Slashdot Mirror


Twitter Notifies 1.4 Million Users of Interaction With Russian Accounts (recode.net)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Recode: At least 1.4 million people on Twitter engaged with content created by Russian trolls during the 2016 presidential election, the company revealed on Wednesday. That's more than double the amount that Twitter initially identified -- and perhaps still just a fraction of the full universe of users who may have witnessed Kremlin propaganda over that period. In announcing the new data in a blog post, Twitter also said it had notified all 1.4 million affected users that they saw election disinformation. That fulfilled a pledge that the company previously made to members of Congress who are investigating Russia's tactics on social media. Notified users included those that followed one of the roughly 3,000 accounts belonging to the Internet Research Agency, the troll army tied to the Russian government, as well as users who retweeted, replied, liked or mentioned those IRA accounts in their tweets. But Twitter did not alert users who merely saw Russian troll tweets in their feeds but did not interact with the content. Nor did it reach out to users who saw tweets from the roughly 50,000 Russian bots that tweeted election-related content around November 2016.

16 of 178 comments (clear)

  1. While you were distracted by Nunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Trump refused to implement the sanctions law, claiming the mere threat of sanctions was working.
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-sanctions/trump-administration-holds-off-on-new-russia-sanctions-despite-law-idUSKBN1FI2V7

    However his CIA chief says Russia has not let up attacking the USA and expects Russia to interfere in the US Midterm elections:
    http://time.com/5124313/cia-mike-pompeo-russia-midterm-elections/

    Republicans should clean house, Nunes is blowing a smoke screen to hide Russian attacks on the US elections, and you can't have the Republican head of the Intelligence oversight committee giving cover for a *foreign* intelligence agency to attack the US.

    1. Re:While you were distracted by Nunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I haven't seen any evidence that Russia ever attacked us in any way, nor that they hacked our elections, something Obama and Clinton said could not happen when it was them being accused of it before the election.

  2. We need examples of the elleged Russian action by bogaboga · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When it comes to trolling, I will be most grateful if anyone presents clear-cut example(s) of what Russians are alleged to have exposed to us.

    I have a feeling it's not that different when compared to what the US agencies do themselves.

    So folks, spit out some examples.

    1. Re:We need examples of the elleged Russian action by ganjadude · · Score: 4, Insightful

      exactly. i mean, if they are pushing truth and not lies, shouldnt we be more upset with our own government for lying to us??

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    2. Re: We need examples of the elleged Russian action by bsDaemon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The best I can figure is, they leveraged two pillars of a free society: freedom of press and freedom of speech, by posting on open social media platforms and buying ads. Some people donâ(TM)t like the outcome and refuse to accept that after 30+ years of dealing with Clintons in the political spotlight, enough people in strategically important locations were sick of it to not vote for her. It must have been a few months of social media lies by Russians!

      The burried lead here is essentially that Democrats are insisting that Trump voters are easily misled idiots incapable of rational thought. BUT if they had believed different social media bias and voted for Clinton, then they would obviously be independent thinkers.

      I didnâ(TM)t vote for Trump. I think heâ(TM)s crass and shallow. But I didnâ(TM)t vote for Hillary because I donâ(TM)t want her to be president either. I will also say this much: I have no appreciation for those who say âoeif you donâ(TM)t agree with me you are an easily duped idiot who made up his mind because of a tweet.â

    3. Re:We need examples of the elleged Russian action by burtosis · · Score: 3, Insightful

      exactly. i mean, if they are pushing truth and not lies, shouldnt we be more upset with our own government for lying to us??

      Whoa, whoa, whoa. Are you trying to say that maybe we should focus on what's actually important, affecting us daily, and under our control?!? Good, because I'm pretty sure the answer is in her goddamn emails.

    4. Re:We need examples of the elleged Russian action by ScentCone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Good, because I'm pretty sure the answer is in her goddamn emails.

      No, not "her emails." Rather, "Her willingness to look you in the eye and lie non-stop for a year about her deliberate mishandling of classified material in a way that would lose anyone else their clearance and their job, and likely put them in serious legal jeopardy ... and the willingness of a few key people in the FBI and DoJ to do everything possible to make sure she was held to a different and - by comparison - completely toothless standard for purely partisan political reasons, to make sure she became the next boss of all of those people who would lose their jobs and their liberty if they did anything even approaching what she did, and which everyone near her insisted on getting immunity agreements to even talk about."

