WASHINGTON, Oct 20 (Reuters) - The United States on Friday released a U.S. intelligence assessment sent to more than 100 countries that found Moscow is using spies, social media and Russian state-run media to erode public faith in the integrity of democratic elections worldwide.
“This is a global phenomenon,” said the assessment. “Our information indicates that senior Russian government officials, including the Kremlin, see value in this type of influence operation and perceive it to be effective.”
A senior State Department official, briefing reporters on condition of anonymity, said that Russia was encouraged to intensify its election influence operations by its success in amplifying disinformation about the 2020 U.S. election and the COVID-19 pandemic.
I don’t think we should put ourselves on a high horse, I do not think we are any better.
Our military and CIA are always bringing “freedom” to foreign nations since forever, overthrowing democratic elections.
Difference being, our citizens are not as well informed of the US propaganda we see so often, many leaks have shown how we are similar.
Russia hoax was proven false, many Clinton personnel and news stations just ran with it.
For those interested in meta discourse…this comment I’m replying to is a good teaching tool to carry out some exercises, so I’m going to pull it apart, instead of actually talking to the guy.
(Think of it as a live-action English class, but instead of pulling apart boring-as-shit short stories written decades ago, I’m gonna do it to this guy.) Note, I’m not an expert, I’m just a novel writer that gets really pissed off when I see people using techniques IRL that I use in fiction.
First, look at timing of that guy’s comment. Original post pops up about the Russian state’s “success in amplifying disinformation” online. Within 16 minutes, we have this guy jumping in to say, “But what about the US!” Just fast as fucking lightning, diverting attention away from a news post shedding light on how online information can be manipulated by state-level actors to amplify lies and misinformation.
Of course, I can imagine a topic like this is a high-priority target to be shut down. “Oh shit, they’re onto us!”
Now, is this guy actually a Russian agent? (Or from some other nation?) I don’t actually know. It’s impossible for me to find out. But whether this guy is totally legit in all the views proclaimed and is an individual American who truly believes them, or a bad actor from elsewhere, it doesn’t matter.
If you set a cup outside and rain fills it up, or if you go over and fill the cup yourself, the end result is the cup is filled. How it comes to be and the intent behind it doesn’t matter. We can’t prove intent here, that’s invisible thoughts in the poster’s head that we can never access. But we can see the actual action they took (posting), and the timing of it (which they chose), and the words contained (all of which they also chose to use), and think about WHY someone would post those words in this thread with that timing. We can’t see their intent, but we can analyze their actions and choices.
And in this case, the end result of them chiming in here and now with “the US does shitty things too!” is in my opinion distraction from a really important topic, that social media (including this site right here!) is being manipulated to sow division. As someone else in this thread pointed out, it’s “whatabout-ism”. The original news article is about one thing, and this guy jumps in pointing to some other topic instead.
Here’s some other things I want to call out, pertaining to their word-choices.
I don’t think we
“We”. In their very first line. They’re trying to put themselves into a group with other Americans, trying to form closeness with their words. Think of in a movie, the used car salesman slinging their arm over your shoulder. WE want to do this thing, right? WE think this way, yeah?
It plays on the human desire to not be left out of the group. And the fear of saying, “No, WE don’t actually think that at all!” in case there’s repercussions for disagreeing.
should put ourselves on a high horse
Again, playing on emotions of people. “High horse” is a phrase that has an emotional weight. I’m a writer and there’s very few places where I’d use that phrase unless I was really pissed and trying to rouse emotions in others by being mocking or belittling.
When combined with the “we”, think of someone throwing their arm over your shoulder and saying, “Now, WE don’t want to be all stuck up on our high horses, DO WE?” and it suggests someone who goes against the speaker is on a high horse or is otherwise speaking with a snootiness that is not in line with their station or social status.
Which, again, goes back to creating fear in the reader. Anxiety. If we engage with the original news article, are we getting above our station in life? Are we acting out of line? Do “good” people get out of line? And if I think I’m a good person what happens if I do something that might be out of line? A bunch of anxiety about one’s unverbalized social status in life swirls around.
