• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Astroturfing

sherbetbizarre

Special Branch
Joined
Sep 4, 2004
Messages
5,242
Astroturfing is the attempt to create an impression of widespread grassroots support for a policy, individual, or product, where little such support exists. Multiple online identities and fake pressure groups are used to mislead the public into believing that the position of the astroturfer is the commonly held view.

Although usually associated with the internet, the practice has been widespread ever since newspaper editors first invented the letters page. Pick up any local paper around the time of an election and you will find multiple letters from "concerned residents of X" objecting to the disastrous policies of Y. Similarly, concerned residents often turn up on talk radio shows and even in campaign literature, although the latter can prove more dangerous, as Labour party activists posing as residents in Greenwich discovered a few years back.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... troturfing

This next piece is from a confession of "a Paid Internet Shill", originally posted on the Above Top Secret forum (since removed for being "utterly false"). I won't copy the text, as this site has been asked to remove it too. But that was two days ago, and it's still there.

The comments are unsure if this guy is real, but they agree this practice does happen on a large scale:

I Was a Paid Internet Shill: How Shadowy Groups Manipulate Internet Opinion and Debate

Editor’s Note: The type of propaganda strategy described in the article below occurs across a wide range of topics and is employed by various corporate, political, and governmental groups to promote a variety of agendas. It is called astroturfing, and it is far more common than most would imagine.

This post is not about Israel, and it is not partisan. It is simply an illustration of the mechanics of how online debate can be manipulated. As this is an anonymous post, we have no way of verifying the information contained herein, and it is presented only for your consideration.
Our intent in posting this is not to spread paranoia or incite shill witch hunts, but merely to encourage readers to view what they read and engage with online with a more discerning eye.
This confession is presented verbatim from its original thread to preserve its integrity. As such, you may notice some minor typographical errors.
http://consciouslifenews.com/paid-inter ... /#comments
 
I just got sent this by a family member and hadn't heard the term before:

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/...n=20171028Z1&et_cid=DM163348&et_rid=100068640
Story at-a-glance
  • Ninety percent of news media are controlled by six corporations. As a result, the vast majority of what you read, see and hear is part of a carefully orchestrated narrative created and controlled by special interest groups
  • “Astroturf” is the effort on the part of large corporate special interests to surreptitiously sway public opinion by making it appear as though it’s a grassroots effort for or against a particular agenda
  • Wikipedia is astroturf’s dream come true. Many pages are controlled by anonymous Wikipedia editors on behalf of special interests who forbid and reverse edits that go against their agenda
 
Other similar accusations, from leaks and whistleblowers :
https://consciouslifenews.com/cia-monitor-internet-discredit-factual-information/1144372/#

https://consciouslifenews.com/penta...-planting-false-information-facebook/1148434/
Pentagon, CIA, FBI “Cyber-Warriors” Planting “False Information on Facebook”
Posted by clnews January 29, 2013 in Agencies & Systems, Internet Control with 0 Comments
By Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich | Global Research

On November 22, 2012, the Los Angeles Times published an alarming piece of news entitled “Cyber Corps program trains spies for the digital age”. The “cyber-warriors” who are headed for organizations such as the CIA, NSC, FBI, the Pentagon and so on, are trained to stalk, “rifle through trash, sneak a tracking device on cars and plant false information on Facebook [emphasis added]. They also are taught to write computer viruses, hack digital networks, crack passwords, plant listening devices and mine data from broken cellphones and flash drives.” ......

https://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/hbgarys-high-volume.html
HBGary's high-volume astroturfing technology and the Feds who requested it

The enormous corpus of email leaked from federal security contractor HB Gary following Anonymous's hacking of the company's servers continues to deliver compromising payloads.

This time, it's internal emails detailing the creation of "persona management" software to simplify the process of pretending to be several people at once online, in order simulate widespread support for a point of view -- astroturfing automation software. The software appears to have been developed in response to a federal government solicitation seeking automated tools for astroturfing message boards in foreign countries.......

https://www.computerworld.com/artic...cial-media-friends-to-promote-propaganda.html
By Darlene Storm, Computerworld | Feb 22, 2011 6:00 AM PT

Army of fake social media friends to promote propaganda
It's recently been revealed that the U.S. government contracted HBGary Federal for the development of software which could create multiple fake social media profiles to manipulate and sway public opinion on controversial issues by promoting propaganda. It could also be used as surveillance to find public opinions with points of view the powers-that-be didn't like. It could then potentially have their "fake" people run smear campaigns against those "real" people. As disturbing as this is, it's not really new for U.S. intelligence or private intelligence firms to do the dirty work behind closed doors.

