Russian meddling in 2016 US presidential election was weak sauce Russian disinformation didn't materially affect the way people voted in the 2016 US presidential election, according to a research study published on Monday, though that doesn't make the effect totally inconsequential. Boffins from New York University, University of Copenhagen, Trinity College Dublin, and Technical University …
Except this was an ongoing campaign for years even in 2016, so, only considering the direct changes right before the election totally misses the point and the magnitude of harm these troll/propaganda farms are doing (and have been doing already even by 2016) to democracies and societies in general.
The book "Putin's Trolls" by Jessikka Aro has covered the issue in depth. The book is scary. The journalist is brave.
Until this war Putin had UNLIMITED budget for disinformation and influence campaigns. Separatist movements, Canadian truck driver protests, Me Too, etc. had been likely incited with troll factories and western influencers. Many influencers are active on YouTube, noticeable by suspicious bias towards Putin's key points - almost copy-paste from Russian TV anti-western propaganda. This is unlikely a coincidence. Maybe they are paid or blackmail is used (likely both).
Correlation analysis should be performed between events of political confrontation with Russia and following that "punishment" by inciting riots or release of blackmail information to the public.
After the fall of USSR Vladimir Bukovsky on YouTube has mentioned a shocking document in relation to the huge scale of penetration of Soviet Intelligence into the Western society. There are no reasons to think that Putin wouldn't continue to use the network.
That's the old "Moscow Gold" (or "Reds Under the Bed") argument. Haven't heard it for years , it kind of faded after the 1950s.
You might want to ask yourself if this campaign was so long running and so successful why there's no more USSR. The fact is that self-promotion and propaganda are tools that have been around for ever (...and if you drag Dr. Goebbels into it then I'll simply counter by quoting from Mien Kampf a piece about propaganda, about the Nazis learning from the best -- the British in WW1).
Here in the US when it comes to influence campaigns probably the first large scale one was promoting revolution in the late 18th century. I suspect the French of having more than a passing interest since trouble in the Colonies suited their local geopolitical aims.
I've called this out before, and got downvoted massively for it.
I work an org that deals with various UK CNI interests; and we have had Russian ex-pats working here for decades. Now, I have no specific reason to distrust the public persona of those individuals; indeed, most of them are vocally anti-Putin. But how is one to know if they are a front for a carefully engineered intelligence community?
It is, after all, if I were in the FSB, how I would approach the problem to getting insider information.
I really don't like this because I can of course, apply same thinking to any other national origin; some of which are "More allied than others".
Basically, trust no-one, and have multiple layers of security surrounding critical action potential.
This post has been deleted by its author
> carefully engineered intelligence community?
This could be overthinking. There is a lot of great Russian and Chinese talent starting businesses and working in the West. Just look who runs top tech companies nowadays.
Both nationals and non-nationals can be targets for intelligence. But it is those of high status, political influence, access to secrets AND having "reputation skeletons" or susceptible to corruption will be the target. Recent examples: EU Parliament “Qatargate” scandal, or British Prime Minister COVID party.
Disinformation should be the 1st priority, because anyone familiar with marketing and SEO knows how easy it is to influence the whole nation.
IT security is critical too, as the easiest target. I have personally observed severe IT security negligence in multiple western companies of all sizes.
Two pages of stuff that was rehash of articles that were published back in 2016, with no meaningful new numbers or insights, and two pages in this:
"foreign meddling can have second-order effects by provoking a domestic reaction." without even an attempt to delve into what we already knew was their main effect. In addition they gloss over the combined effect of the other operations outside the social media sphere.
The blitz of weak sauce Russian memes was always a distraction, and this report is doing just what they wanted, spreading the idea that the attempt to influence it wasn't effective, and distracting people from the nature of the parts that DID have an impact. The hacks and leaks just before the election for example.
They also fail to mention the main method which these operations primarily operate, which is to find posts that they want to boost and give them an extra push to get them spread widely in the feedback algorithm used by the social media networks. The posts they are making aren't convincing anybody, they aren't designed to, they are just boosting the number of times the computers count the talking points they mention, and activity around posters they are trying to amplify.
