Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Says 126 Million Americans May Have Seen Russia-Linked Political Posts (reuters.com)
Facebook said on Monday that Russia-based operatives published about 80,000 posts on the social network over a two-year period in an effort to sway U.S. politics and that about 126 million Americans may have seen the posts during that time. Reuters reports: Facebook's latest data on the Russia-linked posts - possibly reaching around half of the U.S. population of voting age - far exceeds the company's previous disclosures. It was included in written testimony provided to U.S. lawmakers, and seen by Reuters, ahead of key hearings with social media and technology companies about Russian meddling in elections on Capitol Hill this week. Twitter separately has found 2,752 accounts linked to Russian operatives, a source familiar with the company's written testimony said. That estimate is up from a tally of 201 accounts that Twitter reported in September. Google, owned by Alphabet, said in a statement on Monday it had found $4,700 in Russia-linked ad spending during the 2016 U.S. election cycle, and that it would build a database of election ads. Facebook's general counsel, Colin Stretch, said in the written testimony that the 80,000 posts from Russia's Internet Research Agency were a tiny fraction of content on Facebook, equal to one out of 23,000 posts.
I am beyond sick and tired of Slashdot trying to push the "Russians influenced the election!" BS that the left has been pushing. It's fake. It never happened.
Who cares if they bought ads on Facebook? Does it matter? Does anyone seriously think people voted for Trump because they saw ads from Russians?!
The thing that caused Hillary to lose more than anything else is likely her shady dealings involving her email server and the FBI "investigation" into it. An investigation that could still be restarted as it's becoming more and more clear that one campaign did, in fact, have dealings with Russia: the Democrat's.
was that it wasn't covered by existing disclosure rules. So folks could pour money into it with impunity.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
My virgin eyes!!!! Why Facebook why didn't you protect me from the interwebs. I so was going to vote for Hillary until those adds showed me that Trump was a kind hearted, attractive, beautiful haired, honest, intelligent, and amazing guy. I was duped.
126 million accounts != 126 million individual users.
Considering over 90 million eligible voters never bothered to,
in fact the US experienced voter turnout @ 20 year low,
(even if) 126 million individual users != 126 million voters.
And considering those 18 and otherwise ineligible to vote,
(even if) 126 million voters != 126 million votes.
So this # of accounts seems rather meaningless.
The real question is how many unique views were served for each ad and how many ads there were total. 126 million people seeing one silly racist political meme one random afternoon is nothing to panic about, and certainly they'll try to spin this revelation as nothing more than that. But 126 million people being immersed daily into an advertising environment that's completely saturated with unregulated foreign propaganda, rubber-stamped with approval by an ostensibly loyal, United States citizen-owned publicly traded corporation... now that my friends, that right there is how you sew destruction throughout the minds of an entire population. That is how you fundamentally pervert the perception of reality of an entire social class. That is how you sever friendships and turn families against each other. That is how you topple a government. That is how you start a civil war. That is something worth panicking about.
Or maybe you have been tainted but you're just too stupid to trace cause to effect. Or maybe you're just one of them.
First, they tried to say the advertisements promoted Potus Trump, now "Divisive" ads. Divisive is code for Hillary and Bernie.
And if we are only talking Divisive advertisements, what about ShareBlue or Correct the record? How many millions did these companies pay to change social media, 50 Million? 100 Million? How much did the DNC and related political pacs pay, 500 Million?
And 80k from Russians is a big issue vs a billion?
Wag the dog indeed. If you are still blaming Russia for Trumps win, you still haven't learned. Nobody liked Hillary and Bernie only ran as a Democrat to get on the stage.
This two party system is a problem with all the money is funneled into 2 people. WTF, All that money into 2 parties. When vary widely on so many issues, 2 parties don't cover everyone. I have no idea how, but wish we had a multiparty system to stop this "us vs them" tribal cultural war. We got Democrats voting Republican for financial issues, and Republicans voting democrat for social issues. Libertarians, Socialist, Communists, etc, its a clusterfuck.
STFU we know they're paying you too.
Mark Zuckerberg trolls . . . you!
That's how you sell bubble gum. Nobody changed their mind on who to vote for based on a facebook ad. If you think someone did, prove it.
Those pesky russians are smart! They can change an election outcome with just an ad! I wonder why US politicians did not think about doing the same.
The white-supremacist meme that the unarmed black men shot by the police deserved to be shot by the police?
Or the BLM meme that the unarmed black men were shot by racist cops?
But that the cops are racists may encourage the white supremacists because they want the cops to be racists who shoot black persons for no apparent reason?
