Slashdot Mirror
Thirty Countries Use 'Armies of Opinion Shapers' To Manipulate Democracy (theguardian.com)
The governments of 30 countries around the globe are using armies of so called opinion shapers to meddle in elections, advance anti-democratic agendas and repress their citizens, a new report shows. From a report on The Guardian: Unlike widely reported Russian attempts to influence foreign elections, most of the offending countries use the internet to manipulate opinion domestically, says US NGO Freedom House. "Manipulation and disinformation tactics played an important role in elections in at least 17 other countries over the past year, damaging citizens' ability to choose their leaders based on factual news and authentic debate," the US government-funded charity said. "Although some governments sought to support their interests and expand their influence abroad, as with Russia's disinformation campaigns in the United States and Europe, in most cases they used these methods inside their own borders to maintain their hold on power."
back in my day we just called it propaganda. Folks do know the US Government does this every time we go to war, right? We did it before Iraq and we're starting to do it for North Korea.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
So it is an easy push to villify them.
Those godless Democrats are trying to push an atheist addenda source with those few people who happen to be democrats and push an atheist adgenda.
Those idiot republicans who are trying to bring the country back a century. Reference by those few people pushing a racist agenda who have red trump hats.
If you are on the side of the Democrats you may be a god fearing individual and you realize that these people are not representative of you but a subset group.
If you are a Republican however you are very inclusive and tolerant, you see the racist as not representative of you and the republicans on whole.
We see the news headlines liberals/conservatives are doing something you don’t like. Not a subset of the group is doing something you don’t like. So it just reinforces tribalism tendencies that we have and bypass common sense and you make sure those other guys don’t get power, because they are far more dangerous then your side is.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
It is. Rush Limbaugh gets $50 Million a year to call it a "hoax" and tell lies about it. Sean Hannity only gets $29 Million a year to do the same.
No. There's science, and then there's the shit the right is peddling.
Al Gore got it wrong some 20 years ago, so what makes you think we have it right now?
Al Gore was basically just shooting off his mouth, and was not representing the scientific thinking of the time. It was a big mistake that climate scientists didn't distance themselves from his alarmism and "alternative facts", and instead let a partisan politician become the figurehead for climate change. That pretty much destroyed the possibility of a bipartisan approach to policy.
Also, it was 12 years ago, not 20.
Human-fossil-fuel-burning-caused global warming/climate change, whatever YOU choose (I'm not gonna fall into your labels trap) to call it, is a FACT. Like evolution, it's simply a fact. The evidence is there. You (and people like you) can deny it all you like, but the evidence (like gravity == orbital mechanics) is irrefutably THERE. I don't have to explain myself, pointing at the evidence, you do, ignoring/denying it - it's right there, in front of your face. You're no different than the smokers, back in the 70's, spewing the company line, "No, no, no, smoking doesn't cause cancer, that's just a statistical correlation". You may choose to echo the petro-billionaires denials because it gives you a more comfortable, guilt-free lifestyle, but just like standing under a tree, claiming it's not raining, sooner or later -- you're gonna get wet. Meanwhile, when the petro-billionaires figure out how to monetize your serfdom/servitude without burning fossil fuels, they'll lead you by the nose to that new-found "truth".
A Russian here. I would say that these "opinion shapers", as they are called here, together with RT have much greater impact (and in a more general way) on public opinion than the current nothingburger (my favorite word indeed) of Russian "election meddling" using Facebook ads and microscopical investments at the level of 100s of thousands of dollars. These sockpuppets can be found everywhere in the comment sections of major media. They exist on Slashdot too, although I haven't seen many of them here.
From: It describes itself as a "clear voice for democracy and freedom around the world". The organization was 66–85% funded by grants from the U.S. government from 2006–15... Freedom House is a nonprofit organization. Headquartered in Washington, D.C., it has field offices in about a dozen countries, including Ukraine, Hungary, Serbia, Jordan, Mexico, and also countries in Central Asia.
So when they talk about government funded 'opinion shapers', they know the business.
Meanwhile, the Smith–Mundt Act has been repealed, and that 90% of the media is owned by just six major corporations allowing for near total consolidation of message. We're rife with super PACS that have millions for funding groups like Correct The Record and other astroturfing agencies. The major social media sites are deplatforming, shadow banning, and outright censoring anyone with an opinion they don't like under the guise of combating 'extremism'. Net Neutrality is being dismantled, to help ensure that competing platforms that actually support free speech can't compete.
But, Russian meddling!
Why do people assume that democracy = good? If a majority of people get together and vote to murder you and take your stuff, that is democracy, but it is also evil.
https://fee.org/articles/a-presidential-moron-is-democracy-perfected/
Democracy is simply a might makes right approach to civilization. What we need is liberty.
I know. It would be tempting to assign most of the blame for climate change denialism on them, because that would at least be logical. But nope, it's mainly people who just like fossil fuel industries and hate liberals.
There will always be alarmists. There may be some specific statements made by Al Gore that were exaggerated (I don't know, and you haven't provided any examples, but I would say it's at least broadly correct). But to claim that because there have been some unrealistic dire predictions, all dire predictions are false, is so obviously fallacious that I'm surprised deniers even bother to make that claim at all.
It's also to be noted that Al Gore is a politician, not a scientist, and of course his work was written to be as exciting as possible, because that's simply the only way to get the attention of the masses. If you want more accuracy, try the IPCC reports - if you can find any genuine inaccuracies in those, that aren't corrected in later editions, then I'll start listening to you.