More On the "Cuban Twitter" Scam

We mentioned a few days ago the USAID-funded SMS social network that was connecting Cubans against the wishes of the Cuban government. Now Glen Greenwald's The Intercept has more on this kind of back-channel government intervention via what he characterizes as "the Internet propaganda bucket." Advocatus Diaboli (1627651) writes with an excerpt: "These ideas–discussions of how to exploit the internet, specifically social media, to surreptitiously disseminate viewpoints friendly to western interests and spread false or damaging information about targets–appear repeatedly throughout the archive of materials provided by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. Documents prepared by NSA and its British counterpart GCHQ–and previously published by The Intercept as well as some by NBC News–detailed several of those programs, including a unit devoted in part to "discrediting" the agency's enemies with false information spread online.

The documents in the archive show that the British are particularly aggressive and eager in this regard, and formally shared their methods with their U.S. counterparts. One previously undisclosed top-secret document–prepared by GCHQ for the 2010 annual "SIGDEV" gathering of the "Five Eyes" surveillance alliance comprising the UK, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the U.S.–explicitly discusses ways to exploit Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and other social media as secret platforms for propaganda."

Comments

from a year ago

[Anonymous Coward]

and this is from a year ago..

Bolivian President Evo Morales expels USAID, 1 May 2013 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-22371275)

Bolivian President Evo Morales has said he will expel the US Agency for International Development (USAID). Mr Morales accused the agency of seeking to "conspire against" the Bolivian people and his government. US state department spokesman Patrick Ventrell rejected the allegations as "baseless and unfounded".

Re:from a year ago

[bmo]

Patrick Ventrell rejected the allegations as "baseless and unfounded"

Legalese for "true."

--
BMO

Three interesting things

[jodido]

About the US cyberattack on Cuba. First of all, it failed, as every US attack on Cuba has failed. Second, the US puts form over content--the idea that if you get people to follow your Twitter feed sports scores, when you say "OK! Everyone out to the Plaza to overthrow the government!" that hundreds of thousands of people will show up and try to overthrow the government, even if they didn't know they wanted to (which in Cuba most people don't). Third, the continuing destruction of internet trust on the part of the US. And fourth, their willingness to put people at risk without telling them they're putting them at risk.

Re:Three interesting things

[Erikderzweite]

The real question is, to what extent was the US involved in other countries? Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, Turkey, Ukraine? Different counties, same scenario. Social media play a major role at the beginning and during each uprising.

Which also raises the question whether blocking social media is an act of censorship or an attempt to neutralize foreign involvement in internal affairs.

Re:Three interesting things

[Erikderzweite]

Please... I lived it. But the situation is a bit different here: radio free Europe, Voice of America, BBC etc. were mass media, they claimed higher ground and freedom from government censorship, but they still had owners, countries of origin and so on.

Social networks are controlled differently, the agents there pose as common people, changing and influencing the opinion of those who read but doesn't post (i.e. the majority of users). Often post from social networks are used in the western media to form an opinion about the situation in a country. And information is a very powerful weapon, see Iraq. And the best thing about it: zero credibility. Remember Amina Arraf? The Syrian lesbian blogger who was arrested by the government. Real name: Tom MacMaster, US citizen. For quite some time Arraf was a widely cited symbol of the Syrian rebellion against tyranny. The facts from the Syrian government that such person does not exist were ignored by the media. And that was the doing of a single person. Now imagine the organization behind it, say, NED. Zero credibility, free to invent facts and even a discovery of a hoax will not reverse the already formed opinion: a brief admission at worst: the media don't like admitting own mistakes.

Re:Yawn

[Anonymous Coward]

This is just a mountain made out of a molehill by leftists who are fans of the government of Cuba and don't like when Western governments try to undermine it. I have news for them: doing things like this is the intelligence agencies' *job*. They're supposed to spy; that's why they're called spy agencies, and Cuba couldn't be a more deserving target.

I have news for you: USAID is *not* an intelligence agency. From their website under "What We Do":

• "USAID is the lead U.S. Government agency that works to end extreme global poverty and enable resilient, democratic societies to realize their potential."

For a second, I thought you might've simply posted in the wrong thread...but you didn't, did you. So you ARE an idiot.

Re:Snowden's leaks has gone off the rails

[SpankiMonki]

Remember when Snowden's leaks were about blowing the whistle on illegal wiretapping of American citizens? Does anyone else feel like he's long lost all legitimacy?

This "Cuban Twitter" kerfuffle was exposed by the Associated Press. It has nothing to do with Snowden or the NSA.

Re:Sneaky.

[Erikderzweite]

Reminds me of a map about the Maidan tweets here: http://www.ibtimes.com/ukraine...

One may wonder, how many of those UK and US tweets were from Ukrainians living in these countries (US has a rather large Ukrainian diaspora, the UK doesn't) and how many were associated with intelligence agencies. Interesting are the blips on the map from Bahrain at the crucial moments.

Re:Yawn

[khasim]

This is just a mountain made out of a molehill by leftists who are fans of the government of Cuba ...

False dichotomy. Rejecting A does not mean accepting B.

... and don't like when Western governments try to undermine it.

See above.

I have news for them: doing things like this is the intelligence agencies' *job*.

Just because someone is paid to do something does not mean that anyone has to support that.

They're supposed to spy; that's why they're called spy agencies, and Cuba couldn't be a more deserving target.

Since Cuba is not a threat to the USofA in any way that statement is incorrect. There are many ways Cuba could be "a more deserving target".

If Cuba doesn't do such things itself, it's only because of lack of budget in these post-Soviet days, not lcak of scruples.

Circular reasoning. And you even admit that Cuba is not doing the same to the USofA.

But I wouldn't like it if Cuba dropped bombs on us either, yet I'm not foolish enough to say that it's immoral to drop bombs on another country.

That entirely depends upon how YOU define YOUR "morality".

Re: Snowden's leaks has gone off the rails

[heypete]

Do I think he's lost legitimacy? No.

At the very start he turned over all his data to a few journalists (Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, etc.) and they are the ones who choose to publish articles based on the data he gave to them. Snowden has said he doesn't retain any of the documents or data himself, and has no control over what is published or not. That's entirely up to the journalists.

Re:What does it mean to be British?

[ShieldW0lf]

Let everyone speak, but control the podium supply. Make podiums expensive, but give them away free to those saying what you want to be heard. Use this to control the discussion. Give the illusion that every position you think is important is supported by a rational majority and opposed by a fringe of maniacs. If a subject isn't important to your agenda but is contentious, keep it constantly in the public sphere and use it to keep people divided against each other. Say as little as you can yourself.

That's what it means to be English.

Re:Yawn

[dryeo]

I'd rather live in Cuba then some of Americas right wing allies such as Saudi Arabia or their right wing puppet countries such as Haiti. Now you might look at Saudi Arabia as a libertarian right wing paradise where the citizens don't pay taxes and can do what ever they want as long as they follow the social mores which comes naturally but I don't like the slavery. And of course in Haiti you're free to struggle to get a job for $3 a day, save and become rich but the truth is it is hell on Earth for most of its citizens, but they do enable your underwear to be slightly cheaper.