Only a fool looks at the finger that points or something like that....
"what we already knew was their main effect"
Which was..? People didn't vote for the incredibly corrupt establishment candidate who thought she was entitled to the win?
I don't think the US govt needs to worry about Russians meddling on social media to 'destroy democracy'. The twitter files have shown just how much the US govt itself does that along with the corporate elite (didn't Mussolini describe his ideology as the merging of state and corporatism?) to ensure the survival of the uniparty and the continued supply of govt pork to those at the top.
Hillary broke the law with her emails, Biden has broken the law with his missing VP records and Trump very likely broke the law (remembering the president does have ultimate authority to declassify which the VP and sec of state don't) but you only care about one of those as you have been conditioned to see the world a certain way by the constant stream of propaganda on social media and the MSM.
"People didn't vote for the incredibly corrupt establishment candidate who thought she was entitled to the win?"
Actually, more people voted for the incredibly corrupt establishment candidate than for the insanely unhinged narcissistic sociopath, but electoral college.
"... just how much the US govt itself does that along with the corporate elite ... to ensure the survival of the uniparty and the continued supply of govt pork to those at the top"
You're not wrong, and it isn't just the US either, nor is it anything new. Eisenhower called it with his "military-industrial complex" speech back in 1961.
"Hillary broke the law with her emails, Biden has broken the law with his missing VP records and Trump very likely broke the law..."
IANAL and I don't know the ins and outs of all cases (which will be argued over for years to come, n doubt), but it seems like all of them seemingly broke the rules around private record-keeping of government documents. Only 1 of the three, however, incited a revolution by refusing to accept the legitimate results of a democratic election, going so far as to condone physical violence against a congress led by his own vice-president.
"Actually, more people voted for the incredibly corrupt establishment candidate than for the insanely unhinged narcissistic sociopath, but electoral college."
Both describe Hillary perfectly.
The EC is there to keep a balance of power between the very heavily populated costal states with huge cities and the central areas with pretty much nothing. Otherwise US politics would be dominated by NY, LA, SanFran and a couple of other population centres. People in the UK moan about how UK politics is London-centric.
"Only 1 of the three, however, incited a revolution by refusing to accept the legitimate results of a democratic election"
Hillary? She spent years making money moaning about how the 2016 election was stolen from her and pretty much the entire democrat party was encouraging the almost non-stop riots from 2016 onwards. People have very selective memories and forget the group that showed up outside the white house with a guillotine and tried to storm it. But all we see in the press is the model gallows someone brought to the Jan 6th protest.
"going so far as to condone physical violence"
Plenty of that from the democrat side too.
Eisenhower was a clever man and sadly his warning fell on deaf ears as the profits were just too good to pass up.
"The EC is there to keep a balance of power between the very heavily populated costal states with huge cities and the central areas with pretty much nothing. Otherwise US politics would be dominated by NY, LA, SanFran and a couple of other population centres. People in the UK moan about how UK politics is London-centric."
But think how much money could be saved by doing away with Presidential elections altogether and the President being the party leader of which ever party has the most seats in Congress. It might almost as much fun as "electing" the Speaker but cost $billions less.
IANAL and I don't know the ins and outs of all cases (which will be argued over for years to come, n doubt), but it seems like all of them seemingly broke the rules around private record-keeping of government documents.
The only thing you really need to know is that the law is supposed to be applied equally. Which is the problem with US politics. Hilary had classified information on her private email server. It got hacked, then she erased the evidence, and then the server(s) apparently ended up in Ukraine. Trump got raided because he had classified documents in his house. Biden's lobbying shop apparently had classified documents relating to Ukraine.
Obviously Trump's mishandling of classified documents is the most serious, because the media says so. There wouldn't have been a televised and publicised media event if it wasn't.
Or there's the reality. Classified documents are meant to be kept secure. Level of security depends on their protective marking. Apparently some of the documents found in the Biden business office were classified TS/SCI, which is pretty much the highest level of classification, and should have been in a secure location, which the office apparently wasn't. So that kind of begs the question why he had those documents, and why they were left in an office. Normally being careless with that level of stuff would result in being fired, jailed and certainly losing security clearances. Which I guess is a tad awkward when the person's currently the President.