Russia hoax was proven false, many Clinton personnel and news stations just ran with it.
The word “hoax” is emotionally charged. People don’t like being embarrassed, they don’t want to fall for hoaxes, so when you use that word, fear is roused in the reader that there’s a chance that THEY have fallen for a hoax, and if they don’t back out quick, people might think less of them, or they might feel stupid. People’s priorities can get super-fucked-up if they just THINK they got caught doing something stupid, if there’s just a chance they fell for a hoax, because there’s a lot of emotion tied up in it–panic, shame, guilt. So there’s ways to manipulate if you start telling them they might’ve fallen for a hoax.
Another emotionally-charged word here is “Clinton” (one, it has decades of political baggage, two, it’s being dropped in this post when Clinton hasn’t actually been doing much or anything politically since she lost, which again suggests the person I’m responding to is shit-stirring as it’s brought up for no reason connected to current events in order to harvest the fearful emotions connected to the name from previous years and decades.)
And then connecting the word “Clinton” to “media” aims at fearmongering that “the left” is controlling media.
It’s kind of like a magician doing something flashy with one hand (invoking the name of Clinton and the fear of Clinton-run media) while doing the actual slight-of-hand sneakily (this post here that’s using whataboutism, the false-closeness of “we”, and other charged words like pulling “Clinton” and “many Clinton…news stations” out of nowhere).
Someone might jump in now that I’ve said this and say that yeah, America has done shitty things, and yeah mainstream media does shitty things–those are important topics too, are you shutting that down/censoring/etc?
But I’m saying that human social interaction has always had a “time and place” component. You don’t go to a funeral and ask the widow if she’s single. Yeah, she technically is…but it’s not the time nor place even if her being single technically is a fact.
Similarly, for a thread that is talking about something that is VERY important (like social media being manipulated by bad actors), it’s not the time and place to jump in and start turning people onto other topics. Unless, you know…you’re trying to sow division and cause chaos. Then I imagine jumping in and saying “we” have done “other” bad things and shouldn’t get on “our high horse” would further your goals.
Anyway. My point with the above isn’t to be some textbook water-tight whatever debating the guy. I honestly don’t care about that bit. It’s more an attempt to talk to people about how timing of a comment is important, and word choice in a comment can rouse emotions (very easily in fact), and these things should be in your mind when you read comments on political threads.
And if you’re tired of the usual political comments–someone says something inflammatory, someone posts a rebuttal–you can jump up to the meta discussion, and start picking apart in your head the timing of the other person’s post, and the emotional “color” and “weight” of the words they chose to use, etc. and ask yourself questions about why they said that, in this place, with this timing, and what kind of person might have that comment they posted in their history, but also all the other posts in their history, and see if you can build up in your mind what sort of individual that might be, with what motivations.
This is like…the one place where those English class analysis of paragraphs or stories actually start to be very important in real life. The one place where those skills have real-world use instead of seeming useless outside of the classroom.
(Extra credit: There’s a few places in THIS post where I used some emotionally colored words. What are they? What effect did they have on you? I don’t actually want anyone to tell me, I have no prizes to give out, I just want you to think about it.)
The problem, as we saw in the nineties with the rise of Fox News, is that if no one pushes back on the disinformation and bad narrative, it gets repeated as unassailable truth.
We have to push back if we want to avoid the same outcome.
This is a good opportunity to repeat that there were studies done right after 2016 elections and they found that the best technique is to clarify one statement as a rebuttal and then walk away (2 at most). Also, don’t explain things. They have to explain their side. If they refuse, then you know they think you’re a troll or they’re a troll, lol.
To be fair, if I was trying to distract from the article and sidetrack the conversation, I’d write a long comment explaining how someone else’s comment was trying to distract readers. /s
Just kidding. Media literacy and skepticism of sources and language is very important and needs to be taught in schools. Your comment is helpful and great.
