Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
How did it sow mistrust and chaos?
Look at all the stories, including the proliferation of false stories and what people believe vs facts.
The Russians did that? Are you claiming the WSJ and the NYT are controlled by the Russians?
Are you deliberately misrepresenting things?
No. I have a lot of things to do. Jacking with a mod ain't on that list.
I am looking for the Russians. What fake news did the Russians use to sow chaos and mistrust?
Pizzagate, fake stories about Clintons health, brain injury, mental state, ISIS calls for American Muslims to support Hillary, Pope Francis endorses Trump...
Various articles on it:
Reports: Russian operation boosted 'fake news' phenomenon
Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election, experts say
The reality behind Russia's fake news - CNNPolitics.com
Why Russia wants the U.S. to believe the election was hacked — NOVA Next | PBS
Hillary Clinton health: Debunking the conspiracy theories - CNNPolitics.com
Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election, experts say
The issue is less that it's the Russians doing this - frankly, anyone could - but that is is being done and we are utterly unequipt to counter it and instead just deny it because acknowledging these things casts a shadow on the validity of Trump's election. But it's not going to change anything - Trump was elected freely and fairly in an election largely free of fraud. But refusing to acknowledge it's impact means leaving the door open to even worse in the next election cycle.
“They want to essentially erode faith in the U.S. government or U.S. government interests,” said Clint Watts, a fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute who along with two other researchers has tracked Russian propaganda since 2014. “This was their standard mode during the Cold War. The problem is that this was hard to do before social media.”
...The Russian campaign during this election season, researchers from both groups say, worked by harnessing the online world’s fascination with “buzzy” content that is surprising and emotionally potent, and tracks with popular conspiracy theories about how secret forces dictate world events.
Some of these stories originated with RT and Sputnik, state-funded Russian information services that mimic the style and tone of independent news organizations yet sometimes include false and misleading stories in their reports, the researchers say. On other occasions, RT, Sputnik and other Russian sites used social-media accounts to amplify misleading stories already circulating online, causing news algorithms to identify them as “trending” topics that sometimes prompted coverage from mainstream American news organizations.
The speed and coordination of these efforts allowed Russian-backed phony news to outcompete traditional news organizations for audience. Some of the first and most alarming tweets after Clinton fell ill at a Sept. 11 memorial event in New York, for example, came from Russian botnets and trolls, researchers found. (She was treated for pneumonia and returned to the campaign trail a few days later.)
This followed a spate of other misleading stories in August about Clinton’s supposedly troubled health. The Daily Beast debunked a particularly widely read piece in an article that reached 1,700 Facebook accounts and was read online more than 30,000 times. But the PropOrNot researchers found that the version supported by Russian propaganda reached 90,000 Facebook accounts and was read more than 8 million times. The researchers said the true Daily Beast story was like “shouting into a hurricane” of false stories supported by the Russians.
This propaganda machinery also helped push the phony story that an anti-Trump protester was paid thousands of dollars to participate in demonstrations, an allegation initially made by a self-described satirist and later repeated publicly by the Trump campaign. Researchers from both groups traced a variety of other false stories — fake reports of a coup launched at Incirlik Air Base in Turkey and stories about how the United States was going to conduct a military attack and blame it on Russia — to Russian propaganda efforts.
From the same article:
One of them was PropOrNot, a group that insists on public anonymity, which issued a report identifying more than 200 websites that, in its view, wittingly or unwittingly published or echoed Russian propaganda. A number of those sites have objected to being included on PropOrNot’s list, and some of the sites, as well as others not on the list, have publicly challenged the group’s methodology and conclusions. The Post, which did not name any of the sites, does not itself vouch for the validity of PropOrNot’s findings regarding any individual media outlet, nor did the article purport to do so. Since publication of The Post’s story, PropOrNot has removed some sites from its list.
And?
Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election, experts say
The issue is less that it's the Russians doing this - frankly, anyone could - but that is is being done and we are utterly unequipt to counter it and instead just deny it because acknowledging these things casts a shadow on the validity of Trump's election. But it's not going to change anything - Trump was elected freely and fairly in an election largely free of fraud. But refusing to acknowledge it's impact means leaving the door open to even worse in the next election cycle.
“They want to essentially erode faith in the U.S. government or U.S. government interests,” said Clint Watts, a fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute who along with two other researchers has tracked Russian propaganda since 2014. “This was their standard mode during the Cold War. The problem is that this was hard to do before social media.”
...The Russian campaign during this election season, researchers from both groups say, worked by harnessing the online world’s fascination with “buzzy” content that is surprising and emotionally potent, and tracks with popular conspiracy theories about how secret forces dictate world events.