https://www.computerworld.com/artic...acebook-friend-might-be-a-spy.html#tk.drr_mlt

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2011/02/13/943139/-HBGary:-Dont-let-this-story-die,-its-big-
 
After human troll farms, bot troll farms ? Expert Andrei Massalovich said that until now, bots remain easy to identify ; which does not mean that new generations of more efficient ones are not considered to be developped, on the contrary. However, the fact that the Pentagon made its request so plainly visible suggests that it is a smokescreen to divert attention from their already existing use of internet trolls.
https://www.rt.com/usa/415609-us-army-ai-language-bot

Pentagon bots in your comments? US Army wants AI tool for social networks
Published time: 11 Jan, 2018 15:07 Edited time: 12 Jan, 2018 03:57

  • The US Army wants a new intelligence tool able to understand social media posts in languages including Russian, Arabic and French. It must also be able to answer on its own – just like those pesky “Kremlin bots” we hear about.
    The description of what the US military wants from the future software is outlined in a request for the submission of white papers published on the Federal Business Opportunities website on Wednesday.

    The self-improving AI tool is meant to work with text, voice, images and other content on social media in Arabic, French, Pashtu, Farsi, Urdu, Russian and Korean. It should understand colloquial phrasing, spelling variations, social media brevity codes and emojis, and also recognize various dialects.

    The content will be automatically analyzed for sentiment – at minimum distinguish positive, neutral and negative emotions and preferably tell anger, pleasure, sadness and excitement. It should also have the “capability to suggest whether specific audiences could be influenced based on derived sentiment.”

    Additionally, the tool must be able to serve as a translator to English and back into the original language, and automatically generate “at least three, and up to 10, unique statements derived from one original social media statement, while retaining the meaning and tone of the original.” The responses should be customized according to whatever slang and emojis the original contained. The software is also required to monitor and analyze the impact of the message on the target audience.

    The software is also required to monitor and analyze the impact of the message on the target audience.

    According to former MI5 officer Annie Machon, the Pentagon could be attempting to use the allegations of ‘Russian troll farms’ to justify and deflect attention away from the fact that US military intelligence has been engaged in exactly this kind of activity for years.

    “The most obvious interpretation would be that this is a pushback against the allegations that have been made consistently for the last 18 months about so-called Russian troll farms influencing elections across the West, and it’s interesting to see the languages they are advertising for are the languages of Iran, and of course North Korea and Russia, so that would be a giveaway about which countries they want to be targeting,” Machon told RT.

    “Having said that, the timing to me is interesting, because for sure the West has been running these so-called troll farms against other countries as well for a long time, so are they just trying to expand their operations by developing this new software? Or are they trying to disingenuously suggest to people that actually they haven’t done it before and only the Big Bad Russians, or the Big Bad Chinese, have run troll farms.”

    William Binney, a former NSA official and whistleblower, told RT there’s nothing extraordinary about the US military’s request, as any intelligence agency has among its duties the identification of potential threats on the web and works on manipulation techniques.

    “What they really want to do is to be able to monitor voice communications or any kind of communications, texts, and be able to assess it and check it for threats or things like that or even, from some of the manipulation programs, respond in kind and try to manipulate the other person on the other end,” Binney said. He argued the only thing that is somewhat baffling about the US Army request is the Pentagon’s readiness to go public with it.

    The US military’s involvement in the social media communications in other countries is hardly surprising. The Pentagon was among the pioneers of state ‘astroturfing’ campaigns – online propaganda and social media manipulation through ‘sockpuppets,’ which are fake online personas purporting to be real people advocating whatever views the US military wants them to.

    “Such software is essential for any army, any commander that is in involved in [such] an intelligence operation,” Pierluigi Paganini, Chief Technology Officer at CSE Cybsec, told RT. “For example, such kind of software is very important for social media activities and intelligence. That means it can also be used against terrorism.”

    “Of course, in this specific case we can imagine also that such kind of software can be used for propaganda or to influence the sentiment of other countries. Basically, they can use this software exactly in the same way they say Russia is using it.”

    This particular software request came from the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM), which is primarily tasked with collecting intelligence. The bot-like tool described seems more along the lines of psychological warfare, the domain of the United States Army Special Operations Command (USASOC). It is possible, however, that the spooks need to convince their sources to cooperate with a little help from AI-generated messages.
 
