Effort to Expose Russia's 'Troll Army' Draws Vicious Retaliation
Source: New York Times
HELSINKI, Finland Seeking to shine some light into the dark world of Internet trolls, a journalist with Finlands national broadcaster asked members of her audience to share their experience of encounters with Russias troll army, a raucous and often venomous force of online agitators. The response was overwhelming, though not in the direction that the journalist, Jessikka Aro, had hoped.
As she expected, she received some feedback from people who had clashed with aggressively pro-Russian voices online. But she was taken aback, and shaken, by a vicious retaliatory campaign of harassment and insults against her and her work by those same pro-Russian voices. Everything in my life went to hell thanks to the trolls, said Ms. Aro, a 35-year-old investigative reporter with the social media division of Finlands state broadcaster, Yle Kioski.
...
But pro-Russian voices have become such a noisy and disruptive presence that both NATO and the European Union have set up special units to combat what they see as a growing threat not only to civil discourse but to the well-being of Europes democratic order and even to its security.
In response to her reporting, pro-Russian activists in Helsinki organized a protest outside the headquarters of Yle, accusing it of being a troll factory itself. Only a handful of people showed up. At the same time, Ms. Aro has been peppered with abusive emails, vilified as a drug dealer on social media sites and mocked as a delusional bimbo in a music video posted on YouTube. There are so many layers of fakery you get lost, said Ms. Aro, who was awarded the Finnish Grand Prize for Journalism in March.
Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/31/world/europe/russia-finland-nato-trolls.html?_r=0
The Russian gov is out-of-control with their thuggery & cyberbullying
Lodestar
(2,388 posts)Last edited Tue May 31, 2016, 09:28 AM - Edit history (1)
the others. Apparently, in this country, it is perfectly legal to hire "trolls" to
infest a site like DU, for instance.
https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)What are topics those "hired trolls" talk about on DU?
smiley
(1,432 posts)DetlefK
(16,423 posts)MisterFred
(525 posts)This is a well-established practice. It's not something new or unknown. Companies have been hiring people to edit wikipedia for well over a decade now. But that's just the most famous example of hiring people to alter opinion on the internet. The scary part is the upcoming automation.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)d_legendary1
(2,586 posts)Correct the Records Barrier Breakers project boasts in a press release that it has already addressed more than 5,000 people that have personally attacked Hillary Clinton on Twitter. The PAC released this on Thursday.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/21/hillary-pac-spends-1-million-to-correct-commenters-on-reddit-and-facebook.html
Money has been spent online to make HRC look good. It no wonder that there has been a spike in brock-puppet activity.
certainot
(9,090 posts)probably a lot of that coming from troll factories hired by rove and co. the foreign ones would be less likely to be exposed and be a lot cheaper, with less chance of whistleblowers.
where dems for both candidates are really dumb is ignoring a much bigger problem considering this simple math:
at a cheap $1000/hr x 15hrs/day x 1200 stations, rw talk radio is worth 4.68 BIL$/ year or 390MIL$ /month FREE for coordinated global warming denial, pro republican wall st think tank propaganda, free market deregulation bullshit, swiftboating, and the hate and fear used to get people to vote republican.
that's what bush cheney rove used to lie us into iraq, including with paid callers, and are now using to excuse everything trump and attack hilllary and bernie.
even more dumb is that at least 1/4 of those stations, such as 270 limbaugh stations, piggyback and are endorsed by the sports teams/logos of these 90 universities.
how many bernie and hillary supporters/activists are students at these universities, letting their activism on all major issues be yelled over by a few hundred ignorant racist global warming-denying liberal-hating professional liars?