Then there's the US policy of retaining public records. Clinton decided those laws didn't apply to her when she set up her private server. DoJ also decided they didn't apply when they failed to prosecute. Clinton also broke general IT and INFOSEC rules when she mixed personal and official correspondence on her server. Trump apparently fell foul of these rules by retaining some public records, and got raided. Biden may have broken the same rules because it seems he retained records from his time as VP.
So the TL;DR I guess is US VIPs don't seem to bother following either the laws, or security policies. So I guess the number of 'leaks' and hack shouldn't suprise anyone. There may of course be more suprises to come now there's a changing of the guard in Congress and a fresh set of investigations into the events surrounding Jan 6th, the DoJ, or the Biden family's interests in places like Ukraine and China.
So popcorn futures are still looking good.
It does seem strange that the secret service had visited previously, knew about the documents, where they were etc. yet still raided and then proceeded to search in other places. Almost as if they had set him up for some sort of fishing raid. Just as plausible as the hotel and hookers claim.
Almost as if they had set him up for some sort of fishing raid.
It's possible Biden's also being set up. You want a second term? Sorry, we don't. Here's a scandal we prepared earlier.
But another day, another leak. Or discovery of more documents. Timing is curious given the first discovery happened before the mid-terms, and before the special counsel was appointed to investigate criminal charges against Trump. This is somewhat.. awkward in light of quotes from senior (rank, not age) Dems talking about how outrageous Trump's mishandling of classified information was, including from the 'Big Man' himself.
The left-wing media's got much the same problem having spent much of the last decade piling on to Trump, and now have to deal with their chap being caught doing the same thing. Or arguably worse, given ex-Presidents have limited powers to declassify, whereas a VP leaving public office and returning to being a private citizen do not, ie why classified documents were in his possession after leaving office in the first place.
Seems like the US needs some serious remedial INFOSEC training for it's elites though. Then again, so do we given Truss's "It's done" comment.
"remembering the president does have ultimate authority to declassify"
Anyone who seriously makes that argument is deluded or a partisan hack. There is a process - even for the president. Among other things, changing the classification of a document requires that classification markings be changed and approved. And you didn't note that Trump failed to return the documents when requested. That is the big issue.
From however many years a back? The FSB that ran the troll farms was the SAME FSB that produced that nonsense dossier. Putin wants to undermine trust in our system, and to that end, conducted easily observed "influence campaigns" which he hoped (expected?) would be picked up after the election to undermine the credibility of the winner, no matter who one.
To analyze the troll farms while ignoring the dossier is to help that effort.
...easily observed "influence campaigns" which he hoped (expected?) would be picked up after the election to undermine the credibility of the winner, no matter who one.To analyze the troll farms while ignoring the dossier is to help that effort.
Oh, I totally agree. Except most of the analysis shows that actual Russian influence attempts had very little impact. But there was certainly a lot of amplification by the mainstream media, who dutifully found Reds under every bed. Eventually we discover that actual Russian interference had far less impact than the political spin applied by the DNC.
The dossier certainly shouldn't be ignored. After all, Hilary Clinton paid for that. Christopher Steele, who had extensive connections (allegedly) inside Russia and Ukraine produced the reports, which included such highlights as Trump apparently enjoying golden showers in a bed Obama once slept in. Such sacrilege! Again the MSM leapt on this, probably because of the salacious details. Eventually we discover that the FBI thought it was a load of bollocks and mostly made up. People should try reading them because they're a gish-gallop of unsourced, unverifiable 'facts' in the style of David Icke.
Yet because of the media amplification, some people still seem to believe in the dodgy dossier. It had the effect of spreading Russophobia, but most of the beliefs are false. So you suggest the FSB contributed to the report. If so, it'd probably be because they were just trolling. If they weren't, and were contributing real intelligence.. Why would they do that, when they were supposedly supporting Trump? Were they actually trying to help Clinton? After all, Russians had given generously to the 'Clinton Foundation'.
