773
Unsealed FBI doc exposes terrifying depth of Russian disinfo scheme
(newrepublic.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2024
773 points (98.4% liked)
politics
19120 readers
2773 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Guaranteed they are all over the Fediverse and probably hosting their own instances.
There are a few obvious ones around but it's against the rules to even suggest that they could be shills or bots. Hopefully this news will get the mods to start taking action against the most blatant ones.
I, for one, will not return to allowing that particular guy back on my feed.
That guy gets on my nerves, but I've read enough from him on various topics that I'm pretty confident he's a genuine user. Don't get me wrong, he's for sure an ideologue who's no fun at parties, but I don't think he's a bot or that he's saying things he was instructed to say and doesn't actually care deeply about.
There's another user, with a three-word-phrase username, that I would describe similarly.
I've heard it from a reliable source, a Lemmy.ml mod, that there's simply no Russian activity on Lemmy. Would you like to know who?
Wait, I think I know the instance you're talking about but since when are we not allowed to say anything about it? Or do you just mean on .ml you can't do that
In !politics@lemmy.world, for example, it is against the rules to accuse another user of being a bot or paid actor. Any post suggesting a user might be will likely be removed at the minimum.
Yes but... Fediverse has more moderators and even server level bans where we can fight back.
It's a different political makeup here on the Fediverse. It's not like the Russians can hand money to just one or two CEOs and suddenly all of the moderators we trust here turn to the other side.
We need to keep our wits about us here. We came to Lemmy (and Fediverse) because centralized commercial control of our discussion spaces led to perverse incentives.
I only consider this political situation to be yet another test of the Fediverse. We have to survive it. But I also believe we moved to the Fediverse because we all believe we can do more about disinformation or malicious actors here on the Fediverse than on... Reddit or Facebook.
What happens when your mods are part of it?
Move to a different instance.
Not just that. If it's just the mods of one community, appeal to the instance admins. If the admins are part of the problem, don't just move to a different instance yourself, also try to raise awareness and convince the rest of Lemmy to defederate.
Or shit, make your own instance and have your own mods lol.
A bit of self-promotion here, but check out !fediverse_vs_disinfo@lemmy.dbzer0.com if you want to stay up to date on recent disinformation campaigns. It's obviously not going to solve the problem, but it's one more tool to help identify and fight the disinfo peddlers.
Do you think it's big enough to bother with?
For instance admins, definitely? For the government or other organizations... lol, no. Lemmy is such a very small pie segment of social media... and that's part of why I love it.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Sure, people will spin up their own instance and run it according to their own biases, but I don't see Russia or Israel or whomever running bots specifically to push things one way or another like they do with Twitter, Facebook or Reddit.
I'll bet there are some mods in on it too.
cousneezefartcough .ml cough
Sorry, did that sound like words?
I don't buy it fediverse is cool and all, but it isn't in a anyway relevant for misinformation, X, Facebook, reddit and politians are perfect for that, why bother with the less than 1%, they probably don't even know what fediverse is
Have you seriously not seen advertising and obvious political propaganda on here? Look up anything by that Jimmy Dore guy, for instance. And the guy whose name is like amoxtli or some shit.
I saw alot of dump communist propaganda, that's is usually based on "USA bad, so everyone that disagree with them are good" so they love China and Russia, but the Russia propaganda towards right wings, are more like "Democrats are communists so we must defeat them"
Sure it is. Plenty of platforms are tied into federated information. Bluesky, Mastodon, Threads...
Idk man, bluesky and mastodon are big enough?, mastodon don't has personal algorithms so it's not that efficient, and threads? Where most right-wings-trump-supporters are? YouTube, tiktok and Facebook would be my bet, not threads
Also Russia make propaganda to right wings trump supporters, they are the opposite of what we see in Lemmy, far-left, "urss did not wrong"," USA is always wrong ", so anything that they do is obviously bad, and everyone who disagree with them are inherently good
"X" is something like 70% bots now since the Elon takeover.
You can read other articles that specifically go into detail on why Russia is investing in video and audio influencers now, but that's mostly why.