ALABAMA 8 Auburn 3, Alabama 2, Southern Alabama 2, Troy 1
ARIZONA 2 Arizona St. 1, Arizona 1
ARKANSAS 3 Arkansas 3
CALIFORNIA 5 San Jose State 2, USC 2, Fresno St. 1
COLORADO 4 Air Force 2, Colorado 1, Colorado State 1
CONNECTICUT 1 Connecticut 1
FLORIDA 20 Florida 10, Florida St. 4 Miami 2, South Florida 2, Central Florida 2
GEORGIA 14 Georgia 7, Georgia Tech 5, Georgia Southern 2
IDAHO 7 Boise St. 4, Idaho 3
ILLINOIS 7 Illinois 7
INDIANA 11 Notre Dame 6, Purdue 4, Indiana 1
IOWA 5 Iowa 4, Iowa St. 1
KANSAS 4 Kansas St. 2, Kansas 1, Wichita St. 1
KENTUCKY 3 Louisville 2, Kentucky 1
LOUSIANA 3 LSU 2, La.-Monroe 1
MARYLAND 2 Maryland 2
MASSACHUSETTS 1 Boston College 1
MICHIGAN 19 Michigan St. 11, Michigan 7, Western Michigan 1
MINNESOTA 4 Minnesota 4
MISSISSIPPI 6 Mississippi St. 3, Mississippi 2, Southern Miss 1
MISSOURI 6 Missouri 6
NEBRASKA 6 Nebraska 6
NEVADA 1 Nevada 1
NEW JERSEY 2 Rutgers 1, Seton Hall 1
NEW MEXICO 3 New Mexico 2, New Mexico St. 1
NEW YORK 7 Syracuse 6, Army 1
NORTH CAROLINA 16 North Carolina 8, North Carolina State 3, Duke 3, East Carolina 2
OHIO 10 Ohio St. 6, Toledo 1, Dayton 1, Bowling Green 1, Xavier 1
OKLAHOMA 5 Oklahoma St. 3, Oklahoma 1, Oral Roberts 1
OREGON 12 Oregon St. 7, Oregon 5
PENNSYLVANIA 14 Penn St. 11, Pittsburgh 2, Temple 1
SOUTH CAROLINA 4 South Carolina 2, Clemson 2
TENNESSEE 7 Tennessee 4, Memphis 3
TEXAS 16 Texas A&M 9, Texas Tech 4, Texas 1, Texas Christian 1, Baylor 1
UTAH 1 Utah St. 1
VIRGINIA 6 Virginia Tech 5, Virginia 1
WASHINGTON 6 Washington 5, Washington St. 1
WEST VIRGINIA 2 West Virginia 1, Marshall 1
WISCONSIN 4 Wisconsin 4
d_legendary1
(2,586 posts)And why should anyone spend money to clear their name against propaganda? If anything its the paid spreading of propaganda to make sure that the message that they want heard makes it to you and me. Now a days we have the internet to find information assuming you can use google properly. There's no need to spend that kind of cash to post on places like D.U. to "clear" a candidate's name.
Hillary by no means is a saint, but lying to clean up her image only makes her look desperate.
certainot
(9,090 posts)if i was a candidate getting hammered by a republican russian troll operation i'd probably feel the need to pay someone to counter it.
when all of a sudden a bunch of people join a liberal blog and post multiple daily well written long hillary hit pieces, that makes me suspicious
i realize there are bernie supporters who don't want to vote for hillary but once the primary is over if they continue to explain why they can't vote for her they might as well be republican trolls.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)d_legendary1
(2,586 posts)It'll get your message across spamming the internet with the message you want people to hear. Plus its not like these jobs pay a decent wage or benefits. Its just side money for people who can do it.
Lodestar
(2,388 posts)TipTok
(2,474 posts)User: Hillaryisthebestevereverever
Joined FEB 2016
Several hundred posts all multiple paragraphs in length and only on one subject.
No one is speaking in terms of certainty but we don't have to bury heads in sand either.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)The corollary being that some Sanders supporters are also doing precisely the same are trolls as well, yes?
MisterFred
(525 posts)I'd be more likely to believe that the Clinton campaign has hired internet marketing firms that would use paid commentators though, because of the much higher number of outlets purchased by Clinton-aligned groups. Examples: the Onion, Blue Nation Review. (In fact, I don't think Sanders-aligned groups have purchased any media outlets.)
Response to DetlefK (Reply #5)
smiley This message was self-deleted by its author.
Lodestar
(2,388 posts)One of the many pressing stories that remains to be told from the Snowden archive is how western intelligence agencies are attempting to manipulate and control online discourse with extreme tactics of deception and reputation-destruction. Its time to tell a chunk of that story, complete with the relevant documents.