Some of these stories originated with RT and Sputnik, state-funded Russian information services that mimic the style and tone of independent news organizations yet sometimes include false and misleading stories in their reports, the researchers say. On other occasions, RT, Sputnik and other Russian sites used social-media accounts to amplify misleading stories already circulating online, causing news algorithms to identify them as “trending” topics that sometimes prompted coverage from mainstream American news organizations.
The speed and coordination of these efforts allowed Russian-backed phony news to outcompete traditional news organizations for audience. Some of the first and most alarming tweets after Clinton fell ill at a Sept. 11 memorial event in New York, for example, came from Russian botnets and trolls, researchers found. (She was treated for pneumonia and returned to the campaign trail a few days later.)
This followed a spate of other misleading stories in August about Clinton’s supposedly troubled health. The Daily Beast debunked a particularly widely read piece in an article that reached 1,700 Facebook accounts and was read online more than 30,000 times. But the PropOrNot researchers found that the version supported by Russian propaganda reached 90,000 Facebook accounts and was read more than 8 million times. The researchers said the true Daily Beast story was like “shouting into a hurricane” of false stories supported by the Russians.
This propaganda machinery also helped push the phony story that an anti-Trump protester was paid thousands of dollars to participate in demonstrations, an allegation initially made by a self-described satirist and later repeated publicly by the Trump campaign. Researchers from both groups traced a variety of other false stories — fake reports of a coup launched at Incirlik Air Base in Turkey and stories about how the United States was going to conduct a military attack and blame it on Russia — to Russian propaganda efforts.
From the same article:
One of them was PropOrNot, a group that insists on public anonymity, which issued a report identifying more than 200 websites that, in its view, wittingly or unwittingly published or echoed Russian propaganda. A number of those sites have objected to being included on PropOrNot’s list, and some of the sites, as well as others not on the list, have publicly challenged the group’s methodology and conclusions. The Post, which did not name any of the sites, does not itself vouch for the validity of PropOrNot’s findings regarding any individual media outlet, nor did the article purport to do so. Since publication of The Post’s story, PropOrNot has removed some sites from its list.
And?
No evidence cellular of Trump colluding with Russia.
No evidence of Obama wiretapping Trump.
Considerable evidence of Russia attempting get to influence our elections.
All from the same sources.
Which is nothing new and nothing we don't do to them.
Not entirely true. It is taken to a new level. Should it be ignored?
I doubt that many of those brushing it under the rug would do so if their candidate had lost and the hacking had released negative info on THEIR candidate.
What's disturbing is not who won or lost but a deliberate attack on our democratic system and an erosion of trust in it.
So fine, say everyone does it. That makes it ok?
Do you believe Russia should be punished somehow while we aren't? Is it wrong when they do it but ok when we do it? Are we going to stop? We aren't. I really don't see how we can be so outraged or pretend this is anything new or unexpected. I don't want to set a precedent that will be used against us. I know we won't stop, so eventually, we are going to be bitten by this as well IMO.
Do you remember the political fall out and embarressment when Snowden's data dump revealed how we spied on allies (and this going back BEFORE Obama)? Everyone knows everyone spies and meddles. When it becomes evident - like it did with Snowden, it provides political ammo for individual countries as well as extreme embarressment. And some of those countries did punish us to the extent they could - even if it was mostly public hazing.
On the other hand - Russia has upped the ante in my opinion. So my question is at what point does it become damaging enough you have to confront it? Social media has hugely changed the playing field for this stuff.
Everyone does it...
Everyone tries to gain nuclear capability - why should we punish them?
Everyone hacks - why should we punish them? We punished China, but you're saying don't do it to Russia?
All we've heard for 2 months is that the Trump campaign colluded with Russian to win the election
Uh --- REEEaaly. Links?
"Hiya!"
Sorry, making up a strawman after the fact is not in the world of "reality".
(remember when the D's talking point that "Trump told Russia to hack Hillary's server"?)
Actually we member when Rump said exactly that.
---- that's not "D's" [sic] -- that's Rump in all his orange. On videotape. Video IS reality.
Now it has become pretty apparent that there was no collusion with Russia, it's become "Oh, No, it's not about Trump!"
Strawman fall down, go boom. Who saw that coming.
We told the Libs all along that there was no evidence of collusion.
Of course you did.
"Uh --- REEEaaly. Links?"
What? Did you not read the LWNJ posts on USMB? My entire post was about what we heard here, including from you.
"Actually we member [sic] when Rump said exactly that."
