Does anyone still think it's silly to think astroturfers were paid to disrupt hc debates on DU?

[rudy23]

They used the exact same tactics--ad hominems, accusations of "whining", until a thread was toploaded with bickering. That's how I started to identify them, and identify their talking point at the time---which was to go on a Dennis Kucinich bashing campaign.

I got a lot of responses like "Why would a big company waste their time on here?" To which I responded, "Well, this is probably just one pit stop on their list."

Even though I've been offered a job as a paid blogger doing viral marketing, some people would still dispute their existence. I wonder if any of those people will reconsider, in light of the leaked memo that shows that insurance companies are paying to instruct people to disrupt any intelligent debate on healthcare.

I really hope that will cast some light on some of the paid bloggers who have been disrupting DU, and the army of unrec-ers who are knocking these healthcare debates off course.

[ingac70]

1. ...

show them this....

http://www.cyberjournalist.net/wsj-nearly-2-million-bloggers-get-paid-to-blog/

[havocmom]

7. Thank you for that link

It's a keeper!

[scheming daemons]

2. I bashed Kucinich... and I'm 100% IN FAVOR of Health Care overhaul and the President's plan

Bashing Kucinich is not the same as being a "paid blogger".


Some of us simply realize that Dennis is too far out of the mainstream to ever be taken seriously. He's our Ron Paul.

[rudy23]

4. I'm not always crazy about him, but the "attack posts" were over the top for DU

It was a dead giveaway. They had to attack any support for HR676 by comparison to what we will get. Kucinich was also right out front criticizing the Blue Dogs and the compromises they wanted to make.

People were attacking Kucinich like he just killed their dog. I get that he's not everyone's cup of tea, and not liking him does not make one a paid blogger. It's just that those vicious ad hominems stuck out like a sore thumb to me. Especially at this time--it's not like it's still the primaries and he's calling out your favorite candidate or anything. The timing and tone were just way off.

[lumberjack_jeff]

10. There are times that the rule against "calling out" is counterproductive.

Without a tangible anecdote, people have free rein to make wild accusations and all-encompassing generalities based on strawmen.

Not everyone who supports HR3200 because HR676 stands no chance is a paid disruptor.

[rudy23]

11. Speaking of strawmen--I never said it was "everybody"

Just the ones who were making the over the top ad hominems, who seemed like they were intentionally disrupting the debate. It stuck out like a sore thumb, to me, and I've seen my fair share of nasty debates on here over the years.

[rudy23]

12. But I see what you're saying--because I can't name names, it seems like I'm calling out everybody

It makes me seem like I'm painting with a broader brush than I intend to.

I really wish I could post a list, believe me. Look at the link I provided, and see who squawks the loudest about being called out. That's a good clue.

[lumberjack_jeff]

13. I'm pretty sure that the main disruptor of that thread is not paid to be an asshole.

He appears to enjoy it, on a wide range of topics.

[rudy23]

14. I hear you loud and clear.

Yes, people like that do muddy up my hypothesis. My point remains. The insurance industry has plenty of $ to hire young people at $9-$12 an hour to go around to political websites and try to stir shit up all day.

[lurky]

6. There is disagreement, then there is disruption.

There are people who engage in disruptive behavior to try to poison the debate and make certain topics not even worth posting about.

The most common pattern seems to be the ad hominem attack, where an "issue troll" hangs out on a thread and insults anyone who posts a viewpoint they find objectionable. When people inevitably take the bait, the thread degenerates into a shouting match and gets locked or becomes totally unreadable. This also serves to intimidate people from posting on certain topics (see guns, Israel, 9/11, and let's not forget the primaries).

A more subtle pattern seems to be to change the subject. Someone will sometimes take extreme exception to something the poster says that is totally tangential to the topic. For instance, if somebody mentions that we should have "national healthcare" like Canada, somebody else will turn the whole thread into a nasty argument about whether Canada's single payer system is really "national" health or something else.

It would not surprise me if these were established strategies that people got training on in order to derail discussions. I don't know if these "issue trolls" are paid or volunteers, but they have predictable patterns and seem to be quite well organized.

