Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Electric Monk

(13,869 posts)
Sat Feb 21, 2015, 11:24 PM Feb 2015

Pentagon and others manipulate social media to shape opinion on Security State.

(cross-posting from GD, originally posted by Aerows)

If you ever get the feeling that you are getting a hard sell on the security state, military adventures, the alphabet soup agencies, and everyone in the supply chain that profits off of war, spying, and all of the above, you are.

This has been repeatedly detailed.

Heck, Google Palantir. That will get you started. If you'd rather a sampling, however, here are some.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/07/pentagon-seeks-to-manipulate-social-media-for-propaganda-purposes.html

Cass Sunstein's Nefarious Plans

In case you didn't like the first one

Then there are these types of tactics:

How to disrupt a forum discussion

How about Karl Rove's Guide to Effective Blogging

And on, and on and on.

To preclude the absolute FIRST argument I'm going to get in this thread, I'll refer to the rules of web disruption,

5. Pretend that alternative media – such as blogs written by experts in their fields, without any middleman – are untrustworthy or are motivated solely by money (for example, use the derogatory term “blogspam” for any blog posting, pretending that there is no original or insightful reporting, but that the person is simply doing it for ad revenue).

I didn't link to the intercept, either, but they certainly have a lot of detailed information on this, too - but I figured I'd cut that off at the pass, as it were.

Do you recognize anyone using these tactics? It's similar to Sibelian's how to tell if someone is wasting my time. They are, and doing a lot more.
4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Pentagon and others manipulate social media to shape opinion on Security State. (Original Post) Electric Monk Feb 2015 OP
One poster over at www.schneier.com fit this bill. Pholus Feb 2015 #1
yes... Chimeradog Feb 2015 #2
Interesting. Thank you. n/t Judi Lynn Nov 2015 #3
Kick (The 15 Rules of Web Disruption) fleabiscuit Apr 2016 #4

Pholus

(4,062 posts)
1. One poster over at www.schneier.com fit this bill.
Sat Feb 21, 2015, 11:54 PM
Feb 2015

Bruce Schneier is a computer security expert who got interested in real-world security systems after 9/11. He is also a board member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. His book: "Beyond Fear -- Thinking Sensibly about Security" was a must read about all the things that the security state that Bush created did for no purpose other than to "appear" to be in control. I believe he coined the term "Security Theater" to explain these things -- a term that now had wide usage.

Anyway, he had a long-time poster in his blog's comments section, "Skeptical," who was 100% the government party line on all electronic issues. Skeptical was usually VERY quick to post (no more than a few hours consistently and minutes sometimes) and always had long talking points prepared. He especially got worked up about all things Snowden and arguments about how government backdoors in consumer electronics actually INCREASE risks for the average citizen.

Example thread: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2014/10/more_crypto_war.html

I (and many others who read that blog) could never shake the feeling this poster was an example of the social media operation you describe.

He eventually disappeared in late 2014 (https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2014/11/economic_failur.html), many regular posters hypothesized that it was because his arguments usually drew quick and thorough rebuttals that actually made the governments' position on many computer issues look worse.


Chimeradog

(83 posts)
2. yes...
Mon Feb 23, 2015, 08:17 PM
Feb 2015

on a different forum, its the reason a "real" person like me stopped engaging...I was speaking to a wall of Koch shills...what's the point?

jmo, the element of trust when writing on forums is important to me...I respect integrity and people who stand up for what is right, what they believe, etc.....

However if they all go the way of FB, and agenda/paid shills, I am done.

I'd rather speak at a conference than try and reason with paid robots.


Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Propaganda Debunking»Pentagon and others manip...