Over the last several weeks, I worked with NBC News to publish a series of articles about dirty trick tactics used by GCHQs previously secret unit, JTRIG (Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group). These were based on four classified GCHQ documents presented to the NSA and the other three partners in the English-speaking Five Eyes alliance. Today, we at the Intercept are publishing another new JTRIG document, in full, entitled The Art of Deception: Training for Online Covert Operations.
By publishing these stories one by one, our NBC reporting highlighted some of the key, discrete revelations: the monitoring of YouTube and Blogger, the targeting of Anonymous with the very same DDoS attacks they accuse hacktivists of using, the use of honey traps (luring people into compromising situations using sex) and destructive viruses. But, here, I want to focus and elaborate on the overarching point revealed by all of these documents: namely, that these agencies are attempting to control, infiltrate, manipulate, and warp online discourse, and in doing so, are compromising the integrity of the internet itself.
cont'd
https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/
Lodestar
(2,388 posts)Of course, the same type of online patrolling by the government is also happening in the U.S., particularly from the CIA and its infamous In-Q-Tel program. At a 2012 summit, former CIA director David Petraeus essentially admitted that the CIA has a covert online presence that it uses not only for data mining purposes but also to infiltrate online conversations for the purpose of protecting "national security" interests. Such interests, it turns out, include disrupting conversations that discuss topics like 9/11 truth, for instance, or U.S. involvement in giving weapons to Syrian rebels.
According to Occupy Corporatism, the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA), which was recently exposed by American hero and whistleblower Edward Snowden for its illegal surveillance programs, has devised a training program that literally scouts out hackers from American colleges and universities and recruits them to work for the government. Among the many duties sought from those enrolled in the National Centers of Academic Excellence in the Cyber Operations Program are "collection, exploitation, and response" activities to take place in the online environment.
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/042093_internet_trolls_chat_rooms_federal_government.html#ixzz4AErVTMW4
http://www.naturalnews.com/042093_internet_trolls_chat_rooms_federal_government.html
Gman
(24,780 posts)You have a very narrow world view.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)Gman
(24,780 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I pretend objective evidence is stifling as well... it protects us from rational thought.
uhnope
(6,419 posts)"apparently" "it is legal" "to hire" ... what the heck are you talking about.
Interesting that you would immediately throw this confusing distraction in on the subject of Russian trolls in the media
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)MisterFred
(525 posts)Next you'll tell me that companies don't hire people to edit their wikipedia pages!
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)trolls at DU.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Do they work for free?
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)When really, it's a zit on the ass of the liberal political world. It has zero real world impact.
uhnope
(6,419 posts)Lodestar
(2,388 posts)Of course, the same type of online patrolling by the government is also happening in the U.S., particularly from the CIA and its infamous In-Q-Tel program. At a 2012 summit, former CIA director David Petraeus essentially admitted that the CIA has a covert online presence that it uses not only for data mining purposes but also to infiltrate online conversations for the purpose of protecting "national security" interests. Such interests, it turns out, include disrupting conversations that discuss topics like 9/11 truth, for instance, or U.S. involvement in giving weapons to Syrian rebels.
According to Occupy Corporatism, the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA), which was recently exposed by American hero and whistleblower Edward Snowden for its illegal surveillance programs, has devised a training program that literally scouts out hackers from American colleges and universities and recruits them to work for the government. Among the many duties sought from those enrolled in the National Centers of Academic Excellence in the Cyber Operations Program are "collection, exploitation, and response" activities to take place in the online environment.
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/042093_internet_trolls_chat_rooms_federal_government.html#ixzz4AErVTMW4
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Lodestar
(2,388 posts)Do suppose one of those corporate or government owned resources
would be MORE accurate.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)You automatically lose the argument when citing them.
uhnope
(6,419 posts)awesome, thank you
certainot
(9,090 posts)and it would be naive and trollish to suggest the predominant internet trolling was coming from the hillary camp, or any, for that matter.
the main trolling i've seen on progressive sites is trolls pretending to be bernie supporters, streams of well written and frequent diaries repeating the usual rw bullshit about the clintons repeated for 25 years on rw radio and later on fox, from writers with very few comments.
i suspect the clinton social media effort was to counter some of that. that's the kind of shit that a russian troll factory would do for rove and co. i haven't seen anything that looks like and that makes the most sense by far - typical rovian tactic to suppress votes. and it makes a lot of sense that with all their money the republican forces of evil are hiring those foreign troll factories.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)DetlefK
(16,423 posts)"Bombard the readers with bullshit, overload them, confuse them, until their attention drops. Then slip in half-truths."
