Social media in the 2016 election

[Belsnickel]

So we've been hearing for some time about people being paid to go onto social media sites, Reddit, other places to try to manipulate the information out there in favor of Hillary Clinton. There have recently been allegations that the big Twitter bump Trump had during the debate was bot fueled (though they admit that the GOP would still have had a lead on the site, just not as much) and the same allegations have been made regarding /r/The_Donald in a rather extensive breakdown by a user on the site.

So with these allegations being thrown around at both sides and pretty decent evidence pointing to it happening on both sides, what do you think about this tactic? Do you think this is something we will continue to see more of in the future?

[xxlt]

Perception is reality. And, our perception is always being manipulated, this is just the latest incarnation.

Sadly, it makes the people who deny what appears to be reality and indisputable facts look sane®.

Allegedly a former CIA director said something like this, "When nothing anyone in America believes is the truth, our disinformation campaign will be complete." I have a friend who likes to reference that quote. I kind of believe, based on what I know about the CIA that it is a real quote from a CIA director. But I don't know.

Not trying to hijack the thread, but wonder what people think about that alleged statement and about the social media illusions.

[Belsnickel]

(10-18-2016, 10:24 AM)xxlt Wrote: Perception is reality. And, our perception is always being manipulated, this is just the latest incarnation.

Sadly, it makes the people who deny what appears to be reality and indisputable facts look sane®.

Allegedly a former CIA director said something like this, "When nothing anyone in America believes is the truth, our disinformation campaign will be complete." I have a friend who likes to reference that quote. I kind of believe, based on what I know about the CIA that it is a real quote from a CIA director. But I don't know.

Not trying to hijack the thread, but wonder what people think about that alleged statement and about the social media illusions.

It's absolutely true that we are always being manipulated. I have been talking about this recently with others, but public opinion is a two-way street. What public opinion is about certain things will always influence politicians and public policy, but politicians are also constantly manipulating public opinion to win over the public to their sides. People think they are getting "unbiased" or unfiltered information, but they never are.

Just for an example, the people that denounce the mainstream media for their biases are getting the information and claims that the MSM is biased from people that have their own biases and in fact benefit from these people thinking that the MSM is overly biased. Yet they trust those that are feeding them the information even though their motives are the exact same as those they are denouncing.

The accessibility of information is more open than ever, yet the public are more uninformed or misinformed than ever, and this is just another brick in the wall being built to hide things from the general public. If the quote is real, then I am concerned because it is not the role of the CIA to operate domestically. But this campaign of misinformation on all fronts is certainly a concern.

[GMDino]

As long as there are ways to make the public think something is true it will happen.

I'd bet your salary that years ago (and less) there were "fake" letters to the editor in the newspapers.  And I know there were/are fake callers to the radio talk shows.  People who were/are paid to ask a leading question so a topic can be forwarded.

As I say, there is nothing new under the sun.

I don't like it.  And, to me, if a person has more Twitter followers than another that means nothing (to me) as far as their opinions.

[6andcounting]

Bots are one thing, but actual people getting paid to troll and parrot official talking points(Hillary's Correct the Record PAC) is pathetic. They are so easy to spot and they don't have actual arguemnts - just a list of pro-Hillary talking points and some lame insults to hurl at Trump. The fact that people need to get paid to support Hillary is laughable.

Trump has Reddit, /pol and internet trolls in general on his side that do professional work pro bono. Pepes won't post themselves you know.

[Belsnickel]

(10-18-2016, 07:55 PM)6andcounting Wrote: Bots are one thing, but actual people getting paid to troll and parrot official talking points(Hillary's Correct the Record PAC) is pathetic. They are so easy to spot and they don't have actual arguemnts - just a list of pro-Hillary talking points and some lame insults to hurl at Trump. The fact that people need to get paid to support Hillary is laughable.

Trump has Reddit, /pol and internet trolls in general on his side that do professional work pro bono. Pepes won't post themselves you know.

I don't see how having to inflate your numbers with bots is any better than paying people to do it. Saying one is better than the other would have to come from a position of bias. Both situations are misinformation campaigns.