I agree, I just disagree that fediverse is bigger enough to gather that attention, we don't even have influencers here(that I know off) but the rest, that X is infested with pro-russia bots I totally believe
Everyone that doesn't agree with me politically basically
I've seen a lot of seriously obvious and unapologetic shilling for very out there positions around here. The further telltale sign is that when one popular poster starts getting regularly rebuffed and shutdown, backup arrives not long after to pollute a thread with their bullshit.
It's a slippery slope to start assuming people are bots or paid shills. Whos to say everyone that agreed with you at first weren't bots and then regular people came in and commented their own opinion that went against the first wave of bots?
Not everyone that thinks capitalism is broken is a paid Russian agent. I'm assuming that is what you are referring too. Some are very extreme in their views but the most likely explanation is that they are a combination of stupid and mad.
Not the green party or communist not jobs necessarily, but the Pro-Putin, "Ukraine is Nazis", warmongering types...yup.
I'd argue they are still most likely just idiots that got wrapped up in foreign propaganda, and not necessarily paid to post on lemmy of all places.
I just think calling people bots and shills has no place in honest discourse and the brushstroke always tends to get bigger and bigger.
Bots and shills have no place in honest discourse, but they obviously exist. Should we pretend they don't—assume everyone is arguing in good faith, regardless of how blatantly dishonest and inconsistent they are? What would you suggest?
I don't disagree that there's a slippery slope problem; there's no shortage of fringe internet echo chambers that dismiss all dissenting opinions as coming from npc's, cia shills, shitlibs, bloodmouths, breeders, , etc.
It's a though problem but essentially yes. We should only ban because of content, so anything pro-putin would get the hammer but that comes with it's own problems. It's hard to draw the line. Is being pro-isreal an acceptable stance (not morally, thats obvious, but ban wise)? What about being pro-gasoline cars? I've been tempted many times to assume people bashing EVs are oil industry shills but it's really just people that fell for their propaganda and not someone that is actively participating in it. For the most part, downvotes do their job but everyone knows those can easily be manipulated as well.
If the news was about pro-AI bots floating around, I would probably be accused of being one because I'm very outspoken about it when it's a dissenting opinion on lemmy.
I just don't think it's a good standard to keep. I don't have a solution but I think trying to call out people on it will just end up in people calling each other that when ever an argument goes badly. In the end, I view it as a form of rhetoric.
I guess what we want to do is to cultivate a community where people—and especially bots—will have a hard time engaging dishonestly. Having said that, I'm no closer to knowing how to do it. The struggle with ~~misinformation~~ disinformation seems like an arms race where the bad actors will always have the advantage.
You didn't read the article
Where in the article does it mention lemmy? As far as I am concerned, we do not have any influencers and we definitely won't be on the list.
I'm just saying assuming people are bots is a bad habit. Why not just assume I'm a paid shills and disregard my points? See how easy it is and why it shouldn't be encouraged?
Pretty sure they're making veiled shill accusations at anyone who isn't 100% on board with arming Netanyahu until his genocide is complete.
It's real easy to tell who is a troll/bot though. All you have to do is ask them a few questions, they will respond with a quote, and only answer one. Why do you think they only answer one? Why not answer two or three? What's really weird is no where in this thread was Netanyahu mentioned besides you?
From your perspective, it's anyone who doesn't love being Netanyahu's genocide weapons supplier.
Well, either they agree with them or don't want to bother responding to unhinged bullshit. Maybe one thing you said stood out as particularly wrong. Maybe you aren't as entitled to having all your questions answered as you think you are.
Putting a question mark at the end of a declarative sentence doesn't make it a question, but you'll demand to see a manager if I don't answer it anyway. I mentioned Netanyahu because of people who see someone who is upset about genocide and immediately shriek "foreign troll!"
Which is prevalent behavior on lemmy. Thank you for illustrating my point by suggesting that I am a foreign troll, as you have done multiple times in response to my opposition to selling Netanyahu weapons for genocide.
Lol, you proved my point perfectly, now if only a mod would come in and do their job, you wouldn't be here posting bullshit anymore