How fake news from Macedonia influenced USA election

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: SuperFrog
a reply to: butcherguy

Still off topic and still of mark... Hillary did not give any statement regarding fake news as far as I know, and only mentioning of her name was as title of 'fake' news that in my opinion did influence voters.

Now, that you know it did not influence you, please stay on topic or avoid derailing of discussion - Topic is 'fake news and influence on usa election'.

You seem to be in denial that Hillary was involved in the election.
You blamed me for being offensive, and still have not pointed out which part of my post offended someone (I am presuming it was you).
Can you let me know what was offensive. My goal is not to be offensive, so your help is appreciated.

This topic is not about you, nor is about Hillary blaming loss of election on kids from Macedonia.

I am sorry that you are incapable to understand that, but as you said - you made your mind about her before election, you did not need fake news... and thus it does not influence you - good for you.

Please stop with this off topic stuff.

Thank you

a reply to: SuperFrog

You obviously have no answer, so I will assume that you meant that I was being defensive.
Good luck with keeping your thread on topic.
I shall bother you no more.

Facebook news feeds around the world look a lot different today.

Yours might be one of angst and despair, or celebrations and "I told you so's." It depends on the people you're friends with and the online community you've created with your clicks, likes and shares.

Facebook's algorithm knows what you like based on the videos you watch, people you talk to, and content you interact with. It then shows you more of the same. This creates something called "filter bubbles." You begin to see only the content you like and agree with, while Facebook (FB, Tech30) hides dissenting points of view.

This means news on Facebook comes with confirmation bias -- it reinforces what you already think is true -- and people are increasingly frustrated.

Facebook denies it's a media company, yet almost half of U.S. adults get news from Facebook.

When Facebook fired its human curators and began to rely on algorithms to surface popular stories earlier this year, fake news proliferated.

* Source: money.cnn.com...

I find this very interesting... as well troubling.

The fake news spread by americans....
The Russians hacked DNC
They supplied the dirt to the Trump campaign....
The obviously selected results of MSM polling....
The entire US Gov. is allowed to propagandize its own people.....how can that NOT be used to influence the election?
In fact the amount of phony information spread by the two sides and third parties,
Like the claims of some victims,etc all fake and influential...

It's a matter of concern that planted stories abroad can be circulated and believed here, because this would mean an nefarious entity could manipulate the news in the United States by channeling it through some foreign country .... so for your own protection strict censorship effective immediately...

problem- reaction- solution- blowback

a reply to: SuperFrog

So what is the offense? I know no Trump supporter that would accept a random site as fact. Are there some that would? Probably, but I doubt many. About as much trust in them as MSM

Already covered here
Clickbait Election - How Teens In The Balkans Are Duping Trump Supporters With Fake News

a reply to: SuperFrog

I think the overall gist of your thread is just how susceptible we ALL are to manipulation, not just how "THEY' or "YOU' are susceptible. We need to understand that it is also "US' and primarily "ME' who are also susceptible. This susceptibility is hard to admit to ourselves. Admitting this to ourselves requires not only looking at present sources of information but more importantly, the sources of information to our whole lives. How we accept or reject information as adults, how we did or didn't as teens and how we did or didn't as children and even more importantly as toddlers and babies.

If we are unwilling to admit this susceptibility in ourselves then our only recourse is to accept most of the information that concurs with our already established parameters of belief. And the cold hard truth of those parameters is that they originate way back when we were first born and not really there as 'ourselves' to evaluate what information to believe and what to reject. Basically we build our adult beliefs not only on our adult lives and our youthful lives but on our lives as totally susceptible babies.

We like to think of our personal 'parameters of belief' as the truth. That we as adults can ascertain truth from falsehoods. But in reality that truth in most cases is little more than just belief. Once someone learns the parameters of our beliefs it becomes easy to toss information at those beliefs that sounds reasonable to the collection of information already gathered within that system of belief.

The more ardently we believe something, the easier it is to toss stuff at the walls of that belief that end up sticking to it, and on goes the cycle. To the point that we will just accept tidbits of information with no grounding in reality other than they fit our edifices of truth.

originally posted by: SuperFrog
How should ATS approach this? (In my memories ATS used to be fact-driven - deny ignorance site, today not so much...)

I used to run some forums of my own, and I took what is currently the ATS approach: Let people say what they want, and trust your users enough to determine fact from fiction. As people spread their views, your community will be able to figure out who is and isn't full of it.

In the past year or two though, I've come to realize this approach doesn't work on larger forums like ATS, especially in this past political season. I've spoken with mods and maybe even the admins about this topic a few times in the board issues forums. I can understand the sites viewpoint, that freedom of speech also entails the freedom to be wrong about your views, and even the freedom to mislead (to an extent) but as an internet user and forum host this has become more of an issue to me.