I just got sent this by a family member and hadn't heard the term before:

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/...n=20171028Z1&et_cid=DM163348&et_rid=100068640
.....Wikipedia is astroturf’s dream come true. Many pages are controlled by anonymous Wikipedia editors on behalf of special interests who forbid and reverse edits that go against their agenda.....
That's true. I've been banned from Wikipedia for editing Andrew Lloyd Webber's page with factual information about his vote supporting the government on tax credits. My edit was removed, with a message that if I could provide links to news stories about it, then it would be allowed. So I did, and then they removed my edit anyway. I just kept reversing the edit until they locked the page and banned me.
 
editing Andrew Lloyd Webber's page with factual information

Living figures are sensitive about the way they appear on Wikipedia; its reputation for being a terrible source of information stems from the experience of people who seldom look up anything but pop culture or contemporary politics etc.

Micro-slebs edit their own Wikipedia pages; I am sure mega-gits have a galley of slaves working for them. Needless to say, word gets into the public domain somehow . . . :omg:
 
Revelations already 6-years old ; being first with the truth, a coded name for being first with my truth... :
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks
Revealed: US spy operation that manipulates social media
Military's 'sock puppet' software creates fake online identities to spread pro-American propaganda

Jeff Jarvis: Washington shows the morals of a clumsy spammer
Nick Fielding and Ian Cobain

Thu 17 Mar 2011 13.19 GMT First published on Thu 17 Mar 2011 13.19 GMT

  • The US military is developing software that will let it secretly manipulate social media sites by using fake online personas to influence internet conversations and spread pro-American propaganda.

    A Californian corporation has been awarded a contract with United States Central Command (Centcom), which oversees US armed operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, to develop what is described as an "online persona management service" that will allow one US serviceman or woman to control up to 10 separate identities based all over the world.

    The project has been likened by web experts to China's attempts to control and restrict free speech on the internet. Critics are likely to complain that it will allow the US military to create a false consensus in online conversations, crowd out unwelcome opinions and smother commentaries or reports that do not correspond with its own objectives.

    The discovery that the US military is developing false online personalities – known to users of social media as "sock puppets" – could also encourage other governments, private companies and non-government organisations to do the same.

    The Centcom contract stipulates that each fake online persona must have a convincing background, history and supporting details, and that up to 50 US-based controllers should be able to operate false identities from their workstations "without fear of being discovered by sophisticated adversaries".

    Centcom spokesman Commander Bill Speaks said: "The technology supports classified blogging activities on foreign-language websites to enable Centcom to counter violent extremist and enemy propaganda outside the US."

    He said none of the interventions would be in English, as it would be unlawful to "address US audiences" with such technology, and any English-language use of social media by Centcom was always clearly attributed. The languages in which the interventions are conducted include Arabic, Farsi, Urdu and Pashto.

    Advertisement
    Centcom said it was not targeting any US-based web sites, in English or any other language, and specifically said it was not targeting Facebook or Twitter.

    Once developed, the software could allow US service personnel, working around the clock in one location, to respond to emerging online conversations with any number of co-ordinated messages, blogposts, chatroom posts and other interventions. Details of the contract suggest this location would be MacDill air force base near Tampa, Florida, home of US Special Operations Command.

    Centcom's contract requires for each controller the provision of one "virtual private server" located in the United States and others appearing to be outside the US to give the impression the fake personas are real people located in different parts of the world.

    It also calls for "traffic mixing", blending the persona controllers' internet usage with the usage of people outside Centcom in a manner that must offer "excellent cover and powerful deniability".

    The multiple persona contract is thought to have been awarded as part of a programme called Operation Earnest Voice (OEV), which was first developed in Iraq as a psychological warfare weapon against the online presence of al-Qaida supporters and others ranged against coalition forces. Since then, OEV is reported to have expanded into a $200m programme and is thought to have been used against jihadists across Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Middle East.

    OEV is seen by senior US commanders as a vital counter-terrorism and counter-radicalisation programme. In evidence to the US Senate's armed services committee last year, General David Petraeus, then commander of Centcom, described the operation as an effort to "counter extremist ideology and propaganda and to ensure that credible voices in the region are heard". He said the US military's objective was to be "first with the truth".

    This month Petraeus's successor, General James Mattis, told the same committee that OEV "supports all activities associated with degrading the enemy narrative, including web engagement and web-based product distribution capabilities".

    Centcom confirmed that the $2.76m contract was awarded to Ntrepid, a newly formed corporation registered in Los Angeles. It would not disclose whether the multiple persona project is already in operation or discuss any related contracts.

