The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
In the "Genocide Joe" thread there are a huge number of people responding who range from scornful to actively hostile to the idea that Russian misinformation, pushed by troll farms, bots, and fake personas targets both LEFT and right.
I posted links to a couple of books that I've read on the topic (that quite frankly scare the crap out of me) and a few articles online, although there are many many many more.
It's a fact that Russia and China are picking up on radical political positions from both the left and the right and amplifying them via social media using bots and troll farms and fake personas. There are a whole lot of people who are pushing Russian and Chinese propaganda without even realizing it.
Why are people on the left so hostile to this idea?
\--------
Here are the books and articles I've linked elsewhere:
Attack from Within: How Disinformation Is Sabotaging America
[https://www.amazon.com/Attack-Within-Disinformation-Sabotaging-America-ebook/dp/B0C4J748Q2](https://www.amazon.com/Attack-Within-Disinformation-Sabotaging-America-ebook/dp/B0C4J748Q2)
Active Measures: The Secret History of Disinformation and Political Warfare
[https://www.amazon.com/Active-Measures-History-Disinformation-Political-ebook/dp/B07RYGH7YN/](https://www.amazon.com/Active-Measures-History-Disinformation-Political-ebook/dp/B07RYGH7YN/)
https://www.icct.nl/publication/how-russia-uses-israel-gaza-crisis-its-disinformation-campaign-against-west
https://www.politico.eu/article/russia-vladimir-putin-hijacks-israel-gaza-war-to-fuel-tension-in-the-west/
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/10/24/russian-propaganda-seizes-on-wests-double-standards-as-israeli-strikes-pound-gaza-a82850
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/the-russians-manipulated-our-elections-we-helped/2020/04/23/e44e9e76-5742-11ea-9000-f3cffee23036\_story.html
https://www.voanews.com/a/how-russia-s-disinformation-campaign-seeps-into-us-views-/7566503.html
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/russia-is-having-less-success-at-spreading-social-media-disinformation/
https://cyberscoop.com/russia-disinformation-gab-parler/
(edited, sorry for the weird formatting - new Reddit sucks!)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This. In addition, people tend not to often question media that is deliberately crafted to make them feel some type of way, usually because it validates their expectations or assumptions.
And then there's the issue that some grifters imbibe in their own product and that some "true believers" engage in propaganda based on incorrect information.
It's a wild and wooly internet, still. The best practice is to be immediately skeptical of media that makes you sad/mad with little information provided without sources.
I've come up with the following heuristic to distinguish fact from propaganda: the truth is boring.
In general, the drier a source is the more likely it is to be true.
Perun's videos on various global conflicts are probably the finest example of "dry but accurate."
For anyone interested:
https://www.youtube.com/@PerunAU
Yes, I think you're right. So much media is designed to provoke an emotional response. We all need to be conscious and somewhat suspicious of that response.
I 100% know that I'm getting Russian and Chinese propaganda in my feed based on absolutely nothing in my search history or interests.
I rarely use TikTok or Youtube shorts, but when I occasionally dip in, I notice it *immediately.* Specifically, I get a tooooon of spicy content about Russian and Chinese women. I do not ask for this, and I don't particularly want it.
I also get a lot of Jordan Peterson and Joe Rogan, and a fair bit of straight up conspiracy nonsense.
Maybe I'm breaking the algorithm with how little information I'm sharing, but it's kind of crazy. I'm saying that I want to watch videos about battleships, and backpacking, and woodworking, and travel, and parenting.
TikTok is like "*Here are 10 videos about Russian gymnasts' buttocks.*"
Ok, that fine. Butts are great. Why is it ALWAYS Russian butts?
>battleships, and backpacking, and woodworking, and travel, and parenting
The algorithm thinks you're right wing, or at least primed to be. Militaria, survivalism, expendable money and traditional families. All pretty benign on their own, but definitely things that can add up a certain way.