Please point out just exactly where he told Russia to hack Hillary's server. "if you happen to find" does not an order make. If I asked you that IF you happen to go to the kitchen, would you get me a beer is NOT telling you to get off of your fat ass and go to the kitchen and get me a beer.
all you like, it doesn't go away.If anything he was suggesting that the Russians had already hacked the servers and to release the emails.
Also, a simple question. Just exactly who, or what, did you "member when Rump said exactly that"? Did you cuddle and have a smoke afterwards?
The Ukrainians specifically lied about Manafort and lied about investigating him for corruption.
Politico did an awesome random act of journalism in their investigation about the Ukrainians.
Oddly enough I haven't seen many D's decrying the Ukrainian intervention in the election.
Did the Ukranians hack us?
The only erosion of trust is because of the whining bitching and screaming of the very people that claimed no such thing could happen until they lost and had to have an excuse.No evidence cellular of Trump colluding with Russia.
No evidence of Obama wiretapping Trump.
Considerable evidence of Russia attempting get to influence our elections.
All from the same sources.
Which is nothing new and nothing we don't do to them.
Not entirely true. It is taken to a new level. Should it be ignored?
I doubt that many of those brushing it under the rug would do so if their candidate had lost and the hacking had released negative info on THEIR candidate.
What's disturbing is not who won or lost but a deliberate attack on our democratic system and an erosion of trust in it.
So fine, say everyone does it. That makes it ok?
Do you have proof of these allegations of yours?No evidence cellular of Trump colluding with Russia.
No evidence of Obama wiretapping Trump.
Considerable evidence of Russia attempting get to influence our elections.
All from the same sources.
Which is nothing new and nothing we don't do to them.
Not entirely true. It is taken to a new level. Should it be ignored?
I doubt that many of those brushing it under the rug would do so if their candidate had lost and the hacking had released negative info on THEIR candidate.
What's disturbing is not who won or lost but a deliberate attack on our democratic system and an erosion of trust in it.
So fine, say everyone does it. That makes it ok?
Do you believe Russia should be punished somehow while we aren't? Is it wrong when they do it but ok when we do it? Are we going to stop? We aren't. I really don't see how we can be so outraged or pretend this is anything new or unexpected. I don't want to set a precedent that will be used against us. I know we won't stop, so eventually, we are going to be bitten by this as well IMO.
Do you remember the political fall out and embarressment when Snowden's data dump revealed how we spied on allies (and this going back BEFORE Obama)? Everyone knows everyone spies and meddles. When it becomes evident - like it did with Snowden, it provides political ammo for individual countries as well as extreme embarressment. And some of those countries did punish us to the extent they could - even if it was mostly public hazing.
On the other hand - Russia has upped the ante in my opinion. So my question is at what point does it become damaging enough you have to confront it? Social media has hugely changed the playing field for this stuff.
Everyone does it...
Everyone tries to gain nuclear capability - why should we punish them?
Everyone hacks - why should we punish them? We punished China, but you're saying don't do it to Russia?
What sanctions or punishment did we receive? We got egg on face for influencing our ally's election and spying on our friends. Russia has egg on her face for meddling in an adversary's election. What other penalty would you impose that we would accept applied to us when we get caught?
Actually retard the ONLY proven instance of the States being attacked was by Obama's Homeland Security.Yet not one single ballot vote was forged, changed, or miscounted. So much for election tampering. As for business connections, virtually every American has had some ties to Russia considering that it's not hard to find at least one product/material/service in every single U.S. home. So if we're not talking about election tampering, or business dealings, maybe we could talk about setting aside the desires of the voters in order to please Russian leaders: "Obama tells Russia's Medvedev more flexibility after election"....a deliberate attack on our democratic system...
Related:
Yesterday 6:03pm Donna Brazile Flatly Denies Giving Questions to Hillary Clinton ...amid WikiLeaks revelations appearing to show that she provided the Hillary Clinton campaign with questions she would be asked in a televised CNN town hall, flatly denied Saturday that she had done so.
Mar 17, 2017 Donna Brazile: Russia DNC Hack Played Out Exactly As Hoped Donna Brazile admits she did in fact "share potential town hall topics with the Clinton campaign... ...a mistake I will forever regret."
Sounds like you are engaging in redirection and what about isms.Yet not one single ballot vote was forged, changed, or miscounted. So much for election tampering. As for business connections, virtually every American has had some ties to Russia considering that it's not hard to find at least one product/material/service in every single U.S. home. So if we're not talking about election tampering, or business dealings, maybe we could talk about setting aside the desires of the voters in order to please Russian leaders: "Obama tells Russia's Medvedev more flexibility after election"....a deliberate attack on our democratic system...