    Nobody was available for comment at Ntrepid.

    In his evidence to the Senate committee, Gen Mattis said: "OEV seeks to disrupt recruitment and training of suicide bombers; deny safe havens for our adversaries; and counter extremist ideology and propaganda." He added that Centcom was working with "our coalition partners" to develop new techniques and tactics the US could use "to counter the adversary in the cyber domain".

    According to a report by the inspector general of the US defence department in Iraq, OEV was managed by the multinational forces rather than Centcom.

    Asked whether any UK military personnel had been involved in OEV, Britain's Ministry of Defence said it could find "no evidence". The MoD refused to say whether it had been involved in the development of persona management programmes, saying: "We don't comment on cyber capability."

    OEV was discussed last year at a gathering of electronic warfare specialists in Washington DC, where a senior Centcom officer told delegates that its purpose was to "communicate critical messages and to counter the propaganda of our adversaries".

    Persona management by the US military would face legal challenges if it were turned against citizens of the US, where a number of people engaged in sock puppetry have faced prosecution.

    Last year a New York lawyer who impersonated a scholar was sentenced to jail after being convicted of "criminal impersonation" and identity theft.

    It is unclear whether a persona management programme would contravene UK law. Legal experts say it could fall foul of the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981, which states that "a person is guilty of forgery if he makes a false instrument, with the intention that he or another shall use it to induce somebody to accept it as genuine, and by reason of so accepting it to do or not to do some act to his own or any other person's prejudice". However, this would apply only if a website or social network could be shown to have suffered "prejudice" as a result.

    • This article was amended on 18 March 2011 to remove references to Facebook and Twitter, introduced during the editing process, and to add a comment from Centcom, received after publication, that it is not targeting those sites.
Centcom said that it didn't target Facebook and Twitter, so, if they say so...
 
One of the most active astroturfing agency is Israel's Hasbara. In Hebrew, it alledgely means to explain or to enlighten. Well, this is what every propagandist says of propaganda ! :
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/israels-information-ops/
Israel’s Information Ops
When Tel Aviv goes to war, universities and activists are organized to beat back the bad news.
By Philip GiraldiAugust 20, 2014

The past few weeks have not been kind to Israel in the public relations department. The war against Gaza was so lopsided and obviously contrived that even in the United States pro-Israel sentiment began to soften. For those interested in fine points of national security there were three news articles of note. The first quoted from a document from the Edward Snowden haul citing a 2007 National Security Agency (NSA) assessment naming Israel as the “third most aggressive intelligence service against the U.S.” It ranked just behind perennial adversaries China and Russia in terms of aggressiveness and the persistence of its espionage effort. Israel was also cited as a “leading threat” to the infrastructure of U.S. financial institutions.

The second article reported how U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry had his cell phone communications intercepted by Israel in 2013 when he unsuccessfully sought to negotiate a peace agreement with the Palestinians. ...

The third piece described how Israel was given weapons from a U.S. stockpile during its assault on Gaza, allegedly without either the White House or the State Department being informed about what was occurring. ...

All of the above would be embarrassing enough, but Israel has also been extremely active in yet another enterprise that falls in the gray area between covert operations and overt governmental activity. ...

When an intelligence organization seeks to influence opinion by creating and deliberately circulating false information, it is referred to as a “disinformation operation.” Such activity is generally described as public diplomacy when it is done openly by a recognized government official and the information itself is both plausible and verifiable, at least within reasonable limits. But Israel has refined the art of something in between, what might be referred to more accurately as “perception management” or “influence operations” in which it only very rarely shows its hand overtly, in many cases paying students as part-time bloggers or exploiting diaspora Jews as volunteers to get its message out. The practice is so systemic, involving recruitment, training, Foreign Ministry-prepared information sheets, and internet alerts to potential targets, that it is frequently described by its Hebrew name, hasbara, which means literally “public explanation.” It is essentially an internet-focused “information war” that parallels and supports the military action whenever Israel enters into conflict with any of its neighbors.

The hasbara onslaught inevitably cranks up when Israel is being strongly criticized. There were notable surges in activity when Israel attacked Gaza in 2009 and 2012, as well as when it hijacked the Turkish humanitarian relief ship the Mavi Marmara in 2011. The recent Gaza fighting has inevitably followed suit, producing a perfect storm of pro-Israel commentary. The comments tend to appear in large numbers on websites where moderation and registration requirements are minimal, including Yahoo! News, or Facebook and Twitter. Sites like TAC as well as leading national newspapers have much stricter management control over who comments, and are generally avoided.