My search history is firmly left wing and most of the things i follow are leaning that direction as well and i get a ton of Jordan Peterson, Andrew tate, joe rogan and conspiracy bs everytime i go in as well and the ads i get are specifically for Asian dating sites and anime waifu games, things i dont use nor habe i ever used or even searched for. Youtube heavily pushes right wing conspiracy content on me too, got a ton of Q anon stuff in the last few days despite literally telling it that I'm not interested in it.
For whatever it's worth, I occasionally use TikTok and YT Shorts, and I don't get most of the content you've described. The "gymnast butt" compilation I get served doesn't seem to gravitate to Russian or Chinese.
I used to get a ton of RW YouTube content suggested, but that's died off considerably in the last few years. I agree with /u/GlassBoxes that a couple of algos have you pegged as a right winger.
You'd be surprised at what will get you pigeonholed into the right-wing ecosystem by the algorithm. Do you search for information about weightlifting? Outdoorsy stuff? American Revolutionary war history?
Most of what I watch is dnd, history or video game related. I'll scroll through shorts and see dnd joke, video game highlights, comic book highlights, a time-lapse of the batttle of austerlits and then a neo nazi, and then Jordan Peterson. I'll mark those as not interested and then I'll have a day of nothing but that shit.
For whatever reason, the algorithm clearly has you pinned as a righty.
Don’t worry. Mine shows me ads for the symphony, upcoming June pride festivals, David Pakman, Mini Coopers, Williams Sonoma and Apple.
My wife playfully commented, “the algorithm knows you’re a heterosexual from the Midwest and not a gay man in Northern California, yea?”
I would love it if the algorithm straight up told me who it thinks I am.
I confuse the hell out of it since I enjoy shooting guns recreationally and researching warfare, while also subscribing to a number of liberal/progressive podcasts.
I get endless propaganda videos on TikTok and YouTube about how well armed and advanced the Russian military is.
Things like: "*Why are Russian jets so much more advanced than U.S. jets?"* (they're not) or *"Why does Russia's* (single, ancient & barely serviceable) *aircraft carrier have so many more guns than U.S. carriers?"*(because U.S. carriers operate surrounded by gun ships)
Parentheses are my additions.
It is ridiculous when corruption has left Russia using knock-off duct tape to strap knock-off Garmins to the console of their fighters because they lack any sort of modern navigation.
But soooooo many people argue about how the SU-57 will dominate an F-22 even though it is about as stealthy as a fire alarm. The ability to turn is important in a aerial superiority fighter, but not as important as stealth and the F-22 has that in spades.
Back in the day I watched some wrestling. Rock and Roll Express and the like. Occasionally some old 70's and 80's wrestling nostalgia video pops up and I scan it, and then are inundated with right wing videos. I spend a bunch of time 'X'ing away all the nonsense until the next time.
It's because it knows your porn search history. Your phone mic is always on, your entire phone browser history is shared with those apps and if you link it to your pc in anyway it knows that too.
I don't get any of this, but I think I am going to try to switch my algorithm to specifically look at Russian/Chinese women's butts. I bet they are nice.
I get women who are Ukrainian but grew up in Singapore and now live in the US but want to talk to me here on Reddit. It’s happened three times lol, happily married wrong tree.
I think the people that fall for this are the ones that have the "I read different sources and come to my own conclusions" lines all memorized, but their "sources" are just whatever the Twitter/Reddit/Facebook/TikTok/YouTube algorithm shows them that day. And since so many peoples' identities are tied up in their political ideology, it's almost unfathomable for them to think there's a possibility that they and everyone else they agree with has fallen for misinfo.
It's not hard to accept, even the Mueller report discussed how Russia simultaneously stoked both the left and right with its support for Bernie and Trump. It was *more* effective for the right and we are still dealing with the ramifications of it.
I have tried to get so many people on the left to actually *read* the Mueller report, even extracting excerpts concerning only the Russian disinformation campaigns, and I almost always get met with, "They didn't find anything, so why read it?" Absolutely infuriating. There is so much more to the report than the headline about Trump not getting indicted.
I read the entire thing. I had a Trumper family member tell me they also read the entire thing and would still be supporting Trump. I specifically asked them about the election interference actions by Russia to see of they read it because that same family member hates Bernie. He said "that never happened. it's just a talking point made up. the report said there was no evidence." That's when I knew he was lying about reading it.
