's nothing stopping them. If someone watches a TikTok video and believes it holds all the secrets of the universe, then what do you want me to say? They've been duped, mesmerized, conned, suckered, and manipulated into believing BS.

In the end, I guess it's a question of who should be blamed more: The huckster selling the snake oil, or the suckers who are dumb enough to buy it?

I don't like it any more than you do, but I see what I see, and I call it as I see it. I'm not interested in how absurd you think it is. The whole situation is absurd.

 

[crossfire]

No specifics on what the disinformation was.

Starting on page 89 of the pdf there are pages and pages of examples of the propaganda posted on spoofed websites.

 

[Pogo]

No specifics on what the disinformation was.

No, but I'm quite sure you could parrot it as information you have heard.

 

[Pogo]

Absolutely not.
The EU treaties come first.

Yes, trivial, in this case it is the interest of the EU beyond the formal treaties.

 

[Estro Felino]

Yes, trivial, in this case it is the interest of the EU beyond the formal treaties.

What happens in Europe is our own business.
Not America's business.

 

[Stevicus]

That's where you are wrong. For many people, it's not exactly a "choice".
They are kept within their echo chamber by the algoritms that control their newsfeeds. You know... "we think you might be interested in....."

People who aren't very tech savy or who don't understand how these internet things work, are literally not just kept in an information bubble, but are literally pushed deeper and deeper into it.

If I google "why did Putin invaded Ukraine" I will get immensly different results as compared to when someone like Estro googles that.

Many people consume all their "news" on social media "newsfeeds", thinking "It's the news and therefor unbiased". In reality, it's the platforms' algoritms that decide what they get to see, based on what they read previously. And these algoritms do NOT make any distinction between fake news and actual news.

And that's how troll farms from Russia manage to interfere in US elections.
That's how companies like Cambridge Analytica managed to feed countless lies to british nationals in the brexit campaign.

The fact is that most people don't properly vet their sources and they get fed misinformation 24/7.
That's who millions of americans have been convinced by all that Q nonsense and about supposed pedophile networks operated by democrates and "deep state" bs.

You are very naive about this, it seems to me.
Feeding misinformation to the masses has NEVER been as easy as it is today.



There's nothing magical or mysterious about it.


Yes. Where there is zero regulation and where ALGORITMS from tech companies decide what you get to see and what not - without any fact checking whatsoever.

ALGORITMS of which the purpose is not to give you accurate intel, but instead of which the purpose is to exploit your human psychological weaknesses and to keep your eyes locked on the screen by whatever means necessary to generate ad revenue.

The teams that program these things literally have psychologists as team members, did you know that?
This, to make those services as addictive as possible. To exploit your psychology to make you keep watching the ads.
This is how the "like" button saw the light of day (positive feedback loop - the endless quest for "likes").
This is how the endless scrolling list saw the light of day (I wonder what I'll see next - and it just goes on and on and on)
This is how the "notifications" saw the light of day (I wonder what that beep was about - I'll better grab my phone and look)
....

I don't work in the tech industry as you do, so I won't argue with your expertise about algorithms. I have had some degree of awareness about this, and I've seen it in play myself. However, I also know that there isn't just one player here. There are multiple companies and organizations in play trying to influence using whatever technological means they have at their disposal. But I see it mostly as American companies doing this (Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon, etc.), not Russian entities. There may be other parties involved, but the bottom line is that it still largely seems to be a relatively open playing field.

You're not saying that anyone has a monopoly on any of this, are you? If so, then that would be a problem. You yourself have argued many times about the merits of competition and the free market, so isn't this an example of that very philosophy playing out?

Personally, I look for information more actively. These newsfeeds and algorithms seem to target the passive reader or internet surfer. Other than that, I get a daily digest from the Arizona Republic, the LA Times, AP, CNN. I don't know if they're the same for everyone or if they use an algorithm, but nevertheless, I peruse multiple sources. I don't generally use Fox News, but then again, I don't automatically reject Fox out of hand. As with anything, I look around and try to get whatever background information I can.

One source of frustration I come across when browsing news is the infamous "paywall." I encounter that phenomenon more and more these days. While some sites are freely flooding us with algorithms and slanted news, the more established news sites are hiding behind paywalls because profits. I have nothing against paying for a newspaper (I used to buy 2-3 papers a day before the internet), but if I'm just looking for a specific article about a specific event, it's a different thing.

It seems to me that, if there are people so concerned about the spate of disinformation out there, then they should encourage more media outlets (and academia and libraries) to unlock their paywalls and make information available to all. If they want information to be a for-profit industry, then they can't very well complain if the less affluent aren't getting the same level of information.

 

[Pogo]

What happens in Europe is our own business.
Not America's business.

Whoosh!