[solaarphunk]

Russia, and many populist/extremist political campaigns, literally manipulate European elections by employing content farms to push out controversial content. Internet Research Agency, Cambridge Analytica, etc.

How do you think populist leaders gain such a large voice so quickly in those EU countries? You're kidding yourself, if you don't think the same tactics are being deployed in Europe, and amplified via platforms like Facebook.

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20191007IP...

[nopriorarrests]

>How do you think populist leaders gain such a large voice so quickly in those EU countries?

There are two options here.

1. People are not really happy with current status quo so they are looking to choose alternative leaders via elections, just as expected in democratic countries.

2. Some bad guys post bad stuff on Facebook and, like, 30% of german voters read it and march to election booth like zombies to vote the way bad guys said them to vote (for Alternative for Germany).

Well, you can pick which theory survives the Occam Razor test better.

EDIT: And oh, wrt to "a large voice so quickly" -- when a lot of stuff happens quickly (i mean, between 1 or 2 elections) -- yes, a lot of people can change their minds quickly. Turbulent times, you know. In stable times people change their minds slowly.

[solaarphunk]

In case 2. you're being a little disingenuous by oversimplifying the issue.

The issue is that when "bad guys post bad stuff", it gets amplified because its engaging, and can really distort people's reality and nudge their belief systems. Have you taken a look at Cambridge Analytica? This was their playbook. There's a reason those people were paid a lot of money, and received a ton of scrutiny.

As for case 1. Yes, people are not happy with the status quo, but they can be convinced that the reason they are not happy is because of something that's difficult to prove, and creates an "us vs. them" mentality. Think antisemitism in WW2, or anti-immigration, more recently.

[kritiko]

IRA was totally overblown in terms of its impact. See Thomas Rid's Active Measures.

Andrew Bosworth, former head of FB ads, has been pretty critical of Cambridge's claims as well: "In practical terms, Cambridge Analytica is a total non-event. They were snake oil salespeople. The tools they used didn’t work, and the scale they used them at wasn’t meaningful. Every claim they have made about themselves is garbage. Data of the kind they had isn’t that valuable to begin with and worse it degrades quickly, so much so as to be effectively useless in 12-18 months."

[8ytecoder]

It’s easy to scapegoat than actually solve a real problem. This is a well tested way to win elections.

[pjc50]

To me it seems like both of these are true? There is a lot wrong with the status quo, so people go looking outside that for solutions. They run into charlatans offering quick, easy, convenient, and disastrous solutions.

It's strong parallels to those people who've found a valid but isolated problem with the medical establishment then immediately jump off the deep end into completely untested nonsense from quacks which they've heard from Youtube. "Collodial silver" and all that.

[sonotathrowaway]

Are you under the impression that 30% of the vote is insignificant? What if I told you that Hitler never won more than 37% of the vote in free and fair elections?

[nopriorarrests]

30% is HUGE, and this is why I do not buy the idea that you can get such percentage of votes because of some evil state actor who posts ads on facebook, with independent press, TV, all being available and popular as well.

If some party got 30% of votes in Germany, stop blaming facebook and 'state actors'. Germans are better then this, they are not zombies, and they have a lot of information sources to pick up news/opinions from.

[pjc50]

> Germans are better then this

If they're voting for the Nazis again, maybe they're not better than this.

[nopriorarrests]

OK, agree. But then, don't shift the blame to 'malicious state actor'. This is their decision and they own it in full.

[fwsgonzo]

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-43301643

Especially Russia would have a lot to gain from Trump being re-elected. It would have been crazy if they didn't put all hands on it. And the same can be extended to friendly candidates in other countries.

[nopriorarrests]

Yeah, I know. Russia would have a lot to gain from:

-- Trump being re-elected

-- Yellow Vests riots in France

-- Brexit

-- Alternative for Germany party rise in Germany

and all of these happened because of Facebook+Russia.

Sorry, but this is just Q-Anon level global conspiracy theory adopted for progressives. :-(

[solaarphunk]

How do you explain the Internet Research Agency then? What purpose do they serve?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Research_Agency

[nopriorarrests]

Stealing goverment money under the premise of "we will rule the world comrade, so please allocate 100 million dollars to us ASAP" and pocketing it to buy London properties, obviously.

And of course, 50K out of 100M will be really allocated to buy some shitty FB ads to make screenshots and present it to higher-ups.

[solaarphunk]

What a creative application of Occam's Razor!

[crakhamster01]

It's really interesting that people still bring up Cambridge Analytica as a driving force in elections both abroad and domestic. Earlier this year, the UK's ICO concluded after a 3 year long investigation that Cambridge Analytica had no impact on the Brexit vote, and really was no different than your run of the mill marketing agency (just with better PR spin)[1].

But no one has picked up/amplified that story. After the 2016 elections, NYT/WSJ/The Atlantic/etc. ran article after article pinning the outcomes of the US and UK elections on Facebook, despite having no evidence of this outside of testimonies from some former CA employees. Anyone with a background in adtech knew that these allegations were full of shit, but the narrative was too good to pass up.

Now, conclusive investigations have debunked these claims, but it's 4 years too late and the idea that FB/CA caused the problems of the past few years is ingrained in everyone's mind.

[1] https://www.politico.eu/article/no-evidence-that-cambridge-a...

[twox2]

Platforms like FB are just a tool for abuse in your example. If not for FB it would just take place on different platforms or through different channels. This is the price we pay for an interconnected world, killing Facebook will not save "democracy" - whatever that is.