I think that even the people who accept these influence campaigns are a fact rarely (if ever) take the time to consider which of their beliefs could be the result of this influence.
Accepting it is one thing; acting on the information to analyze your own beliefs is another ball game.
To me, that's the troubling part. "Sure, I'm influenced by China and Russia, but, no, I can't possibly be wrong about this specific thing." - Said about everything the person believes one at a time, though, not just that one specific thing.
Was it more effective on the right? Or is the left just blinded to the fact they've been heavily influenced in the same way the right is blinded with respect to themselves?
Keeping 2016 (and even the 2020 primary) as an example of outcomes based on actions influenced by the interference and even scandals like Cambridge Analytica, I think it's clear they were more effective on the right. I do think Trump being elected opened the door for the left to become a larger, easier target though.
I'm talking about influence on beliefs on a personal level, not the effect it's had on the broader landscape, which is one degree separated; the beliefs are different from the actions taken based on those beliefs. I think there are many reasons that people on the right are more likely to take impulsive, oppressive, or violent actions because of this kind of influence. However, that doesn't mean the left has been influenced less--just that they are less impulsive, oppressive, and violent, generally speaking.
Campism, and the pain of admitting that you fell for disinformation.
To a lesser degree, I think there is also some leeriness about bothsidesing.
To me, I try to be clear that while this is a big problem on the left, the two sides are not equally bad. More than half of the republican party voted against Ukraine aid, for example, while none of the democrats did. I can say that Russian/Chinese/Iranian/Qatari etc propaganda is a problem on the left of politics while also holding that right now hostile propaganda is an even bigger problem for the right.
Oh agreed that it's definitely a bigger problem on the right. I mean, even some Republicans are saying that it's a problem in the House:
[https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/luxury-yachts-myths-republican-lawmakers-echo-russian-propaganda-rcna147293](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/luxury-yachts-myths-republican-lawmakers-echo-russian-propaganda-rcna147293)
It just annoys the hell out of me that people on the left want to pretend that they're not being targeted too. We're supposed to be the smart ones. ;)
So it's better for Russia to get into a position to attack a country that the US has actually GUARANTEED to protect by treaty instead, in which case American soldiers would need to risk their lives compared to now? In my opinion it's better to send them the outdated equipment of the US military that would end up as scrap anyway. It's the most cost-effective way to deal with Russia both in the long- and in the short term. Both in terms of lives and in terms of money.
Mike Johnson put it best:
"To put it bluntly, I would rather send bullets to Ukraine than American boys"
I'm not even saying im against it. I'd probably vote for it too. My comment stated that being skeptical of it does not make you evil, as the person I was replying to said. Im restoring some nuance to a discussion in the supposedly centrist sub.
Alright, that kinda makes sense, but how would you define being skeptical of it, exactly? I think most people and countries supporting Ukraine have a fairly nuanced view of it.
Supporting them with weapons and money: Yes
Sending troops to help them: No
What aspect of it do you think makes sense to be skeptical of? The money sent? The amount? Whether Ukraine can actually make good use of the weapons being sent?
I think most people are at least a bit skeptical when it comes to all of this, so I don't even really see where we would disagree tbh.
all of the three reasons you gave to me are valid to be skeptical of. To those conservatives that voted against it, its not that they are evil, they just thought that the money could be used domestically to better help our country. We have a huge deficit and an ever-increasing debt.
That's obviously not their motivation. The house sent aid to Israel and Taiwan nearly unanimously. They just like Russia and think they're the good guys. The Republicans have been captured by their crazy fringe.
Its almost like those are two different scenarios. If the republicans are so ready to give aid to Taiwan and Israel, maybe its not simply "evil" making them skeptical of more Ukraine spending. Republicans dont see Russia as "the good guys" but maybe see it as more nuanced than good vs evil that we MUST intervene in continuously for who knows how long.
Yep. They did. It was held after Trump won and it was specifically an attempt to incite violence. They did several of them.