The hasbara comments are noticeable as they tend to sound like boilerplate, and run contrary to or even ignore what other contributors to the site are writing. ... They tend to repeat over and over again sound bites of pseudo-information ... The commenters operate in the belief that if something is repeated often enough in many different places it will ipso facto gain some credibility and create doubts regarding contrary points of view.

That Israel is engaged in perception management on a large scale has more-or-less been admitted by the Israeli government, and some of its mechanisms have been identified. The Israeli Foreign Ministry even sent a letter out to a number of pro-Israel organizations emphasizing the “importance of the internet as the new battleground for Israel’s image.” Haaretz reported in 2013 how Prime Minister Netanyahu’s office collaborated with the National Union of Israeli Students to establish “covert units” at the seven national universities to be structured in a “semi-military” fashion and organized in situation rooms. Students are paid as much as $2,000 monthly to work the online targets. ...

Many of the volunteers worked through a website giyus.org (an acronym for Give Israel Your United Support). The website included a desktop tool called Megaphone that provided daily updates on articles appearing on the internet that had to be challenged or attacked. There were once believed to be 50,000 activists receiving the now-inactive Megaphone’s alerts.

There have also been reports about a pro-Israel American group called Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) preparing to enter its own version of developments in the Middle East on the popular online encyclopedia Wikipedia. E-mails from CAMERA reveal that the group sought volunteers in 2008 to edit material on Wikipedia “to help us keep Israel-related entries … from becoming tainted by anti-Israel editors,” while also recommending that articles on the Middle East be avoided initially by supporters so as not to arouse suspicions about their motives. Volunteers were also advised to use false names that did not hint at any Israeli or Jewish connection and to avoid any references to being organized by CAMERA. Fifty volunteers reportedly were actively engaged in the program when it was exposed in the media and the program was put on hold. ...

Every government is engaged in selling a product, which is its own self-justifying view of what it does and how it does it. But the American public in particular should be aware of the extraordinary efforts that Israel and its supporters make to present a crafted and coordinated image through the media, particularly by way of the Internet. There are certainly many reasons why the United States uniquely views Israel favorably, but the skillful use of information manipulation and perception management certainly contributes to the process.

Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National Interest.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
More on the Hasbara, and how it attempts to subvert wikipedia. Their case offers a wealth of learning opportunities to understand how groups of influence work on Wikipedia and various other internet sites, as their tactics are typical of other shadow groups involved in astroturfing, providing a number of reasons to take the web encyclopedia with a pinch of salt. The French version of wikipedia made announcements in 2014 and 2015 that it had identified and banned a number of contributors tied to Israel and acting in concert.
https://electronicintifada.net/cont...el-groups-plan-rewrite-history-wikipedia/7472
EI exclusive: a pro-Israel group’s plan to rewrite history on Wikipedia
The Electronic Intifada 21 April 2008

A pro-Israel pressure group is orchestrating a secret, long-term campaign to infiltrate the popular online encyclopedia Wikipedia to rewrite Palestinian history, pass off crude propaganda as fact, and take over Wikipedia administrative structures to ensure these changes go either undetected or unchallenged.

A series of emails by members and associates of the pro-Israel group CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America), provided to The Electronic Intifada (EI), indicate the group is engaged in what one activist termed a “war” on Wikipedia. ...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
An investigation by the New York Attorney General's office has determined the US debate over removing net neutrality protections was heavily influenced by paid astroturfing campaigns.
Report: Fake comments, secret campaign undermine FCC's net neutrality repeal

Millions of fake comments and a secret campaign undermined the Federal Communications Commission's 2017 net neutrality repeal, a report confirmed Thursday.

The New York attorney general's report based on a multiyear investigation found nearly 18 million of the more than 22 million comments the FCC received during its 2017 proceeding to repeal the agency's net neutrality rules were fake comments. ...

The FCC voted 3-2 in December 2017 to repeal the Obama-era rules to prevent broadband companies from slowing down or blocking any sites or apps and charging more to access certain sites. The next month the attorneys general of more than 20 states led by then-N.Y. Attorney General Eric Schneiderman filed a petition to block the FCC's repeal of the rules, saying the rollback was illegal.

"An open Internet -- and the free exchange of ideas it allows -- is critical to our democratic process," Schneiderman said at the time. ...

The report released Thursday by now Attorney General Letitia James found that some of the country's largest broadband companies funded a secret campaign to generate millions of comments in the 2017 net neutrality proceeding to provide "cover" for the FCC's repeal of net neutrality rules.