Related:
Yesterday 6:03pm Donna Brazile Flatly Denies Giving Questions to Hillary Clinton ...amid WikiLeaks revelations appearing to show that she provided the Hillary Clinton campaign with questions she would be asked in a televised CNN town hall, flatly denied Saturday that she had done so.
Mar 17, 2017 Donna Brazile: Russia DNC Hack Played Out Exactly As Hoped Donna Brazile admits she did in fact "share potential town hall topics with the Clinton campaign... ...a mistake I will forever regret."
Or missing the issue.
This isn't about alleged Trump campaign collusion or vote tampering. It's about a foreign government using illegal hacking in an attempt to influence an election and your hatred of Clinton shouldn't blind you to the real issues here. In fact they even attempted to hack state voting systems. At what point does you decide to take this stuff seriously? When its YOUR candidate? It's not just a partisan matter.
What happens when public trust in our very system is completely eroded? I am not talking about political corruption, but our entire democratic system?
Hmmm. Now that you mention this idea of a foreign country trying ot affect the outcome of a U.S. election, I'm remembering that there actually was this one proven historical case (not Russia) that in fact, iirc was the only foreign country on record that ever made absolutely no effort to affect a U.S. election.It's about a foreign government using illegal hacking in an attempt to influence an election
Wait, I said that I hated Clinton? Ah:your hatred of Clinton
Stories started by the losers the Democrats. Stories started after they INSISTED no such thing could happen before the election when Trump brought it up. All of a sudden they lost and suddenly it was magically true with absolutely no evidence to support the claims.There is no evidence. This was a scam the Democrats desperately needed to shift away from their BS.
I disagree. With Russia's involvement in trying to influence our election, and the fact there are various ties between Russia and Trump officials, it SHOULD be examined. If nothing wrong is found, move on. Just like what SHOULD have been done with Clinton's emails, and what should be done with claims of Obama wiretapping.
But will we move on? Doubt it. There will be fresh hatching of conspiracy theories.
Russia didn't influence our elections. The Democrats acted like jackasses. Clinton has a history. The Democrats stopped paying attention to the states. That's what happened.
What I said was "tried" to.
There is no way of knowing whether or not anything they did influenced anything or to what degree so it's pointless to argue it. But it DID sow chaos, mistrust, and a lot real and fake news that is continuing to play out today. What Russia did to us, a d is doing in European elections should be taken seriously, not blown off.
On what you said about the Dems, I agree, there were many factors at play in this election.
How did it sow mistrust and chaos?
Look at all the stories, including the proliferation of false stories and what people believe vs facts.
There is no credible verifiable evidence that Russia hacked the DNC, In fact knowing what we know now knowing that Obama had Homeland security try to hack at least 3 States information and that the CIA can appear to be anyone they chose to be?The Ukrainians specifically lied about Manafort and lied about investigating him for corruption.
Politico did an awesome random act of journalism in their investigation about the Ukrainians.
Oddly enough I haven't seen many D's decrying the Ukrainian intervention in the election.
Did the Ukranians hack us?
Please help us out w/ a clarification, are you talking about WikiLeaks - The Podesta Emails ?...initial Russian hacking...
The same people who are saying there is no collusion between Trump and Russia also say Russia was behind the hacking.There is no credible verifiable evidence that Russia hacked the DNC, In fact knowing what we know now knowing that Obama had Homeland security try to hack at least 3 States information and that the CIA can appear to be anyone they chose to be?The Ukrainians specifically lied about Manafort and lied about investigating him for corruption.
Politico did an awesome random act of journalism in their investigation about the Ukrainians.
Oddly enough I haven't seen many D's decrying the Ukrainian intervention in the election.
Did the Ukranians hack us?
Why would you believe wikileaks over our own intelligence?Please help us out w/ a clarification, are you talking about WikiLeaks - The Podesta Emails ?...initial Russian hacking...
They say that did not get the emails from the Russians but rather from some guy that also meantioned that Podesta's email password was "password". I've been meaning to log on and see for myself as I understand Podesta still hasn't bothered to change it.
Why would you believe wikileaks over our own intelligence?Please help us out w/ a clarification, are you talking about WikiLeaks - The Podesta Emails ?...initial Russian hacking...
They say that did not get the emails from the Russians but rather from some guy that also meantioned that Podesta's email password was "password". I've been meaning to log on and see for myself as I understand Podesta still hasn't bothered to change it.
What, that Wikileaks lied about the emails not being from the Russian gov't because there's some official U.S. gov't intellegence agency that insists that wikileaks is lying and that they did in fact get the emails form the Russians?...believe wikileaks over our own intelligence?
