
Facebook to Turn Over Russian-Linked Ads to Congress - tucif
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/21/technology/facebook-russian-ads.html
======
zghst
Undoubtedly, Russia has worked to advance its interests (through use of
misinformation and spin) during the 2016 election. Unfortunately, without an
appropriate timeline that displays conditions that breeds opportunity for this
behavior, this narrative of election hacking does not do us justice.

The big fish (which should have been included in the article) was the intense
internet campaign made during the 2013 Ukraine crisis. Preceding the crisis,
the Snowden revelations produced an immediate, immense distrust in our
government and institutions, giving way to a wide window of exploitation.
There are heaps of ostensive evidence of how the Russian regime took advantage
of these events on multiple fronts: bolstering fringe groups in the EU,
hijacking public conversations online, intimidating and harassing opposition
voices (which I've experienced), and adding pressure to national dialogue
through injection of Whataboutism and disingenuous innuendo.

The response from various online communities during this period has been
nothing short of courageous. I've personally witnessed a multitude of diligent
detection and pushback across the political and intellectual spectrum during
the crisis, not only due to organic voices, but also a strong intelligence
apparatus that helps to detect, analyze, and disrupt these attacks. These
pieces continually avoid citing sources outside of the political spectrum that
helps to make clear sense of the issue. I acknowledge that certain forces of
good do not want to be in the spotlight, however as time goes on this looks
like a missed opportunity to make a bold statement against not only this
behavior, but also all malignant and criminal behavior that takes place
online.

The confidence lost in our institutions is owed to nothing more than the
political climate itself. We chase the ghosts of "collusion" and "influence"
and other ambiguous terms. The time for scrutiny and hot takes are over, we
should be well underway into a severe, resolute response. Instead we are
packed into a clown car, driving around in circles. God help us.

~~~
Muli22
Zuckerberg should resign. God knows how many elections across the world have
been effected. And if Hillary had won I wonder if Facebook would have even
looked at this seriously.

------
bnolsen
The Obama administration spent taxpayer money to try to knock out Netanyahu in
the Israeli elections. Doesn't anyone care about that?

~~~
zghst
Yes, actually. I am quite pleased by this fact.

------
glomic
Ads so pervasive that virtually nobody had seen them until now.

~~~
jessaustin
The reason none of us have seen them, could be that they were only targeted at
the gullible dumbasses who could possibly vote for Trump? Maybe that was a
special target group? Maybe it's the same group that gets ad-targeted for e.g.
hemorrhoid cream and mobile home skirting?

Frankly, given the revealed political preferences of FB executives, I'm pretty
skeptical of any fruit from this tree.

~~~
slamdance
and _THIS_ is the attitude that gave us Trump.

/full disclosure: I voted for Johnson.

~~~
jessaustin
Did that really need an _/ s_? But yes, I agree.

------
randyrand
I remember when Obama when to the UK to voice his support for Macron in the UK
elections. Does that not count as a USA-sponsored ad? Because it sure has the
same effect and intention as one.

Why the double standard?

~~~
Muli22
Obama was the poster child for overnight political success using more or less
the same mechanics that social media is built on today. They just didn't think
the other side can play the same game. Which goes - Tell people what they want
to hear and whoever gets the most attention wins.

Every politician whether they were tech literate or not got on Facebook and
Twitter after Obama won. Facebook has enabled the propping up of unqualified
to govern but qualified to be "like"d candidates all around the world.

They have done serious damage to society in the last 10 years and we are just
getting started as people realize the damage.

~~~
dragonwriter
> Obama was the poster child for overnight political success using more or
> less the same mechanics that social media is built on today.

Barack Obama had been in electoral politics, as first a state and then US
senator, for just over a decade before being elected President, and had been
widely hailed as an up and coming star in the party and likely future
Presidential candidate after his national convention speech when running for
the US Senate.

He was not at all an “overnight political success”.

~~~
slamdance
so - he was a state senator for less than 4 years (Less than one full term)
before being elected president. I would say that's "overnight" as far as
politics go - considering the others who make it their entire careers and
never reach the pinnacle.

~~~
dragonwriter
He was a state senator for a full term, and a US Senator for a partial term
(and very active as a political, if not elected, figure before that, which is
what being a “community organizer” is.)

> considering the others who make it their entire careers and never reach the
> pinnacle.

Sure, by that standard anyone who succeeds does so meteorically, since only a
handful do per generation, while many spend whole careers in politics. But
that just means the standard is nonsense.