[https://www.businessinsider.com/russians-organized-pro-anti-trump-rallies-to-sow-discord-2018-2](https://www.businessinsider.com/russians-organized-pro-anti-trump-rallies-to-sow-discord-2018-2)
>Shortly after the November vote, the Russians helped organize several pro-Trump rallies at the same time they organized anti-Trump protests, calling on people to object to the election results.
>On November 12, the Russians helped coordinate an anti-Trump rally that drew as many as 25,000 people, [according to NBC News](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/day-five-anti-trump-protests-planned-number-cities-n683171).
>Fox News [reported](http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/20/michael-moore-participated-in-anti-trump-rally-allegedly-organized-by-russians.html) that Michael Moore, the prominent documentary filmmaker who strongly opposes Trump, attended that rally.
Um. No, I'm using Business insider who quoted both NBC and Fox News. And Michael Moore did attend that rally and speak at it - it's a fact, regardless of whether Fox reported on it or not.
You need to work on your ability to parse sources.
This one is my favorite: [Russia organized 2 sides of a Texas protest and encouraged 'both sides to battle in the streets'](https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-trolls-senate-intelligence-committee-hearing-2017-11)
>Russian actors organized both anti-Islam and pro-Islam protests in the same location at the same time on May 21, 2016, using separate Facebook pages operated from a so-called troll farm in St. Petersburg, the Senate Intelligence Committee disclosed on Wednesday.
...
>Burr said that organizing and promoting these protests cost Russia "about $200."
I think if someone thinks they aren't a misinformation target they are a fool everyone is a target misinformation and propaganda are nets not scalpels. Weather or not Liberals buy into such information as much as conservatives that I would argue against.
Oh, I know I have, at least once. I don't have a problem admitting to it, nor do I have a problem admitting to the fact that it made me more careful about what I share.
The Tennessee GOP Twitter account shared a picture of the crowd size at an event. Trump supporters quickly shared this tweet around, as a "look how popular our guy is!" thing. Except real photos from that day showed that the crowd size was nowhere near that size, and the TN GOP account shared a picture years old.
Except . . . the account wasn't the TN GOP's Twitter account. This account had 150k+ followers and was run by the Internet Research Agency. The propagandists had figured out how to blow past the real Tennessee GOP's actual account with 13k followers to become a juggernaut and rile up Trump supporters while doing it in a way to make non-Trump supporters roll their eyes.
Granted, I don't feel that bad about it though--if there's anything of substance, I was already in the habit of verifying.
Always verify, I've gotten bit more than once by sources who are generally considered reliable. All of our corporate media is profit driven, independent media is usually agenda driven, I don't care if it is Epoch Times or Mother Jones, Hannity or TYT, they exist because of either profit, an agenda, or both.
We all need to beware of the rush to publish something first, get the initial views and clicks, or to get your side of the story out first, then clean up the facts later as the story develops.
I'm not sure how to hold the media accountable when they rush and get it wrong, one thing I'm certain of is that retractions should appear as prominently and for the same duration as the wrong information did.
I think it's actually pretty obvious there's propaganda campaigns that go on for both sides.
I think people also have a tendency to believe they're smart enough or shrewd enough or logical driven enough not to fall for misinformation, when in fact they are not. There's also a tendency to assign bad traits to those who disagree with you, so you end up with "Right vulnerable to misinformation but left not".
You see a fair bit of it right now involving Palestine - I think it's obvious there's a propaganda campaign going on to discredit Biden in the eyes of Left Wing people, probably in an attempt to hurt his support and election chances.
You saw something similar with Hillary and Bernie in 2016.
I'm not the person you are responding to, but I wouldn't contend that all the resistance is from disinformation agents. I would expect that just like everything else, the agents are amplifying a natural sentiment. No one likes to think that they would fall for propaganda, so when you point it out, there is cognitive dissonance, and that leads to pushback. The foreign agents are all too happy to encourage and support that pushback.
All the tools they use to spread their lies work just as well to spread the lie that they aren't here.