Or the BLM view that the cops are indeed racists despite their denials because of the white supremacists wanting the cops to be racist?
Clearly we need a Federal Fact-Checking Department, to let us know what is real and what is fake.
Or do we just have to take their word that they've fortuitously found exactly what they set out to look for, from people who are supposedly foreign operatives but apparently are too dumb to cover their tracks?
Russians? I am mad at the Germans too! They are all strange-talkin' ferriners.
This proves how powerful Facebook is. They wanted Trump elected, and they got it.
if you don't use Facebook.
Or anyplace else if you have an adblocker.
It either shows how incompetent and her campaign was or how horrible of a message she actually had. Either way, she had no place being elected as President. A decent candidate with a coherent message would have wiped the floor with Trump.
This is FB advertising the cost effectiveness of placing inexpensive ads on their service. And they're doing it "for free" by "revealing" the information to a willing press.
"SEE HOW MANY IMPRESSIONS RUSSIA GOT FOR ONLY $[insert current estimate here]. YOUR AD COULD DO AS WELL!"
These ads are getting more play now than they got before, most likely.
People who think Trump is about to be arrested any day now for treason are literally mentally ill. You need clinical treatment. I am not joking or being rude. This is a serious comment.
You know what? I don't remember seeing any political ads on Facebook at all. I'm sure there were some; but who even notices ads any more? How much influence do you really think a handful of Facebook ads really brought in such a contentious election?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
So that's why I started drinking a liter of Vodka a day!
Go suck Hittler's petrified cock you Putin cum hole.
I remember learning about slab allocation on slashdot. Who let you in? I bet you are proud of yourself.
"an advertising environment that's completely saturated with unregulated foreign propaganda, rubber-stamped with approval by an ostensibly loyal, United States citizen-owned publicly traded corporation."
So, if Facebook ads effect non-US politics, it's all fine, because "USA, fuck yeah!"
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
If you don't think fake news changed the outcome of the election, it's because you're inside the bubble. So the proof is irrelevant, I couldn't convince you the sky is blue if Fox and Friends told you it wasn't.
What an incredible moron you are. You post those links trying to mock the right wing sites that posted it, but THEY'RE NOT THE ONES WHO SAID IT! It's Michael Moore and your team of Social Justice Ninjas who think the best way to combat speech they don't like is to burn down your local college. Your own deranged brethren are the joke!
Still, super saiyins are pretty tough. If they have even *one* of those it could wreck the entire planet.
It's worth getting worried about.
Whatever you do, don't blame the (heinously unpopular for years & years before the election) losing candidate for losing the election. Blame Canada instead!
Personally I think it's a-okay that B. Clinton got lots of blowjobs in the White House. Go him!
The reason I don't like Bill Clinton is that he did his very best to dismantle what little industry remained in America, and mostly succeeded at that despicable endeavor.
My neighbor's dead dog voted for Gary Johnson. Just sayin'...
Or a lying evil person.
Hmm... :-)
That doesn't sounds very good in english.
Maybe you wanted to actually say: lzhivyy, zloy chelovek
1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
I see Fox and Russians have converged on "blame Hillary Clinton" as the deflection
Wait. How is identifying the fact that she was a terrible candidate who lost the election a "deflection?" The people trying to deflect are the ones implying that it was the RUSSIANS that made her call half the country deplorable people. That it was the RUSSIANS who somehow made her forget to even set foot in states like Wisconsin even once. That it was the RUSSIANS who somehow made her look her supporters in the eye and lie to them for a year straight about her conduct as Secretary of State. You're confusing "deflection" with "pointing out the facts." The Democrats have been trying to deflect reality ever since the night of the election, and their hilarious Russian Collusion narrative is just part of that, and another stellar example of just how dumb they think everyone is. And that misunderstanding of all the people the Dems hold in such contempt is exactly why they've lost nearly a thousand legislative seats, most of the governorships, both houses of congress, the White House, the Supreme Court, and the good will of millions of two-time Obama voters who turned away from She Who Shall Be Queen in disgust.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
That dastardly Boris and Natasha!
They made those Hillary and DNC staffers send all those DKIM-verified unforgeable e-mails! The only explanation: Russia used mind control to make them write the e-mails, then made sure they got to Wikileaks complete with DKIM verification.
What will we discover next? Putin is an inter-dimensional Lizard Lord and has come to steal our fidget spinners to power his planetary reactors?
