"breeding ground for trolls" He said paid trolls. There is no "breeding ground" for paid trolls, they all arrive at once and hit the ground running. Paid trolls are a proven fact, and they don't even try to hide their nature here on slashdot.
Actually if you'd read beyond the first five words, you'd see that I'm actually making fun of your assertion that the use of military social media accounts is for the servicemembers' own jollies rather than propaganda.
So that "suspicion" you're denying was actually your own absurd implication. I know sarcasm is hard, but come on bro.
Bzzz! A lie! The article makes no mention of "an effort"
You're right, it was actually the article right after that from 2006--two years before--that detailed the actual effort, straight from the horse's mouth. My bad! The 2008 article instead details the planned creation of fake blogs to spread propaganda. Decent writeup here:
That seems to be for the troops' recreation and communications, not propaganda.
Because I'm so sure that the military's top priority with enabling its workers to use facebook is so that they can trade cat pictures with their relatives, rather than spread the "information" their employer needs them to spread. Who do you think you're kidding?
Again, all the way back in 2008, the military was throwing money at web propaganda outlets in other languages, under phony names:
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...The websites suggest a pattern of Pentagon efforts to promote its agenda by disseminating information through what appear to be independent outlets, says Marvin Kalb, a fellow at Harvard University's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy.
Yet, even further back in 2006, US Central Command publicly stated its efforts to "engage bloggers who are posting inaccurate or untrue information".
http://www.defense.gov/news/ne..."We were given the mission to do electronic media engagement," Flowers said. "The idea was put forth that so many people are getting their news from online sources that we would be remiss if we neglected that audience."
But clearly when he says "people", he's talking about non-US citizens, right? Try to find some evidence of that in the entire article. Go ahead.
The notion that the US government was somehow *new* to web propaganda even in 2006, even compared to the Russians, is absolutely absurd. Just as blogs were targeted by the military after coming into vogue in the mid 2000s, using social media was the obvious next step. What "propaganda programs" do you think Leon Panetta was referring in that previous USA today article, that they wouldn't involve Americans? Especially considering the military propaganda budget was 580 million dollars by 2012:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...
That's the same article, that the AC above linked to, while making an allegation I rebutted.
You didn't "rebut" anything, you simply mentioned that the Russians also had active propaganda programs, and that we don't know "what has become of that software development effort". I really love the way you tried to turn the thread back around to being about the Russians, even though that wasn't being discussed, and you just wanted an excuse to use that news link. It's very telling that you're more worried about Russians propagandizing to you than your own government.
The article specifically said that a 2.76 million dollar contract was awarded to Intrepid for their sockpuppet software. It would be incredibly naive to think the military threw down the money and forgot about the effort, especially considering their other web propaganda efforts (above) are evidenced at least back through 2006.
The article also mentioned "It would not disclose whether the multiple persona project is already in operation or discuss any related contracts." I'm sure you, in your neverending puppydog trust of our government's good-will, could only take that to mean that the programs were discontinued.
If you think the DoD would encourage its workers to use social media, and would not be willing to utilize sockpuppet software it had already paid for on Americans--at the very least after 2013 when this sort of propaganda is now technically legal!--you're more naive than anything else you've said thus far could possibly let on.
Military Announces New Social Media Policy (Feb. 26th 2010) http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com... "Many months behind schedule, the Department of Defense on Friday issued a new policy that, on the surface, seems likely to expand access to popular social networking sites like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter by troops using military computers."
Well, that's pleasant, but.. just how "expanded" has the "access" been?
Revealed: US spy operation that manipulates social media ( March 17th 2011) Military's 'sock puppet' software creates fake online identities to spread pro-American propaganda http://www.guardian.co.uk/tech... "A Californian corporation has been awarded a contract with United States Central Command (Centcom), which oversees US armed operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, to develop what is described as an "online persona management service" that will allow one US serviceman or woman to control up to 10 separate identities based all over the world."
Convinced yet? Want to explain why US contractors had an active online social media presence in 2011, if they couldn't make money off of it?
"USA TODAY found that the owners of the top propaganda contractor in Afghanistan, Leonie Industries, had failed to pay $4 million in federal taxes on time despite earning more than $200 million in contracts from the government. Their tax bills were paid after the story was published.
Shortly after USA TODAY made inquiries about the tax bills, fake Facebook and Twitter accounts, as well as phony fan club websites, were set up to disparage USA TODAY reporters. The co-owner of the company, Camille Chidiac, admitted to setting up some of the sites but said he did not use company resources in doing so. He had been suspended from receiving federal contracts because of the campaign, but the military lifted the suspension late last year."
http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/...
But let's not kid ourselves: the domestic propaganda has been going on since before 2013. If you think our government actually follows the law in secret, i have a bridge to sell you.