Curiously, it's also back to Ukraine again, and the similarities between claims in the dossier, and current social media psyops. Crude, implausible, and relatively easily deniable.. But obviously effective in winning the media war. Too bad that doesn't really matter.
which included such highlights as Trump apparently enjoying golden showers in a bed Obama once slept in.
Not entirely, the belief promulgated by the sawdust heads was that Owd Trumpy engaged the same room Obama had slept in, then hired Russian prostitutes off the street and watched them urinate on the bed that Soapy may have --- unless it had been replaced --- slept in, for some ridiculous reason of his own.
No prostitutes were ever brought forward, and as Ted Rall pointed out this was a demented thing to allege against a devout germophobe, who has his foods wrapped in plastic. Nor did the hotel explain why they allowed this.
.
However, base and venal as the American Press may be, they learnt it from us, and recent speculations about Mr. Putin in our gutter press ( all of it ) demonstrates there is no media viler.
However, base and venal as the American Press may be, they learnt it from us, and recent speculations about Mr. Putin in our gutter press ( all of it ) demonstrates there is no media viler.
I dunno, I think there's obvious value in the NHS sending a delegation to Russia to look at it's health care. After all, Putin's been suffering from multiple terminal illnesses and been only weeks away from death for years now. Meanwhile, sick people in the UK can't even get an ambulance or a hospital bed.
But how much did we do it to ourselves by allowing infotainment with little to no journalistic integrity call itself news?
Easily enough avoided, just look at CNN and their ratings. Not necessarily healthy for society, but media owners cost cutting and partisan politics haven't exactly translated into viewers, ad revenues or impacts.
It may perhaps be true that Russia's trolls in the antisocial networks and the news didn't achieve too much - I for one still doubt that. But looking at the candid propaganda totally misses the point.
Anyone remember Cambridge Analytica / SCL / Emerdata? Run by a Russian named Aleksandr Kogan? He used data "stolen"¹ from F.c.book as basis for targeted advertising in antisocial networks. That discouraged suspect Democrats from voting. And the like. That was the real meddling.
¹) That is Zockerbergs narration. Still I believe that he encashed on that "stolen" data.
The information wasn't stolen, it was 'made available for research' leading to its deniability ("they used it outside their terms of service").
The fact as Russian ex-pat was running SCL/Whatever is about as relevant as an Indian running Google or Microsoft. Its like the old days -- where you were born or live doesn't matter, its who you show fealty to.
Look at how close the brexit result was and the calamitous impact caused by it on the British economy and international relations because of it. People should be openly wondering what impact misinfo had on the way people voted, and how much misinfo was emanating from bot accounts or campaigns sponsored by bad actors.
And certainly the US presidential election had its share of swing states. All that amplification of bullshit about Hillary's email servers, hacked servers, Benghazi etc. might not have made much difference to the sane voters, but it might have influence a small % sufficiently to change the outcome.
Seeing that republican anti vax rethorics may have killed off enough of their own voters to change election results in the midterms, and seeing how the fptp voting systems implemented in ther UK and the USA, I would be surprised if misinformation did not influence recent election results in both nations.
The vaxxed are now dying in numbers so it is working itself out.
I would guess that those who think the Hillary email thing was a nothingburger were probably also calling for Suella Braverman to be hung drawn and quartered over pretty much the same thing.
Re: Brixit:
mpact caused by it on the British economy and international relations because of it
Sadly, most of the misinformation was coming straight from parts of the Government on that one (£350 million etc) and their willing allies on the foaming xenophobic right.. (Farage being one of the more sane and that's a pretty bad indightment of the rest!)
Ironically, the very people that were very much duped into voting leave (people like the farmers and fishermen) are very much starting to reget doing so - loss of European seasonal workers, difficulties in trading, cost and hassle of the paperwork involved in pretty much everything (which, unsurprisingly has increased markedly) and the loss of European subsidies (UK subsidies are rapidly dropping behind what the EU provided) are showing what an absolute disaster it's been. Not even close to being 'oven ready' - more rotting in the compost heap!