An interesting movie to have seen is Generation P(2011) because to what degree the average (young) Russian can be familiar with US culture far outpaces any reciprocity. Not because of any superiority, but because western advances in terms of technology and modernity have had a primacy since WWII. Someone had to come first. Which produces ironies, such as Dan Ackroyd's (Zalinsky) line from Tommy Boy(1995): What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public. Such precedence is realized and actualized by markets and most often expressed in terms of consumer goods. But their design and production will not forever remain America's providence, nor should they, and this is understandably frightening to many and exploited by some for many reasons.
Would were! Should is! Could be! And live a hundred times three.
Maybe you've never heard how effective propaganda can be.
Here is a hint. If it didn't work, no one would waste their time doing it...
They didn't get the memo did they? Russians weren't hacking the election anymore. It's only election hacking if they supported Republicans. All the money Russians spent on the Democrats clearly shows that they were not hacking the election.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
"zloy" is more angry than evil. "Pagubniy" is probably the closest to how evil is used in English.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Because the Europeans did it openly and legally. They didn't use secret funds and astroturfers like Reverend Green and scentcone to influence the US electorate. Now do you understand?
[...] push globalism and human extinction.
Wot?
I've seen lots of exaggeration on /., I've seen hysterical exaggeration, I've seen must-be-a-drool-proof-keyboard exaggeration, but now slashdot pushes human extinction?
I, err, ..... I give up.
Oh Nos! All those Special Snowflakes who can't make their own decisions saw Bad Things! We must Reeducate them! Get the accounts list from Faceplant and start up the trucks! Seriously? If you're the kind of person who votes based on political ads, would you please STOP VOTING!? Democracy needs a well educated, involved voter base to work. It's a given that neither side WANTS a well-educated voter base, but surely adults (that want to) can find out things for themselves? Even biased news, once the amount and direction of the lean can be determined, can be informative. But, hey...obviously cat videos and get rich quick schemes have a higher priority over figuring out who to vote for. Scotty, beam me up. There's no intelligent life here.
Does anybody actually look at an Ad on facebook, or any other site, and actually put thought into it to believe anything the Ad even says? Granted there are people who fall for the tax scheme or the Windows PC virus phone calls, but c'mon.....
If you don't think fake news changed the outcome of the election, it's because you're inside the bubble.
The outcome of the election was the result of two opposing forces: the repulsion for Trump that made a lot of people vote Hillary, even if they didn't like her, and the repulsion for Hillary that made a lot of people not vote her, even if they do not like Trump. Eventually the second force prevailed, and that was thanks to all the media that endorsed Hillary: the media fanfare made alot of people think that Hillary's victory was obvious and so they voted libertarian or something else and that was fatal in swing states.
Wtf?
First of all, who said the point of the ads is to get people to change their mind? This is what the Trump team itself was doing with ads/targeting before the elections:
All you need to dö is get enough people in the key demographic of your opponent to stay home in key areas.
Second of all: many people don't recognize sponsored content/ads in social media, or elsewhere. You'll see a news article or a blog post that has above it something like '[Your friend name here] also liked [our site]' and that's in fact a paid ad targeted to you because someone you know has liked the page and they've targeted their promotion that way, but really people generally don't think of these as ads but just another part of their newsfeed which actually makes them more effective.
Third of all: ads (both direct and sponsored content) do affect people's decisions. That's why they exist and why companies are pouring money into them but you obviously will have a hard time finding anyone who says they bought any opinion/product/service because it was advertised to them, partly because people don't often recognize the impact ads have on them. Chances are high advertising has affected your behavior during your lifetime without you being directly aware of it. You see ads and at some later point when you're making the decision of what to buy, the ads play into your preconceptions and decision making process at a subconscious level. Hardly no-one is at the store like 'I'm going to buy this product because I saw that ad last week" but there is still is an increase in sales following a successful marketing campaign.
So no, if you poll people and ask them 'did you see any paid for articles in your news feed about either candidate and if so did they effect your decision on whether to vote or not and for which candidate?' you're likely going to get a 'no' on all 3 of those from most people but that doesn't mean there was no effect, it just means most people can't recognize well placed ads as ads anymore and that like always, people think they're immune to the psychological effects of ads/sponsored content when they provably are not.
Human beings on average are much more easy to influence than we tend to admit, and the marketing industry has been honing their skills for way over half a century at this point becoming more and more successful at it.
"It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
I remember learning about slab allocation on slashdot. Who let you in? I bet you are proud of yourself.
I remember learning about cows and the GNAA on Slashdot.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Save some face before all these indictments drag you in, too, you complicit via negligence fucks.