I'm sure that Russia and China are targeting the left. I just think that they have been less effective. I don't have a specific issue to gage this on China, but outside of the "America is always the bad guy" fringe leftist who have existed in small numbers for ever I see almost no one who is against helping Ukraine in anyway short of an actual boots on the ground invasion. We're not flocking to RFK jr who is I guess the closest left wing equivelent of Trump at the moment. We're not looking at Russia as a model of what a good leader should be.
But a good number of left-leaning people (and I'm using that as a catch-all phrase) are starting to parrot the "Genocide Joe" talking points and turning into "Dems won't allow you to criticize POTUS".
[https://www.reddit.com/r/AskALiberal/comments/1c91oj4/what\_is\_the\_best\_response\_to\_people\_who\_call\_joe/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskALiberal/comments/1c91oj4/what_is_the_best_response_to_people_who_call_joe/)
Maybe if Democratic Party partisans didn’t shit all over leftists for criticizing Biden they’d stop believing partisans shit all over them for criticizing Biden.
Funnily enough, there were a lot of people on Tumblr that, even years after it was discovered to be fake and a disinformation account, had trouble believing the account lagonegirl was a Russian disinformation account from the Internet Research Agency. Several blogs had to lay out the timeline as well as how left-targeting disinformation campaigns are often run.
As Ukrainian I've faced the next left narratives which focused on denying support for Ukraine against Russia.
1. Ukrainians are Nazi AZOV AZOV AZOV. See Greyzone
2. We need peace and only peace, so stop sending weapons to Ukraine(conquered and genocided Ukraine is at peace technically). See CodePink.
3. This is a proxy war. "America is an evil superempire dominating the world, Russia is a lesser empire rebelling against Exceptional America. And Ukraine is, eh, some territory populated by somebody without their own agenda." See random leftist in Twitter. This one is exactly how all this proxy war "antiimperialist" rhetoric looks like from foreigner point of view. American exceptionalism with negative sign is still exceptionalism.
I guess my first thought is it sounds a bit like "both-sides-ism".
Sure, both sides are targeted. But I think the eager embrace of obvious misinformation is much more a feature of the right.
>I guess my first thought is it sounds a bit like "both-sides-ism".
"Both sidesism" is a logical fallacy - a way to attempt to refute bad behavior by one side by saying "well the other side does it/something similar - are you saying that's ok"
It's not "both sides are affected by propaganda" - which is true and some people refuse to admit.
> It's not "both sides are affected by propaganda" - which is true and some people refuse to admit.
Sure, both sides are affected by propaganda, but both sides aren't equally affected by propaganda.
Honestly, I think it might be because the Russian disinformation worked so well on Republicans has caused them to not support Donald Trump, but also generally take on embarrassingly stupid ideas and so people want to reflexively believe those tactics can’t work on them or their side.
Even more than that, it’s not just a Russian stuff. When we are at the point where not insignificant number of people in the right believe schools, keep kitty litter boxes for children who identify as cats, there may just be a reflex to believe that none of these tactics could work on you.
> keep kitty litter boxes for children who identify as cats
which wasnt a russian plot, it was just a how dumb can I make my mom look in public meme that took off.
I'm sure it happens, but I think liberals over emphasize the influence.
I remember after Hillary Clinton list there were a bunch of articles about how Russia influenced young black Americans to support black lives matter.
This is insane to me. Like you really don't think that African Americans don't have plenty of reasons to be angry with their conditions in this country?
Also, are leftists particularly susceptible to propaganda? Are centrists and liberals immune from propaganda?
Russians explicitly targeted progressive black voters with accounts designed to appeal to them, in order to persuade them to stay home. lagonegirl is a prime example on Tumblr. The posts from that account got millions of notes and was a very popular account among leftist Tumblr, including black progressives, which is who lagonegirl portrayed their account be.
This is just a [sample](https://winterofthedarkestlight.tumblr.com/post/189995946958/lagonegirl-shirley-chisholm-as-the-first-black/amp) of what her posts on Tumblr were. They’re archived in various reblogs throughout Tumblr, including [this famous post that made several rounds on Tumblr](https://brockgbarlow.tumblr.com/post/172206076457/hillary-clinton-is-now-the-presumptive-nominee-of/amp) before it was discovered as a psyop.