[rudy23]

9. This is exactly what I'm talking about. You articulated it better than I could.

Yes, it seemed like their strategy was to disrupt, rather than just presenting opposing views.

In this way, they seemed "coached", and aroused my suspicions. Especially given the intensity of the healthcare debate, and the amount of money we know is behind the corporate side of it.

[AspenRose]

16. There's LTTE campaigns, too

The tentacles are spread far and wide

[SleeplessInAlabama]

28. "Out of the mainstream" remains a phrase to marginalize those whose opinions are not to be heard.

Dennis Kucinich wouldn't be out of the mainstream in most European countries, and maybe slightly left of mainstream in Canada.

Yes, he'd probably still be seen as a little strange even though he claims to have seen a UFO, which is, if you use UFO as its actual meaning, not impossible. Bill Richardson is idolized by many on DU and he's made the same claims. I probably wouldn't comment publicly about it, but then again I've never seen a UFO.

He remains, however, only so far outside of the agenda of the political machine in America to ever be taken seriously.

[H2O Man]

3. I'd think that

there would likely be more who are unpaid and unintelligent, but intent upon disrupting.

[meegbear]

5. Links?

I wanna see some of these (and see if they got TS'd).

[rudy23]

8. I only have links to my OP's on this, but you can find some trolls from their responses.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6022082

I wish I'd saved some of the offending OP's that made me suspicious about this activity. They usually came out of the woodwork anytime I tried to call them out.

[BlooInBloo]

15. I don't think the "paid" part has been proven, but it's definitely not silly.

[girl gone mad]

17. They were all over the place when TARP was being proposed.

I actually caught a couple of them because they left information in social networking sites and personal blogs (which they had linked to) identifying themselves as finance lobbyists.

[wroberts189]

18. They are here....

I would bet my marbles the health insurance companies are posting here. (by me)


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6045745


made it to the greatest page.

[rudy23]

19. Wow, thanks! I never saw that. It was right from around the time I started posting on the subject.

I think they were in full force here in late June/early July. They've backed off a bit, but they'll be back.

[wroberts189]

22. They are like cockroaches ..they scatter in the light.

Or like spiders... freezing up and not moving.


Thx for the Thx :)

[bvar22]

20. There are undoubtedly paid disruptors (corporate astroturfers) at DU....

OTOH, there are some people who just do it for FREE out of dedication to a "Centrist" ideology....an ideology that has NO "Ideals".

"Centrism"...because its so easy!
You don't have to STAND for ANYTHING, and get to insult those who do!
:party:

[TheBigotBasher]

21. The politicians posing as the centre are not centre

far from it, blue ogs are to the right of Conservatives in Canada, UK and Germany. "Centre" Republicans would be to those parties far right and the rest of the GOP have no political equal. Centrist Democrats should be called Right wing Democrats.

[wroberts189]

23. Ya know thats the best definition of "centrism" I have ever heard.

Until now ..I honestly did not really know what a centrist was.

To me ..there was no gray in this area ..you are either right or wrong.

And the right is always wrong.



Why conservatives are always WRONG

http://conservativesarealwayswrong.googlepages.com/

[booley]

24. Why pay for free milk?

I do think it silly since the right echo chamber can get these people to do this for free.

You don't pay slaves, even ones that don't know they are slaves.

[rudy23]

25. It's a little tougher to get people who can pass for Democrats to do it.

That's where I think the money comes in.

[booley]

26. Pass for Democrats?

That would require what exactly?

Speaking without drool?

I am just saying there are plenty of people who will happily sell their own mothers if you can convince them it fits their ideology.

[ThoughtCriminal]

27. I've been accused of being a paid Soros disrupter (not here!)

It was really pretty funny. This was on a hobby board with a small group of Freeps who insisted on using at a soap box. I never started a political thread there and had hundreds of posts directly related to the hobby. Yet because I occasionally would post a response to their insane rants, at least one of them was CONVINCED that I was a "Paid Soros Troll".

Eventually the moderators had to close the open forum and ban off-topic discussion to get rid the morons. The wing-nuts started their own little echo chamber in some circle of hell. I never bothered to look to see how that was going.