For example: RT-articles read pretty normal on the surface... and then they slip in nuggets like a whistleblower revealing that US-generals are actually clinically insane ("psychopaths" or that ISIS is actually working for the US.
Response to DetlefK (Reply #2)
Turbineguy This message was self-deleted by its author.
MisterFred
(525 posts)Tell me a news source that doesn't often lie to people...
It's no worse than gaining information from any other source with an obvious bias. It's really not any different than parsing information delivered by CNN or Fox News.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)RT is more the equivalent of the Voice of America or some other government-sponsored propaganda outlet. Whatever you think of CNN or even Faux, they are NOT government enterprises.
RT isn't just a corporate news source with an agenda. It is a government mouth piece engaged in shaping public opinion to meet the end goals of an actual government. It has more than a bias and point of view. It is part of an orchestrated and coordinated effort to meet specific political ends on an international scale.
MisterFred
(525 posts)But frankly, I don't really care about that. Privately-funded propaganda is not inherently superior to government-funded propaganda.
metroins
(2,550 posts)Our MSM propaganda is like having allergies(CNN) or the flu(Fox).
RT is in the same league as Alex Jones and is akin to having ebola or some other extremely deadly disease.
RT is on it's own level of bs.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)Have you tried
http://www.spiegel.de/international/ (though a little bit too "both-sides-do-it" for my taste)
http://international.sueddeutsche.de/
http://www.dw.com/de/themen/s-9077
http://www.euronews.com/
http://www.aljazeera.com/
http://www.thelocal.com/contentmarketing/#!//&lang=en
MisterFred
(525 posts)Though my favorite is the Guardian, with the BBC probably a good second.
Frankly though, al-Jazeera is a good outlet to compare RT to. They both have pretty blatant biases, yet many or most of their stories are high quality and quite worth someone's time. al-Jazeera is better, especially for world news, but if you forswear RT because of its biased coverage and can't see that often happens with al-Jazeera...
Lodestar
(2,388 posts)I've listed several sources in this thread. Take it or leave it. Doesn't matter to me.
Why don't you prove the government is NOT spying, infiltrating, hiring trolls on the
internet. Silly, of course they do.
And then there are privately hired interrupters like Hillary's PAC hired.
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/4/21/1518537/-Clinton-SuperPac-Admits-to-Paying-Internet-Trolls
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)See? You try to push a rhetorical point on me I didn't make. And I push right back with exactly the same tactic.
Try again.
Thanks for the link.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)Europeans should probably ip block any emails from Russia.
iandhr
(6,852 posts)FSogol
(45,579 posts)Democat
(11,617 posts)There are some long time trolls that never seem to get banned.
Yeah. With some you just wait for them to cross a line. Like one I recall posting and defending an RT article of which the sole source they used was an American Holocaust denier.
Response to uhnope (Original post)
Post removed
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)ish of the hammer
(444 posts)thanks for proving my point.
ish of the hammer
(444 posts)much like our own.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)ish of the hammer
(444 posts)they have elections in russia also, so what? it's an oligarchy just the same as in the U.S. of A. you get to vote on
people picked by the oligarchy and you think it's democracy. what protections do you have from the Patriot Act?
does the constitution protect your person and your privacy? lets ask the NSA, shall we?
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)your dear old Dad & soviet troops took back to Russia? All of it doesn't belong to you.
ish of the hammer
(444 posts)rockets. the nazis killed 60 million russians and you're crying about some loot. read some fucking history, sunny boy.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)Mazal Tov bagger.
ish of the hammer
(444 posts)have a nice day.
uhnope
(6,419 posts)Sunlei
(22,651 posts)require any citizen of russia who wanted to use online media to register their entire personal information with the government first?