Technology

I think every literate soul in Afghanistan would agree that this isn't really limited to Russia.

Not only voters, also politicians. Everyone can be influenced, even those in power :)

You'd have thought publicising them would involve not only saying they exist, but also educating people about what the misinformation is. As far as I can tell from a quick scan, the article doesn't talk about the message the proganda is pushing. I'm just as clueless as before about what I should believe and what I shouldn't.

Are the public just meant to know when they're being lied to?

DISinformation. The difference is that misinformation might or might not be intentional, whereas disinformation is organised intentional misinformation with specific goals in mind.

Not that I blame you for getting it wrong, mind you, since most media outlets consistently do.

To add: Twitter under Musk also complies with all government censorship requests since Musk took over. News on Twitter has been hugely influential in the past in protests in authoritarian states, but that's clearly a thing of the past now.

Full compliance with government censorship was 83% in may last year, up from the 50% it was before Musk.

And partial + full compliance was at 98.8%, up from 92% before Musk. And the remaining 1.2% were not denied, just status unknown, so it's basically 100%.

https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2023/5/2/twitter-fulfilling-more-government-censorship-requests-under-musk

I wonder what the current numbers are and how the full/partial takedowns are geographically distributed. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if partial compliance was limited to some western countries and it's full compliance everywhere else.

Elon Musk, the self declared "free speech absolutist", what a shithead.

If you're in a country that shares a border with Russia, or are Canadian or British and understand the end goal of this, you've been sick of it for a while.

Europe certainly is. I should note that while most of their campaigns happen over on Twitter & Facebook that if federated social media ever took off in a big way it would happen there too and it might actually be harder to control if it did.

If you see memes & misinfo trend about immigration, Ukraine, drugs, vaccines, climate change, abortion, gas & oil, politics, NATO, EVs, MAGA, Palestine / Israel, dissidents etc. then invariably there is a bad actor driving that crap.

The thing is, there's a lot of stuff in those topics you list that we need to have social discourse about and there are legitimate differences of opinion on. I don't think you can write everyone that is against what somebody/government deems as "approved fact" as a bad actor. I'm sure I would disagree with you on a number of those topics and would argue them in good faith. This is what makes it all so hard.

Russian propaganda is big on the left, too.

It's a great pun, but I hate how good an English pun it is, especially for the operation. It suggests that these guys aren't hacks, and have enough language and culture skills to blend in. The recent "warm water ports" gaffe comes to mind.

Also, intelligence agencies don't use cute code names for things like this since it makes it easier to work out the operation scope or intent. To me, this also says that the operation is "at arm's length" and the name was coined by non-government folks. Think: information age mercenaries.

To prove that they're real. Without proof it can be seen as a conspiracy

'Just'

How do you defend against something without first uncovering it and seeing how it works?