That will never, ever happen, as Facebook has been grafted onto the NSA spying apparatus. Zuckerfuck could end up in a ditch one day, though, and it could be attached even more securely. TPTB do not respect the rule of law.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
If you think a single post here was posted by a russian troll/bot etc you are delusional. Or very very stupid. Or a lying evil person. Those are the three options.
If you think russian trolls/bots are above posting on Slashdot, you are probably all of those things. Forum posts are very inexpensive, especially if being made by a bot. How many HTTP requests does it take to equal one porn download? They might as well be free.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The reason I don't like Bill Clinton is that he did his very best to dismantle what little industry remained in America, and mostly succeeded at that despicable endeavor.
Don't forget his role in media consolidation. Faux news and the so-called "Fake News" alike derive their power from being able to own every media outlet they can get the grubby hands of dead presidents upon.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
She announced her candidacy sitting on a couch, on TV. If that isn't hubris I don't know what is....
love is just extroverted narcissism
Prove that it had zero influence on anyone. You can't, any more than I can prove that a specific ad influenced a specific person.
But it wasn't just ads of course. There was an army of fake accounts amplifying those messages and shitposting from 8 AM to 6 PM Moscow time every weekday.
Frankly the claim that it all had zero influence lacks any credibility. I don't think any reasonable person would contest that propaganda and fake news has zero influence on anyone.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Would someone who inherited a billion-dollar fortune count as one of the elites?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Sewing?
It's fairly telling that you can look at a post that so accurately and straightforwardly nails Ratzo as the spiteful, bitter little man he's become in direct contrast to the flowery story in his profile, and the only real response you can manage is to point out a single spelling gaffe.
Perhaps, it would be a good idea to develop an Universal Code of Conduct? Similar to Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Otherwise the attempts to destabilize each other would only keep intensifying.
Given how her primary counterpart announced their candidacy, I'm not exactly sure what point you're trying to make here.
Whatever you do, don't blame the (heinously unpopular for years & years before the election) losing candidate for losing the election. Blame Canada instead!
To be precise, Crooked Hillary lost the electoral college.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
I clearly said Russian troll talking point. It appears you are saying /. posters are spewing the propaganda. Hmm... It appears you are thinking now, just slightly. Good Morning America!
--
"No Branch" - Poppi, Trolls
See? Facebook is bad for you. Delete your account and never go back there.
I love how political teams come up with simplistic nicknames simple people can parrot. Lyin' Ted, Crooked Hillary, Little Marco, Crazy Bernie etc.
This is typical behaviour of a schoolyard bully. It is child-like intelligence at it's peak.
Have you ever wondered why these people got easy to parrot nicknames? What was the thought behind giving them nicknames and to whom they might appeal?
That's right. Morons. Parroting morons.
Are you saying ads don't work? You could earn billions by selling your idea to companies on how to cut their advertising budget.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
This: Many people got convinced not to vote for Hilary for whatever reason and she lost.
The media fanfare is fueled by what people are interested in and if that is her emails, that is what they will write about.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
It's impossible to be pro-Trump without supporting corruption, racism, theft and fraud.
That sounds like something a Russian troll would say, trying to sow divisiveness.
Sanders announced at a press conference where he answered questions and Trump announced at a rally.... Hillary's dislike for the unwashed masses is palatable.
love is just extroverted narcissism
A typical email marketing campaign might have an open rate of 5% and a closure rate of 10% (of those 5% who opened the email). So in all, half a person bought your product out of every 100 people you marketed to. I'd expect rates are similar or worse in facebook ads. Honestly, only targeted ads get better open and conversion rates. So did it affect the election? Yes. Did it determine the outcome of the election? I doubt it. Pretty much all the flyover states voted from Trump overwhelmingly and pretty much all the metro pockets voted for Clinton. The real story of the election is that the only reason Clinton had a chance at all is because California is a winner take all state.
That just shows how incredibly egotistic she and her campaign people are. To just assume you're going to win multiple states without even bothering to campaign in them one single time is the height of arrogance. One of many reasons she lost in the first place.
Honestly, who cares? Why not let the market of ideas sort itself out? After all, its the merit of the policy positions that matter, not just the logistics of who is going to implement them.
Hey at least we have a multitude of political parties at all levels of government. You should try it sometime, people are more likely to vote on the issues when they have several choices. Where I live we even have a coalition provincial government where the 2nd and 3rd place parties joined together to form the government, ousting the incumbent. In a two party system your issues matter little, so you get what you get.
I wish I had a lawn.
If you think someone did, prove it.
Proof: the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on advertising each year. Folks don't spend that without proof it sells the product.