You're essentially claiming that it's in the best interest for US government trolls to out themselves as existing here on slashdot. Or maybe you're claiming he's a russian troll, just because he's stating the obvious? That's absurd, especially given how pro-russia trolling is virtually nowhere to be found on this site.
And "you doing it is ok"? How is that even relevant when the guy was posting as anon?
I see paid establishment shills on here every day. I'm the 7th or so comment, but this thread will lilely be full of shills complaining about Dice as to muddle discussions about.. well, them.
"A guy who went straight to the Russians"? you mean, a guy whose passport was revoked by the Americans while in Russia. You just responded to someone's claim of paid shills by raising your hand--God, you guys are so bad at this!
..except for their own reputation. It's not like there will soon be an election where americans will need to vote fot turkey.. so this isn't comparable to ads for products or elections.
I wonder who the article writer has been asking--his grandparents? Fox news? Because Snowden's been vindicated in the eyes of virtually everyone that doesn't bathe in television.
"Try fact"? That such a wall would disrupt the ecology and water movement of the area is an undeniable fact, so undeniable that you didn't even attempt to argue with it. That such a wall would be a good idea is little more than your empty wishing.
Who cares abouy Russian trolls when slashdot already has its share of government shills (cold fjord), telecom / cable shills (Sarten X), and fossil fuel shills? Russia is the least of our worries when it comes to disinfo.
Our banks don't comply with laws, either--or was that you point in mentioning how paypal acts like a bank? At least paypal can't fuck up when processing your morgage, and then illegally forclose on you as a result.. (not defending paypal)
Slashdot Mirror
"breeding ground for trolls" He said paid trolls. There is no "breeding ground" for paid trolls, they all arrive at once and hit the ground running. Paid trolls are a proven fact, and they don't even try to hide their nature here on slashdot.
And the summary claiming the TPP grants "assistance to workers" is a real laff.
Your suspicions are not citations. Next.
Actually if you'd read beyond the first five words, you'd see that I'm actually making fun of your assertion that the use of military social media accounts is for the servicemembers' own jollies rather than propaganda.
So that "suspicion" you're denying was actually your own absurd implication. I know sarcasm is hard, but come on bro.
Bzzz! A lie! The article makes no mention of "an effort"
You're right, it was actually the article right after that from 2006--two years before--that detailed the actual effort, straight from the horse's mouth. My bad! The 2008 article instead details the planned creation of fake blogs to spread propaganda. Decent writeup here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/...
dun let the door hit ya on the way out.
That seems to be for the troops' recreation and communications, not propaganda.
Because I'm so sure that the military's top priority with enabling its workers to use facebook is so that they can trade cat pictures with their relatives, rather than spread the "information" their employer needs them to spread. Who do you think you're kidding?
Remember that the military put out an effort to secretly recruit bloggers back in 2008: http://www.wired.com/dangerroo...
Again, all the way back in 2008, the military was throwing money at web propaganda outlets in other languages, under phony names: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com... The websites suggest a pattern of Pentagon efforts to promote its agenda by disseminating information through what appear to be independent outlets, says Marvin Kalb, a fellow at Harvard University's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy.
Yet, even further back in 2006, US Central Command publicly stated its efforts to "engage bloggers who are posting inaccurate or untrue information".
http://www.defense.gov/news/ne... "We were given the mission to do electronic media engagement," Flowers said. "The idea was put forth that so many people are getting their news from online sources that we would be remiss if we neglected that audience."
But clearly when he says "people", he's talking about non-US citizens, right? Try to find some evidence of that in the entire article. Go ahead.
The notion that the US government was somehow *new* to web propaganda even in 2006, even compared to the Russians, is absolutely absurd. Just as blogs were targeted by the military after coming into vogue in the mid 2000s, using social media was the obvious next step. What "propaganda programs" do you think Leon Panetta was referring in that previous USA today article, that they wouldn't involve Americans? Especially considering the military propaganda budget was 580 million dollars by 2012: http://www.usatoday.com/story/...
That's the same article, that the AC above linked to, while making an allegation I rebutted.
You didn't "rebut" anything, you simply mentioned that the Russians also had active propaganda programs, and that we don't know "what has become of that software development effort". I really love the way you tried to turn the thread back around to being about the Russians, even though that wasn't being discussed, and you just wanted an excuse to use that news link. It's very telling that you're more worried about Russians propagandizing to you than your own government.
The article specifically said that a 2.76 million dollar contract was awarded to Intrepid for their sockpuppet software. It would be incredibly naive to think the military threw down the money and forgot about the effort, especially considering their other web propaganda efforts (above) are evidenced at least back through 2006.