Main funders of the campaign included an industry trade group and three companies, with a combined market value of approximately half a trillion dollars. The campaign created an appearance of widespread grassroots opposition to net neutrality rules, which did not exist in reality.

Polls showed overwhelming public support for keeping the net neutrality rules in place, so the industry hired companies "known as lead generators" that would "generate comments for a fee," the report said. ...

"This practice -- disguising an orchestrated, paid campaign as a grassroots effort to create a false appearance of genuine, unpaid public support -- is often referred to as astroturfing," the report noted.

The secret campaign spent $4.2 million generating and submitting over 8.5 million fake comments to the FCC, according to the report. The campaign also sent over a half a million fake letters to Congress. ...
FULL STORY: https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/202...band-companies-secret-campaign/2531620313340/

THE NY ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT: https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/oag-fakecommentsreport.pdf
 

Whilst Israel will actively conduct pro-Israel campaigns online, the problem with the labelling of "Hasbara" is that anti-Zionists then label any pro-Israel comment as "Hasbara", in order to devoid it of any worth.

It should also be noted that the Palestinians have a massive activism effort, and will use the tactic of "outrage" at an injustice, even when that injustice is entirely fictional.
They also will use a tactic of claiming the mainstream Western media pay a lack of attention to a disaster or death, when the opposite is true.


I will have to be careful what I write as politics is banned, so will not name names.

But there was one London mayoral candidate for today's election who going by social media posts, seemingly had a lot of support.
But in real life I could not find anyone who supported them, in fact the people I spoke to really baulked at this candidate.

It made me very suspicious that the candidate had engaged a web savvy PR company, to run a campaign that appeared as if it was from the ground up, based in grassroots support.
 
... But there was one London mayoral candidate for today's election who going by social media posts, seemingly had a lot of support.
But in real life I could not find anyone who supported them, in fact the people I spoke to really baulked at this candidate.

It made me very suspicious that the candidate had engaged a web savvy PR company, to run a campaign that appeared as if it was from the ground up, based in grassroots support.

If there were such a campaign to generate pseudo-evidence of support beyond that which the candidate actually had among the electorate it would indeed be an example of astroturfing.

The rise of popular social media has further complicated the situation by providing channels through which unpaid parties with diverse motivations (possibly as trivial as simply joining in on a joke ... ) can have similar influence. All it takes is generating sufficient exposure to con the audience into assuming the frequency of encountering your particular point of view represents its prevalence in the population at large.

It can be very difficult to differentiate between deliberate and spontaneously self-induced astroturfing.
 
I've recently pondered if some social media sites are paying staff to post inflammatory comments because it gets them more site traffic through arguments. There's a internet guru of sorts (self proclaimed narcissist) Sam Vaknin, who believes Twitter's character limit is intentionally short to provoke hostility (he says it takes fewer words to say something mean than something nice) because anger holds peoples attention better than happiness. I kind of think he might be on to something.

That said, I have been taken aback by the rise in partisanship among conspiracy theorists as of late. It used to be taken for granted that conspiracy nuts "didn't trust the guvment" no matter which political party was in power. But in recent years I've seen conspiracy theorists backing particular candidates and what not and labeling the other side as pure evil... which makes me think the astroturfers have successfully undermined the conspiracy subculture online.

I'm trying to be careful not to be political but I think there's plenty of evidence in the US that the candidates of both sides are buddy buddy in recent elections. I think elections are largely Kayfabe which used to be a given among conspiracy theorists.
 
Last edited:
'Meet the new boss, same as the old boss' or something like that.

Edited to be more generic... you can research the history of prominent candidates and find many of them are friends behind the scenes.

There's a cold war Era Russian animation about a knight slaying a mechanical dragon by killing the pilot only to become the next pilot. Different driver same beast.
 
Last edited:
Back on topic, please ...

Get Kraken: Since you're new, you may not be aware that "politics" is a prohibited subject on this forum. Postings purely dedicated to "politics" are subject to sanction and / or deletion. The same applies to members who persist in posting them.
 
Back on topic, please ...

Get Kraken: Since you're new, you may not be aware that "politics" is a prohibited subject on this forum. Postings purely dedicated to "politics" are subject to sanction and / or deletion. The same applies to members who persist in ,
Thanks. I think the Kayfabe theory of politics ties into astroturfing.
My understanding regarding politics here is that it is okay within context. Astroturfing online often involves creating division and "teams" and interparty hostility. I see this as an extension of kayfabe. Astroturfing is itself a political topic.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top