Media in general has moved away from reporting the facts to reporting opinion and people tune in to the opinions that support their views. This means the money isn't in reporting balanced content but rather in the sensationalism that once only existed at the fringes of reporting.

It's something that I think ATS is going to be forced to address sooner or later, and I for one can't wait for that day. The phrase "Believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear" has never been more true than at this moment.

a reply to: jjkenobi

Or Huffington Post?

originally posted by: jjkenobi
What is the difference between a fake story made up by random people from another country and a fake news story made up by CNN? Both duped plenty of people this year.

Nothing, and that's the problem. The "alternate media" by which I mean blogs that make up whatever they want under the guise of independent journalism, have forced actual mainstream sites to do the same thing in order to be competitive. This is why no one trusts our media, everyone reports opinions. People embed themselves in an echo chamber that speaks to their beliefs, they then assume their sources are true, and opinion rather than fact based reporting becomes the new normal. CNN, Fox, etc are just following the market trends.

I said this right after Trump won too. This is an issue Trump is familiar with, and he said he would take our media to task during the campaign. If he makes a big issue out of it, he might actually be able to fix it by requiring certain standards to be met in order to be considered press. Basically, regulating opinionated alternate media out of existence. We'll see if he does it or not.

a reply to: Aazadan

Good post Aaz. I think you state the situation clearly. But I have to wonder about Trumps sincerity on this issue of requiring certain standards with his embrace of Cannon and Alies.

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: SuperFrog

Maybe Hillary should shoulder the blame for her LOSS, instead of blaming her defeat on other teenagers in other countries.

I think Hillary deserves blame for the electoral college loss..

And Trumpkins deserve full responsibility for what they elected.

We can check back in 12 months and see how that is going.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: jjkenobi
What is the difference between a fake story made up by random people from another country and a fake news story made up by CNN? Both duped plenty of people this year.

Nothing, and that's the problem. The "alternate media" by which I mean blogs that make up whatever they want under the guise of independent journalism, have forced actual mainstream sites to do the same thing in order to be competitive. This is why no one trusts our media, everyone reports opinions.

...

This is an issue Trump is familiar with, and he said he would take our media to task during the campaign. If he makes a big issue out of it, he might actually be able to fix it by requiring certain standards to be met in order to be considered press.

Holy crap no.

Trump doesn't want honesty in reporting...Precisely the opposite.

He hasn't talked about reforming media, he has said he wants to silence his critics through legislation. Loosening the Libel laws to be specifics.

He SUES people that write FACTUAL stories about him (and has lost)...

While at the same time....Touting stories in tabloids about Ted Cruz's father assassinating Kennedy.

He LOVES fake news.

a reply to: Indigo5

We can check back in 12 months and see how that is going.

That is very good. The proof will be in the pudding.
I hope for the good of our country and the individuals that make it up we are better off in 12 months.

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Indigo5

We can check back in 12 months and see how that is going.

That is very good. The proof will be in the pudding.
I hope for the good of our country and the individuals that make it up we are better off in 12 months.

I hope so, but the truth is that we are doing pretty damn good after 8 years of Obama and their are a dozen ways Trump has proposed effen it up. Not the least of which is tripling debt with a spending spree.

the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta shows that wages are growing at their fastest pace in eight years. Nobody noticed in the heat of the October campaign, but data released last month also showed that American wages reached an all-time high point. A little less than a year from now, we are due for a census report that will show that median household income is at an all-time high.

www.vox.com...

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Aazadan

Good post Aaz. I think you state the situation clearly. But I have to wonder about Trumps sincerity on this issue of requiring certain standards with his embrace of Cannon and Alies.

What Trump believes to be true and what is true aren't necessarily the same thing. The guy is completely detached from reality. That doesn't mean he doesn't have a point though.

It turns out that at least some of these websites were ran be Israeli intelligence.

Israeli Intelligence Firm’s Election-Meddling Analysis Comes Under Mueller’s Scrutiny

The presentation outlines the ways in which social media “bots” and fake online content were used to help energize voters supportive of Mr. Trump. One slide entitled “Trump Campaign Components” outlines a timeline where “fake news sites/avatars/content” were created during the early part of the election year and then leveraged to spread “uncertainty” by midyear. The final stage was “using fake bots to react to real life situations & further polarize the TA,” or target audience, the slide says.

Another slide says the firm identified 140 pro-Trump websites linked to a man in Macedonia. The websites “had American-sounding domain names such as WorldPoliticus.com” and “published aggressively pro-Trump content aimed at conservatives and Trump supporters in the USA.” WorldPoliticus.com is no longer acti

www.wsj.com...