The article also mentioned "It would not disclose whether the multiple persona project is already in operation or discuss any related contracts." I'm sure you, in your neverending puppydog trust of our government's good-will, could only take that to mean that the programs were discontinued.
If you think the DoD would encourage its workers to use social media, and would not be willing to utilize sockpuppet software it had already paid for on Americans--at the very least after 2013 when this sort of propaganda is now technically legal!--you're more naive than anything else you've said thus far could possibly let on.
So, it was not done by a go
I got plenty of citations
Military Announces New Social Media Policy (Feb. 26th 2010)
http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com...
"Many months behind schedule, the Department of Defense on Friday issued a new policy that, on the surface, seems likely to expand access to popular social networking sites like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter by troops using military computers."
Well, that's pleasant, but.. just how "expanded" has the "access" been?
Revealed: US spy operation that manipulates social media ( March 17th 2011)
Military's 'sock puppet' software creates fake online identities to spread pro-American propaganda
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tech...
"A Californian corporation has been awarded a contract with United States Central Command (Centcom), which oversees US armed operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, to develop what is described as an "online persona management service" that will allow one US serviceman or woman to control up to 10 separate identities based all over the world."
Convinced yet? Want to explain why US contractors had an active online social media presence in 2011, if they couldn't make money off of it?
Propaganda programs hard to justify, Panetta says
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...
"USA TODAY found that the owners of the top propaganda contractor in Afghanistan, Leonie Industries, had failed to pay $4 million in federal taxes on time despite earning more than $200 million in contracts from the government. Their tax bills were paid after the story was published.
Shortly after USA TODAY made inquiries about the tax bills, fake Facebook and Twitter accounts, as well as phony fan club websites, were set up to disparage USA TODAY reporters. The co-owner of the company, Camille Chidiac, admitted to setting up some of the sites but said he did not use company resources in doing so. He had been suspended from receiving federal contracts because of the campaign, but the military lifted the suspension late last year."
http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/... But let's not kid ourselves: the domestic propaganda has been going on since before 2013. If you think our government actually follows the law in secret, i have a bridge to sell you.
You're essentially claiming that it's in the best interest for US government trolls to out themselves as existing here on slashdot. Or maybe you're claiming he's a russian troll, just because he's stating the obvious? That's absurd, especially given how pro-russia trolling is virtually nowhere to be found on this site.
And "you doing it is ok"? How is that even relevant when the guy was posting as anon?
Isn't this quaint--a post acknowledging the clear and present fact of paid trolls on slashdot, being marked as "troll" by those same paid trolls.
I see paid establishment shills on here every day. I'm the 7th or so comment, but this thread will lilely be full of shills complaining about Dice as to muddle discussions about.. well, them.
"I'm not in love with the fossil fuel industry, but.."
One of many things to say before/after defending the fossil fuel industry.
the question made no distinction between straight and curved lines
The girl who sailed The Soul was written in 1960, and had interstellar travel via infrared sails thousands of miles long.
"A guy who went straight to the Russians"? you mean, a guy whose passport was revoked by the Americans while in Russia. You just responded to someone's claim of paid shills by raising your hand--God, you guys are so bad at this!
"Even i, a right-wing Greek,"
Oh, sure you are. Did you have to check your onscreen prompt to remind you which country your current sockpuppet is supposed to be from?
..by contractors, probably. "I didn't mean to shoot the civies, the bullets went right for them!
..except for their own reputation. It's not like there will soon be an election where americans will need to vote fot turkey.. so this isn't comparable to ads for products or elections.
"Methys" actually means "wine", hence the name. But we know now that's false.. why would this be amy different?
Why should a company like Diebold care about security when they know they're guaranteed a no-bid contract?
Making contractors rich with no-bid contracts is in the constitution? please do indicate where..
Cold Fjord: the *incredibly lonely* token establishment voice of slashdot.
I wonder who the article writer has been asking--his grandparents? Fox news? Because Snowden's been vindicated in the eyes of virtually everyone that doesn't bathe in television.
"Try fact"? That such a wall would disrupt the ecology and water movement of the area is an undeniable fact, so undeniable that you didn't even attempt to argue with it. That such a wall would be a good idea is little more than your empty wishing.
You're right that paypal is not a moral actor. Their freezing of wikileaks' donations account over pressure from the government was bullshit.
Who cares abouy Russian trolls when slashdot already has its share of government shills (cold fjord), telecom / cable shills (Sarten X), and fossil fuel shills? Russia is the least of our worries when it comes to disinfo.
Our banks don't comply with laws, either--or was that you point in mentioning how paypal acts like a bank? At least paypal can't fuck up when processing your morgage, and then illegally forclose on you as a result.. (not defending paypal)