[6andcounting]

(10-18-2016, 09:15 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't see how having to inflate your numbers with bots is any better than paying people to do it. Saying one is better than the other would have to come from a position of bias. Both situations are misinformation campaigns.

Any computer nerd could make a bunch of bots post dumb comments. Having a task force of real life autists getting paid to type talking points from an office is sad.

Millions of people do it for Trump for free for the love of trolling and the fun of jumping on a high energy, anti- establishment movement. Me being one of those people. And it has been widely effective. Clinton literally declared war on a cartoon frog based on an article written by a journalist who got trolled by a Twitter account clearly labeled a "parody" who went by the name "Jared Taylor Swift". The real identity of the account is a Jewish teenager who thought it would be funny to post Nazi pepes and tell a clueless journalist he's part of a white supremacist movement who will stop at nothing to make mainstream pepe "toxic" in the name of the KKK.

[Belsnickel]

(10-18-2016, 09:45 PM)6andcounting Wrote: Any computer nerd could make a bunch of bots post dumb comments. Having a task force of real life autists getting paid to type talking points from an office is sad.

Millions of people do it for Trump for free for the love of trolling and the fun of jumping on a high energy, anti- establishment movement. Me being one of those people. And it has been widely effective. Clinton literally declared war on a cartoon frog based on an article written by a journalist who got trolled by a Twitter account clearly labeled a "parody" who went by the name "Jared Taylor Swift". The real identity of the account is a Jewish teenager who thought it would be funny to post Nazi pepes and tell a clueless journalist he's part of a white supremacist movement who will stop at nothing to make mainstream pepe "toxic" in the name of the KKK.

You aren't really making a cogent argument against what I am saying.

[xxlt]

(10-18-2016, 10:19 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Your aren't really making a cogent argument against what I am saying.

Shocking! 

[Rotobeast]

(10-18-2016, 09:15 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't see how having to inflate your numbers with bots is any better than paying people to do it. Saying one is better than the other would have to come from a position of bias. Both situations are misinformation campaigns.

Bots cannot be prosecuted (maybe the creators).

As I'd stated in my CTR thread, I have a friend that is trying to do just that.
He has evidence that could prove that voter intimidation has taken place.
Bots can be programmed to not cross that line.
Unfortunately, people get emotional and frequently do.
I guess that's the biggest difference to me.

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[Belsnickel]

(10-19-2016, 01:20 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: Bots cannot be prosecuted (maybe the creators).

As I'd stated in my CTR thread, I have a friend that is trying to do just that.
He has evidence that could prove that voter intimidation has taken place.
Bots can be programmed to not cross that line.
Unfortunately, people get emotional and frequently do.
I guess that's the biggest difference to me.

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

But crossing the line is on the individual doing that. I am talking about the use of these methods to manipulate public opinion. When you look at it like that, there really is no difference.

[6andcounting]

(10-18-2016, 10:19 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: You aren't really making a cogent argument against what I am saying.

Is there a difference between a mass spam email and a personal email someone wrote themselves?

Is there a difference between calling 1-800 number and getting a) an automated system (bots) b) Someone from a 3rd world country who can't speak much English and can only communicate to you via the script their given (CTR trolls) 3) Someone who is knowledgeable about the topic of you questions and is able to give you specific help based on exactly what you say (centipedes)?

[GMDino]

(10-19-2016, 07:09 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: But crossing the line is on the individual doing that. I am talking about the use of these methods to manipulate public opinion. When you look at it like that, there really is no difference.

Like the robo calls when Turdblossom was telling people in Carolina that McCain had a "black child"?

If I got one I wouldn't care...apparently it works in the south.  Can't imagine why.

[Belsnickel]

(10-19-2016, 07:36 AM)6andcounting Wrote: Is there a difference between a mass spam email and a personal email someone wrote themselves?