      And, at this point, it wouldn't really matter. Except that what the purely partisan year-long witch hunt we're currently witnessing is based on is a collection of decisions and actions made by some of those very same Clinton-backing partisans in the FBI and DoJ. Yes, that IS under our control. Those people shouldn't be in that line of work. There are a jillion other things that would more constructively benefit from all of the energy the left is currently putting into their phony, theatrical hysterics. But they still can't get over the fact they put Hillary Clinton forward as their candidate, and lost because she was a terrible candidate who went out of her way to exhibit her disdain for - among other things - millions of women she called deplorable. Or the entire state of Wisconsin, in which she couldn't even be troubled to set foot during her campaign. So to make up for their terrible performance and choices, the Democrats and the majority of the media, which carry their water, are standing around with their hair on fire pretending it's all about something else, and wasting all of our time and energy. Yes, we can do something about that, and should. Because we have other stuff to do.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  3. Re:Right about 1%.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Exactly!

    The liberals are pushing the idea of globalism and acceptance of other people, but they are critical of each and every person that has even the slightest interaction with somebody from Russia.

  4. Re:We need examples of the alleged Russian action by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There was a claim, [possibly made by Vlado himself,] that many of the Russian IPv4's interacting with Twitter traffic were due to TOR exit servers based in Russia.

    So we are back to a verifiable {micro-sized airborne particles of combustion origin and planar reflective surfaces} situation

  5. "Distracted by Nunes"!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So you think it's OK for senior law enforcement people in the FBI and DoJ to even contemplate things like "insurance policies" against candidates they don't like?

    "Insurance policies" against that candidate being ELECTED???

    Are you a dropped-on-your-head-at-birth utter FUCKING MORON, or an actual dyed-in-the-wool totalitarian?

  6. Re: Trolls, political campaigns, difference? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Is it somehow different when it's a foreign actor?"

    Yes. Yes it is. The fact that you feel you need to even ask that question is frightening. What the hell is wrong with you?

  7. Who they were targetting by XXongo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wonder who they were targeting...

    In fact, it's pretty clear that they were targeting America in general.

    Despite the popular thinking, all the evidence is that they weren't actually trying to help one political party over another-- their intent was just to disrupt American society, and the democratic process, any way that they could.

    (and not just America-- they wanted to disrupt western European countries as well. And, of course, it all stems from their attempts to destabilize Ukraine.)

    1. Re:Who they were targetting by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is mostly true. Their primary objective was definitely to divide the populace and undermine liberal democracy, and they went so far as to organize opposing protests in adjacent locations. But it isn't true that they didn't care who won. They definitely preferred for Trump to win - they just assumed that there was no way US voters would be that stupid, and focused on undermining the legitimacy of the system as a whole. But as Mencken said, "Americans are dumber than horse shit." (That is the quote, right?) And here we are.

    2. Re: Who they were targetting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Yeah, CNN and leftists in general are doing a fine job of that without any Russian help.

      They literally stormed out of a State of the Union address when people started cheering, "USA."

      Imagine hating yourself, your friends, and your family so much that you have to leave the room when someone cheers for them.

  8. Re:Can't get an answer if you don't pay attention by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ya... nothing in the links specifically talk about how they identify that an account was opened by a "Russian"

    They use terms like, "Linked with" and other vague phrases. But nothing that says they can prove an account was opened in this location by some individual. If I were in Southern CA and opened an account and posted material similar to what they claim are Russian accounts, they'd likely claim I was a Russian.

    More likely they are simply choosing what accounts to claim are Russian based solely on their content.

    If you have a better explanation, I'm listening.

    BTW, calling someone a Russian simply because you don't like their messages is pretty much the bottom of the barrel when it comes to any kind of discussion. Conceptually, it's no different than scoffing at someone and dismissing them as a N*ger or K*ke, or any other racist pejorative. It is pure intellectually laziness and an explicit admission that you have lost the argument.

  9. Re:Right about 1%.... by Narcocide · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Traitors.