This isn’t about the US being righteous. It’s about Russia fucking with other countries. You don’t have to jump to whataboutism every time the US is involved in something.
I am pushing back on the US opinion.
Many seeem to disregard what we have done.
Why else would I bring it up.
We are pushing for war in Isreal/Iran again, our ships have been deployed.
Lol. Lmao even.
Idk where youve been the last 10 years but if youre talking about Trump and Russia, there’s no hoax therr.
Its been demonstrably true a dozen times over.
I’ll drop the obvious one: Eric Trump on national tv in 2014, “We dont need American banks, we have all the funding we need from Russia.”
Trump and Russia corruption vs. Biden and Ukraine corruption.
I say we jail them both, why stop there might as well jail all past presidents for all the war crimes commited.
I don’t think the people in charge well let it happen, since that is how the system was made to work.
There has been zero evidence of any corruption involving Biden and Ukraine.
Except every Republican lead House investigation this year has said, “Theres nothing there we can charge anyone with, but we’re gonna keep pretending there is so we can creat a fake moral equivilancy!”
Watch some news that doesnt stroke your echo chamber.
To be clear, the Russia hoax wasn’t proven false. DOJ deemed it unactionable, not false.
The connections between team Trump and Russia are deep, known, and absolutely proven. Politico even set it up as a series of graphics:
Russiagate intiailly was pushed by Clinton when she lost to Trump, which was a surprise to many of the elites when she lost.
Trump having connections to Russia is not a dispute.
I am talking about the media frenzy that Russia had this big interference in our elections.
Again, proven interference, and not just in our elections. Russia has an interest in destabilizing many countries:
You parroting the catchphrase “russiagate” tells me all I need to know about your lack of intelligence and credibility.
edit: seen as aggresive, made more passive
Pointing out the hypocrisy on both US and Russia, okay…
Learning only one view will not help our country improve, it is best to learn opposing views as well.
this is exactly what the Russians do online… thank you for providing us with such a great example…
Russians or just americans that are not really as nationalistic as the rest?
Can’t all be bots, can they…
Damn, so you moderate a sub dedicated to Joe Rogan, another one for Jimmy Dore, and post an endless stream of bullshit on two others all on your own? That’s some dedication to an agenda, @jimmydoreisalefty
400+ posts in 3 months, no less 😂
Yes, that is how Communities work, which are dedicated to certain topics, like JRE or Jimmy Dore.
Posting and sharing what they post, then seeing what people have to say about the content or points they make.
Modding communites that are not seen in good light is not easy, that is why I like it, hahaha
You’re missing my point. I’m criticizing the sheer volume and the quality of insanity that you’re outputting by yourself Lol
I hope that you’re automating it because it’d be concerning to be consuming that much nonsense and thinking anybody wants to hear it. Also weird that you mention modding and commenting because you’re the only active user in all of them 😅
Something’s not right
I work with someone like this. No matter what the topic is, they cannot stay on it.
Yes, many people are not that good at discussions.
It is a skill learned by doing.
I am not perfect, I try to stay on topic, but I may just try to get my point accross instead of over thinking and over sharing information.
The report doesn’t put the US on a high horse:
Washington “recognizes its own vulnerability to this threat,” said the report, noting that U.S. intelligence agencies found that “Russian actors spread and amplified information to undermine public confidence in the U.S. 2020 election.”
It was a broad call out of how we see ourselves vs. how the world sees us.
The quote you mention, not sure how that applies. This article does not include what we have done in interference in other countries.
It’s pointing out that we aren’t immune to Russian propaganda, that it’s clear that the Russians have found success in meddling in our elections and your own comment was a clear demonstration of that fact. No, it doesn’t touch on our own interference but that’s a moot point here. Unless you have evidence that we are currently meddling in foreign elections, and even then you would need to demonstrate that our goal is to undermine democracy around the world as the Kremlin is doing.
But somehow I suspect you’ll continue to sling mud without providing anything concrete to back up your assertions.
Don’t feel bad, I was told it was a hoax too. But intelligent people like you know better.