Is there a difference between calling 1-800 number and getting a) an automated system (bots) b) Someone from a 3rd world country who can't speak much English and can only communicate to you via the script their given (CTR trolls) 3) Someone who is knowledgeable about the topic of you questions and is able to give you specific help based on exactly what you say (centipedes)?

In regards to this discussion, no, there is no difference. The manipulation of public opinion with misinformation is what we are discussing here, and all of those things are being used to do so. They are tools for manipulating public opinion. One is not better than the other from an ethical standpoint and whether this will continue to be the norm, which is what this discussion is about.

Also, thanks for the laugh. The centipedes being knowledgeable was hilarious. Don't get me wrong, there is a lack of knowledge all along the political spectrum. I just laugh at those that think their side actually has a better understanding of it than the other as I watch them all suckle at the teat of elite influence.

[6andcounting]

(10-19-2016, 09:24 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: In regards to this discussion, no, there is no difference. The manipulation of public opinion with misinformation is what we are discussing here, and all of those things are being used to do so. They are tools for manipulating public opinion. One is not better than the other from an ethical standpoint and whether this will continue to be the norm, which is what this discussion is about.

Also, thanks for the laugh. The centipedes being knowledgeable was hilarious. Don't get me wrong, there is a lack of knowledge all along the political spectrum. I just laugh at those that think their side actually has a better understanding of it than the other as I watch them all suckle at the teat of elite influence.

No - that's wasn't literal, I was using a metaphor to draw a parallel. The phone center analogy was grading the 3 groups (bots, paid CTR, and pro bono centipedes) on their trolling. Centipedes are the professional trolls.


EDIT

The analogy was solely intended to further explain me saying, "Millions of people do it for Trump for free for the love of trolling and the fun of jumping on a high energy, anti- establishment movement. Me being one of those people. And it has been widely effective."

[Belsnickel]

(10-19-2016, 12:42 PM)6andcounting Wrote: No - that's wasn't literal, I was using a metaphor to draw a parallel. The phone center analogy was grading the 3 groups (bots, paid CTR, and pro bono centipedes) on their trolling. Centipedes are the professional trolls.


EDIT

The analogy was solely intended to further explain me saying, "Millions of people do it for Trump for free for the love of trolling and the fun of jumping on a high energy, anti- establishment movement. Me being one of those people. And it has been widely effective."

Here's the thing, though, behind all of those people doing it for the love of trolling, there are people behind the scenes feeding the information and stirring it up. These are the people that connect the campaign with all of them and make them tools being used and why this is a part of the discussion.

[6andcounting]

(10-19-2016, 12:54 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Here's the thing, though, behind all of those people doing it for the love of trolling, there are people behind the scenes feeding the information and stirring it up. These are the people that connect the campaign with all of them and make them tools being used and why this is a part of the discussion.

The alt-right has been so successful because they aren't hijacked and run by somebody the way Occupy and the Tea Party ended up. It's just regular folks, mostly millennials, who just make edgy memes.

Trump doesn't need someone else to be controversial and make the risky comments on behalf of his campaign. He just goes on Twitter or gets in front of a camera and does it himself. Hence he's the "absolute madman"

[Belsnickel]

(10-19-2016, 01:16 PM)6andcounting Wrote: The alt-right has been so successful because they aren't hijacked and run by somebody the way Occupy and the Tea Party ended up. It's just regular folks, mostly millennials, who just make edgy memes.

Trump doesn't need someone else to be controversial and make the risky comments on behalf of his campaign. He just goes on Twitter or gets in front of a camera and does it himself. Hence he's the "absolute madman"

I guarantee you there are people that are a part of the campaign infrastructure that are feeding the information and inciting some of it. There is zero doubt that is occurring. But, as has been discussed, those that are a part of it like to think that isn't the case, that they aren't being manipulated. But that is never the case.

[6andcounting]

(10-19-2016, 02:25 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I guarantee you there are people that are a part of the campaign infrastructure that are feeding the information and inciting some of it. There is zero doubt that is occurring. But, as has been discussed, those that are a part of it like to think that isn't the case, that they aren't being manipulated. But that is never the case.

Probably Trump himself.