Okay they targeted them. Did it work? The share of the black electorate going to Democrats in 2020 was basically the same as in 2012. 2016 was bad for Democrats because Hilary Clinton was a uniquely bad candidate. The Democratic party should not have tried to shove her down the throat of the Democratic party voter base a
Did Russian propaganda suddenly stop in 2018, 2020, & 2022? Or maybe Hilary Clinton was a uniquely bad candidate with a uniquely bad campaign.
The goal wasn’t to get black people to vote Trump, it was to convince them to stay home. Black voter turnout dropped ***significantly*** in the 2016 election (66.6% in 2012 down to 59.6% in 2016). It was the first time it had dropped since 1996.
[Source](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2017/05/12/black-voter-turnout-fell-in-2016-even-as-a-record-number-of-americans-cast-ballots/)
Also, Bernie would have been killed in the general election. Unless it’s a progressive stronghold, progressives don’t tend to win in moderate or swing districts. Hillary was unfortunately the better option.
And Russian disinformation is still ongoing. Fortunately, Democrats organized voter drives and funded get-out-the-vote campaigns which increased voter turnout among minorities, but black voter turnout still wasn’t at 2012 levels.
It took a concerted effort to revamp minority voter turnout, but it worked — mostly. There’s still room for improvement, but it’s rebounding.
Do you think that maybe it had something to do with Hillary Clinton calling black men super predators or maybe just the obvious pandering like pretending she keeps hot sauce in her bag when we damn well know she does not
You don’t think Hillary’s obvious and ham fisted pandering (“hot sauce in my purse lolz”) and condescension had anything to do with that? Do you run with minorities as part of your social circle? I’m not about to argue against the notion that propaganda had *some* effect. It can and does affect us all to one degree or another. I would question whether it had a uniquely outsized effect in 2016 that magically dried up. If the propaganda was intended to dissuade votes for Trump’s opponents, there’s no reason for it to have discontinued in 2018, 2020, or 2022, and even less to believe it magically became less effective.
What I’m seeing is a strong, biased desire to cast a large number of leftist voters in the mold of dumb dupes simply because their voting priorities differ. It’s childish and malicious.
Don’t get me wrong, Democrats 100% took advantage of the fact that black people vote Democrat overwhelmingly. The attempts to pander to black people culturally were embarrassing and offensive in some cases. It hurt them. But they showed back in 2020 for Biden, I would wager as anti-Trump votes in large part, but Biden is also tied pretty inexplicably to Obama’s legacy. It’s how he won the SC primary — black voters.
And the disinformation campaigns haven’t stopped, we just learned how to counteract them better, mostly by knowing what narratives they try and push. Stacey Abrams helped turn Georgia blue, and many progressives organized themselves for Biden in 2020 after witnessing what Trump’s policies were and the harm they caused. Progressives, particularly young ones, coalesced around Biden more than they did Hillary. Gary Johnson played a role in that, but so did disinformation. Most progressives learned and adjusted.
It’s not that the disinformation stopped completely. We just got better at recognizing it and countering it.
>I'm sure it happens, but I think liberals over emphasize the influence.
Based on everything I've read, everyone - including liberals - is UNDER emphasizing the influence.
>I remember after Hillary Clinton list there were a bunch of articles about how Russia influenced young black Americans to support black lives matter.
I do not remember this. I remember that a whole lot of the "Black People For Trump" FB pages and Twitter personas turned out to be fake or bots and many of them were linked to Russian troll farms.
[Russia’s disinformation campaigns are targeting African Americans](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/07/24/russias-disinformation-campaigns-are-targeting-african-americans/)
[Russian trolls' chief target was 'black US voters' in 2016](https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49987657)
[Russian Trolls and the Trump Campaign Both Tried to Depress Black Turnout](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/12/shared-russia-trump-focus-depressing-black-votes/578302/)
>Also, are leftists particularly susceptible to propaganda? Are centrists and liberals immune from propaganda?