And then add Boris' utter bumbling in 'negotiating' the trade agreement (which has directly lead to utter political paralysis in NI - as even an idiot could have predicted) and then further compounding that by trying to unilaterally break an agreement that *he* negotiated.
So, in order to boost his political career, Boris led a movement that resulted (eventually, via Truss) to our economy being trashed and our international reputation being the lowest it's ever been.
And the chances of a trade agreement with the US is vanishing ever further into the distance as they won't do *anything* until the situation with Northern Ireland is resolved. And it can't be resolved while there is a effective trade border in the Irish Sea - which was the foundation plank of Boris' deal. And that border can't be removed without a complete re-negotiation of the EU trade deal - something that I don't think is particularly high on the EU's priority list.
@CrazyOldCatMan
There is a lot wrong in that post but low hanging fruit-
"Sadly, most of the misinformation was coming straight from parts of the Government on that one (£350 million etc)"
The gov were pro-remain. This is after Cameron promised he would go with limp wristed demands and campaign leave if he didnt get them. The governments punishment budget and continual FUD using tax payers money against us plus threatening the use of government against the population should we not do as we are told.
"Ironically, the very people that were very much duped into voting leave"
Aka free thinking people making their (hopefully informed) choice vs you duped idiots? See how its easy to frame the other side as duped. Maybe if remain wasnt argued on FUD which was continually proved to be FUD it may have been better. The official leave campaign was an embarrassment I assumed existed to give remain an easy win. Then I saw the remain campaign and shook my head at both.
"difficulties in trading, cost and hassle of the paperwork involved in pretty much everything"
Actually part of the reasoning to leave. These impositions imposed on EU members.
"showing what an absolute disaster it's been."
We are all still waiting for this disaster. Is this the recession from voting leave? Or the one from invoking art50? Or the nebulous one in the future once they didnt appear? Similar FUD we faced when the people didnt want to join the dreaded Eurozone which shows how glorious the mismanagement is in full. Instead we had immediate benefits and a serious lack of 'the end of western civilisation' and we saw a floundering EU crying over a sofa, screwing up contracts, forgetting its brexit negotiations and bending over for Russia.
"Not even close to being 'oven ready' - more rotting in the compost heap!"
That we can agree on. When the negotiations consisted of remainers trying to 'appease both sides' in an either/or situation and other traitors not even in power going negotiating behind the back of the government it did create a mess.
"And then add Boris' utter bumbling in 'negotiating' the trade agreement (which has directly lead to utter political paralysis in NI - as even an idiot could have predicted) and then further compounding that by trying to unilaterally break an agreement that *he* negotiated."
He didnt negotiate it. It was inherited from Mays negotiations, which was performed in bad faith by the EU anyway providing legal rights to disband the agreement if we wish, that created the Ireland problem that wasnt even the UK's problem. It is an EU issue with nothing to do with the UK after the UK stated it did not wish to impose a hard border. So 100% remainer screwup. Please remember the EU tried to unilaterally break said agreement until the UK and ROI 'reminded' them of negotiations just agreed to.
"So, in order to boost his political career, Boris"
We can agree there. He backed brexit for his career. We couldnt trust him and unfortunately he was the last hope for those who voted brexit to get anything like.
"to our economy being trashed and our international reputation being the lowest it's ever been."
Eh? Kinda missed the global state of affairs due to the virus of unspecified origin? Not defending our governments economic competence but there is a broad failure around the world for this one. As for international reputation I dont know what you are on about (yes the gov is an embarrassment) but I refer you back to my mentioning of a sofa and a Russian rogering.
"And the chances of a trade agreement with the US is vanishing ever further into the distance"
As a remainer you do not get to play that card at all, its remainers fault. Do note that UK/US relations were good under the previous president, but remainers dragged out the negotiations.
"until the situation with Northern Ireland is resolved"
Again something we can resolve instantly but remainers will cry and the EU spit out its dummy.
"And it can't be resolved while there is a effective trade border in the Irish Sea"
Which can be removed and therefore resolving the situation as I mention above.
