this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2024
114 points (94.5% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4848 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
114
China-linked 'Spamouflage' network mimics Americans online to sway US political debate (abcnews.go.com)
submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
11 comments fedilink hide all child comments
all 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 months ago (1 children)

When analysts first noticed Spamouflage five years ago, the network tended to post generically pro-China, anti-American content. In recent years, the tone sharpened as Spamouflage expanded and began focusing on divisive political topics like gun control, crime, race relations and support for Israel during its war in Gaza. The network also began creating large numbers of fake accounts designed to mimic American users.

Spamouflage accounts don't post much original content, instead using platforms like X or TikTok to recycle and repost content from far-right and far-left users. Some of the accounts seemed designed to appeal to Republicans, while others cater to Democrats.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

We need a shibboleth. Unfortunately given how America is, good luck getting enough people to agree on anything.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It’s fun sometimes to ask them what they think of NATO, or Alexei Navalny or democracy demonstrations in Hong Kong or etc.

You would think that they would say “Oh yeah I was talking about Claudia De la Cruz because I like her policies / I’m upset about Biden approving Alaskan fossil fuel leases / whatever United States thing we were talking about, but OF COURSE them killing Navalny was a horrifying human rights abuse yes.” And yet, the few times I’ve tried it, that has never happened - it’s always either “well you know he had ties to X Y Z white nationalists” or else silence.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Lemmy is immune to this, right? Riiiight?

With the knowledge/reports that this was going on by Russia in the 2016 election (reports dropped during the election cycle) with suggestions that other countries were likely doing the same, I am not surprised. Hell, it was exposed that even the Trump campaign had their own "~~grass roots astroturfing~~ troll farm" division.

It's made me incredibly skeptical of posters. But it's not too hard to spot potential trolls. I'm also sure there's those that operate in a far more subtle way that even my skepticism doesn't capture.

I wish the communities here had better rules in place to mitigate this. But the rules tend to lean towards "benefit of the doubt" instead of a harder line on dis-incentivizing this from happening throughout our moderated communities. Maybe part of that is a limitation of Lemmy MOD Tools, but another part is definitely a lack of stronger definitions and enforcement of disallowed behavior (bad faith arguments) and enforcement of those rules.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Also, if your vote is based on what a random Lemmy user or other social media user posts... yikes.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It's usually a slow trickle of slighted information that resonates with somebody until they've flipped to a view/position contrary to their own interests manipulated by a foreign actor. It's why your previous posting behavior was received so negatively, as you were tripping the "trolldar" of many individuals as it seemed you were posting with a "hidden" agenda. Which I have to say, while I don't always agree with you, your recent posting behavior and approach to discussions is no longer tripping my internal warning klaxons.

But an even bigger example is Q-Anon, where there was a slow trickle of info that slowly worked it's way into so many susceptible individuals.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 2 months ago

ABC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for ABC News:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/china-linked-spamouflage-network-mimics-americans-online-sway-113342948
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

[–] [email protected] -5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

You mean I could be getting paid to shit on the diseased lump that is the US political system? Hit me up, Xi

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I don’t think it pays very well

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Hey, it's more than doing it for free