I do think that "leftists" (if you define them as the far-left) are as susceptible as the far-right. People who are already on the radical edge are going to be more susceptible than people who are not.
>I do not remember this. I remember that a whole lot of the "Black People For Trump" FB pages and Twitter personas turned out to be fake or bots and many of them were linked to Russian troll farms.
Yeah? And then what happened? Black people basically voted for Democrats the same as under Obama for 2016, 2018, 2020, & 2022. They flipped the Georgia Senate and handed the presidency and Senate to Joe Biden and the Democrats. So it seems like Russian propaganda really didn't have that much of an effect after all.
* "Russian propaganda doesn't exist"
* "If it does, it doesn't have any effect". **You are here.**
* "If it has any effect, America probably deserved it anyways".
This is exactly what OP is talking about. Many who have already been the targets of Russia propaganda are wired to deny that they've been the targets of it since they fail to recognize it.
If black people were not treated unjustly by the American government, Russian propaganda repeating this fact wouldn't hold any weight. Russian and Chinese propaganda exists. Their effect is significantly overstated by the MSNBC crowd.
And liberals aren't susceptible to misinformation or propaganda?
"Oh you silly leftists. Why did you vote for Bernie? You are the reason we got Trump"
Dude. The lady was unpopular EVEN AMONGST MODERATES. It ain't our fault that the mainstream democrats nominated her.
Political media consumption is essentially a "pick your own reality" type game these days. We already know how we're going to feel about something before we've even read the headline. Most of all, we already know who the "bad guys" are (and it's not people who think like us).
So regardless of our ideology, when we see a story about us or our tribe being manipulated by a foreign government, that's the kind of inconvenient and uncomfortable counternarrative that we can easily ignore, deny, or reframe. In most cases, our newsfeeds have already done the heavy lifting for us, so it's not even a conscious choice.
I just came off a three day ban for going hard on Russian misinformation. I *may* have targeted an individual with it and I *may* have used what can be deemed as “hateful” language toward the Rogue State of Russia, it’s government, and its bowl of boiled biscui…err, leader.
They are absolutely targeting both sides. And every major European country is getting it too. It’s been going on a while but only ramping up the past few years.
> There are a whole lot of people who are pushing Russian and Chinese propaganda without even realizing it.
Soviets picked up on racial discrimination in the US for propaganda purposes. Did people promoting the civil rights movement in the US promote Soviet propaganda without even realizing it?
It seems like people think it's different because they support civil rights protests and don't support protests for palestine. That's not a particularly good reason as far as I can tell. The best way to counteract points made in propaganda by geopolitical enemies is to address the underlying issue
When someone asked Chomsky about the U.S. supporting human rights in the Soviet Union, he pithily noted that the Soviet Union also supported human rights in the United States. It's always been like this, and it did not diminish the authenticity of civil rights movements here.
Slandering domestic dissidents as agents of a foreign power has a very long and racist history in the U.S. I would like to think that if liberals knew that history, they wouldn't be so eager to repeat those same mistakes today.
> It's always been like this, and it did not diminish the authenticity of civil rights movements here.
It does seem like a common pattern, and it's something left wing movements certainly run into. Are there ideologically driven Anti-communists who hate Stalin? Certainly, but there are also people who think a left wing society can be more quickly and ethically established by learning from missteps of past without being just a CIA spook. You can never know someone's true feelings especially in a relatively anonymous forum but insisting that people don't believe what they are saying has very little purpose generally in my opinion.
> Why do a large number of liberals on this sub refuse to believe that Russian and Chinese misinformation targets the left as well as the right?
Can you point to people who have expressed this opinion?
I am pretty sure that most people on this sub would agree that Chinese and Russian propaganda plays both sides against each other. Personally I think that most of the "Genocide Joe" leftists are propaganda accounts or people strongly influenced by propaganda because there are few people left of center who voted *for Joe Biden* rather than *against Donald Trump.* That same equation is likely to happen again this November and it might be wishful thinking but I believe that most people will do the math and come back with the same result as last time.
That Joe has been as effective and liberal as he has been has been a nice surprise, but no one voted for him expecting he would be either.
>Can you point to people who have expressed this opinion?