"And that border can't be removed without a complete re-negotiation of the EU trade deal"
Yes it can. Unilaterally. And the EU would cry, then most likely enact their own border between ROI and the EU or the EU make a hard border (which I guess you would say breaks the GFA).
Unfortunately as has been shown to great extent since the God Emperor came to power politics has descended from the usual pissing contest into complete cults who will stop at nothing to sabotage the other side and gloat over the carnage no matter what the cost is to those they are supposed to represent.
A classic example of this being the German Green party politician Annalena Baerbock who said she would support Ukraine no matter what her voters thought about it. They have turned into proper tinpot despots.
The remainers have moaned and moaned about how they didn't actually lose the vote (what is that you say about Trump and 2020?) and have pretty much refused to work together to resolve this utter shitshow simply so they can gloat at how bad it is.
Same is happening in the US. Congress is busy overturning what the previous congress did while the pervious congress cry and moan about how awful it is that the new congress won't work with them yet 2 years ago they did exactly the same.
"A classic example of this being the German Green party politician Annalena Baerbock who said she would support Ukraine no matter what her voters thought about it. They have turned into proper tinpot despots." - A leader who has principles!!! We can't have that!!!
Seriously? There was no end of prattle about how the low turnout meant that the 'majority' didn't vote for brexit. "only a third of registered voters voted for brexit" etc..
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/brexit-lib-dems-sam-gyimah-referendum-a9108681.html
@Insert sadsack pun here
"but I have never seen anyone serious suggest that "we" didn't get fewer votes."
Seriously? You are doing better than me, I have heard this argument since the result. So many mental contortions to say that those who didnt vote obviously didnt want change. There are a few variations on this idea where leave was outvoted and so shouldnt be allowed, even though as you say remain got fewer votes.
@Uncle Slacky
"Nothing worse than a sore winner."
Interesting revision of reality. So @CrazyOldCatMan posts garbage. Lies that have not stood to scrutiny. I have responded to his comment correcting him. And now you are crying your little eyes out that I am somehow a sore winner?
Maybe there is something worse than a sore winner. A sore whiner
In most American political elections (not just your local mayor etc) the majority of people do not vote "for" a candidate but vote "against" the other candidate. For example Biden is president because the majority of people (including me) voted against Trump, not "for" Biden. This is the environment that causes the Russian attempts to influence American election to fail every time.
British elections are different, in Britain people just talked about a vote for Brexit - watching the events prior to that vote it seemed clear that there was foreign influences but the only people confident that there was no Russian influence in that vote were the Brexiters every time a little evidence appeared.
Talking about foreign influence into US internal politics is quite rich coming from a US citizen whose government shamelessly overthrows and kills foreign governments. Or how else do you qualify what happened in Iraq, Libya, Nicaragua, Vietnam, Chile, Ukraine ... in the past 1/2 century ?
Honestly, is this not looking at the wrong network? Facebook is a MUCH larger echo chamber that peddled nonsense for years and allowed access to data when it shouldn't (Cambridge Analytica for example).
Your average American voter is more likely to be on Facebook than on Twitter.
I don't doubt that the Russians have a network of trolls and captive influencers in play.
Probably true, but this report again suggests they had little influence. Then again, other influencers seemingly have more effect. Just look at CNN, MSNBC, NBC etc. Republicans became MAGA Republicans, then Extreme Maga Republicans. FIery, but mostly peaceful protests became insurrection, and the deadliest threat to Democratcy since Pearl Harbor.
Fox regularly does dog-whistles showing how the MSM dutifully repeats the memetic viruses they've been programmed with. But we're IT types, so should probably have read Snowcrash already and know how this works.
I understand that the Twitter files are the current obsession but why was Facebook left out of the equation? According to the joint FBI/CIA&NSA report "Between January 2015 and August 2017, Facebook linked 80,000 publications to the Russian company Internet Research Agency" does this not count? One also needs to keep in mind the timeline and which social media platforms were in predominate use by the "Trump" side. Given there were quite a few physical rallies started on Facebook I think narrowin gthis conversation to Twitter does a disservice to the push that Russia made.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