And if you think reading a fake article about how candidate ____________ made some illegal _________ when they were ___________ can't affect someone's vote, you're mentally handicapped.
Did it determine the outcome of the election? I doubt it.
The issue is that a foreign power even attempted to influence a US election. You're being fed information telling you this is a witch hunt to reverse the election result or impeach Trump. It's not. That's not going to happen any sane person knows that.
Mueller... Hillary... Obama... Russia...
Wow, I don't see how you could possibly be talking about the same comment you originally replied to. Oh, wait, you're not -- you're jumping to a completely different one. Apparently the spelling gaffe was the only thing you could find wrong in the original comment.
Remember, standing up for ACs in a discussion on Russian media influence makes you a useful idiot at best.
Ok, Senator McCarthy -- got it. (Do you ever take a step back and listen to yourself when you say stuff like this?)
But while we're on the subject, what does it make you if you believe that all ACs in a thread are the same poster (dude, really?)
Even for presidential candidates there are only 24 hours in a day.
But I know, the US electorate always votes for the most entertaining candidate, and well, DJT got that angle covered by dominating the news during the elections with his pratfalls.
To be precise, Hillary conceded defeat.
But she still lost the electoral college while recieving more votes. Face it, unless you are a Russian Troll, You'd be calling for armed insurrection if a Democrat won th eoffice in the same manner.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Wow, I don't see how you could possibly be talking about the same comment you originally replied to.
Wow, I'm talking about the comment that PopeRatzo replied to, you stellar dumbfuck. You can't even follow the thread of the conversation?
But while we're on the subject, what does it make you if you believe that all ACs in a thread are the same poster (dude, really?)
I don't. I think they're different Russian trolls.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Also extremely biased.
So 100,000 dollars nets you 120 million influnces. Facebook is going to sell a lot more ads in the near future. I didn't see the ads as I dumped Facebook during the primaries due to what I perceived as inherent bias on the part of Facebook itself.
I had no likes, entered no work or education history, rarely followed anyone but tech pages, and I was being inundated with pro Hillary and anti-Trump rhetoric.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
The thread of the conversation is crystal clear and here for all to read, and all the invective and table pounding you care to dish out can't change the fact that you silently shifted to attacking a completely different post after I called out your cheap shot at the first one. If you honestly think you were discussing the same post throughout, perhaps a med rebalance is in order.
Foreigners are trying to brainwash the American people - that's OUR privilege alone!
Requiem for the American Dream
I don't know much about Canadian politics. Do your parties have significant policy differences?
In America, we get to vote for one faction of the Capitalist Party, or the other faction of the Capitalist Party. So elections are contested over personality and small, divisive but ultimately insignificant differences in social policy.
Here in Vietnam it's much the same. In every election people get to choose between at least two, often four, candidates from the Communist Party. Who have roughly as much diversity of views between them as our "two parties" do in America.
Look, I'll defend a lot of what Sanders did and that's great, as well as that Hillary is, for the most part, incapable of being genuine with people on a campaign. However, don't go arguing Trump wasn't showing off his ego with that announcement. He was even trying to conduct the music for god's sake. It was a show for him, and him alone.
Also, the need to go overboard attacking people you don't like isn't helping general discourse. Not knowing how to talk to the 'unwashed masses', as you state, is not even close to disliking them. I'll never defend Trump, but I'm never going to say more than he doesn't care about them. Hillary, if you ask me, is trying to help them the same way she wants to try to help others - but because she's a politician I don't think she knows how help outside of traditional political thinking. I don't know how much she actually cares, but at least I get a sense she's trying to do something to help them (flawed as the thinking is).
Facebook is probably 1/3 fake accounts so I wonder how they came up with this "126 million Americans" figure? I'd put the number closer to 85 million, which is still substantial, but fb has a fake account problem.
Yawn.
I've not been following this too closely. Apparently the problem is that voters are sheep that can reliably be lead by advertising to vote for whoever advertises at them the hardest, most often, most effectively, or most recently. Or something like that.
And instead of domestic scoundrels doing it, it was the Roooskies!
As long as they're using their fiendish mind control to support a candidate of one of the statutory duopoly party candidates, what's the problem? What makes them worse than the Democrats and the Republicans who were attempting the exact same thing?
Did I miss something?
There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
Naw broham. I'm an American, and I live in Vietnam.
How's the air pollution in Beijing today?
Where I grew up, the factories were dismantled under B. Clinton. They literally disassembled the production machinery, packed it in boxes, and literally shipped it to China. Then tore down the factory buildings. Clinton was a great enemy of the industrial working class in America.