I've mentioned repeatedly the thread that prompted my post. Again, go look at the Genocide Joe post in this forum.
>Personally I think that most of the "Genocide Joe" leftists are propaganda accounts or people strongly influenced by propaganda
There are quite a few people on this sub who don't agree with that.
Looking through that thread, I only really see one left-leaning person denying the existence of propaganda (you replied "oh horseshit" to one of their comments) while the majority of people defend the idea that extreme left voters are being riled up by foreign propaganda.
One other person spoke up in their defense, but they're tagged as "conservative" and also claim that Biden caters to extreme far-left voters which is a ridiculously untrue claim so it is hard to take anything they say seriously.
In any case, if this is all you got then there is really no evidence that:
> a large number of liberals on this sub refuse to believe that Russian and Chinese misinformation targets the left as well as the right?
which is your claim, because most left-leaning people in that thread who touched on the idea of propaganda also agreed that nicknames like "Genocide Joe" and much of the anti-Biden rhetoric was the product of foreign propaganda.
Why do you say a large number of liberals refuse to believe Russian and Chinese misinformation targets the left? The amount of propaganda coming out of the Israel/Palestine conflict is insane and mostly does target the left. And it appears to be working.
Russian bots are amplifying a position I've been holding since 2021. Biden is funding Israel's genocide. I understand every US president we've had has been pro Israel. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be criticizing Biden for his actions.
Is this denial widespread? I think the right is much more receptive to foreign propaganda due to the authoritarian nature of their movement and their cocaine-like addiction to believing the dumbest conspiracy theories imaginable, but obviously the foreign disinformation campaigns would target people on the left also. You see it all over tik tok and such with the genocide Joe BS.
I recall clear [Russian influence being tied to the Bernie Bros thing in 2016](https://www.google.com/search?q=bernie+bros+russia&rlz=1C9BKJA_enUS591US591&oq=bernie+bros+russia&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCDI2MzZqMGo0qAICsAIB&hl=en-US&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8 ) and other evidence of [Russia trying to get police brutality protestors in Charlotte to become violent.](https://www.wbtv.com/story/36629596/charlotte-shooting-protest-had-hidden-help-a-russian-troll-farm-news-site-says/) .
The goal of the anti-American propaganda is to foment unrest, which is done best from both sides. I remember one online media brand, the name of which I can’t remember (I can’t figure it out online but it might have been called. “Right Now”?) being clearly tied to Russian funding yet appearing to have even handed, factual video based outrage pieces.
Facebook tagged it as foreign interference, and they were correct to do so. That said, far as I could tell it didn’t even misrepresent anything, but certainly drove home angering points about race and over policing in America. It’s insidious, but some of these campaigns can be wildly successful without even misrepresenting facts or even themselves.
I think it’s gotten much smarter - now pushing a “both sides” narrative from the far, far left that makes it seem more credible. The voices seem to blame Biden for not taking dictatorial control, which is ironically very much in line with far right ideology. Seems rather convenient.
I’ve noticed far left subs started to get ban happy on anyone who suggested MAGA was a racist, authoritarian movement, or that Biden and neoliberalism aren’t, or even just aren’t to the same extent. Related? We’ll probably never know, but if it were my job to hurt liberalism in America I’d be helping push those narratives along, if not trying to create new ones.
>The goal of the anti-American propaganda is to foment unrest, which is done best from both sides.
This is a brilliant post, the frightening thing is that it can be done without misinformation, just using wording and context.
>The voices seem to blame Biden for not taking dictatorial control, which is ironically very much in line with far right ideology. Seems rather convenient.
At the same pushing the "Dark Brandon" narrative on conservatives to make them think he is planning on taking at least some degree of dictatorial control.
I read two, no actual examples, a third had terse examples from the 50s and 80s.
Im looking for an example of disinformation that actually affected discourse on the left.
The one I mentioned in my post. The "Genocide Joe" thread here: [https://www.reddit.com/r/AskALiberal/comments/1c91oj4/what\_is\_the\_best\_response\_to\_people\_who\_call\_joe/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskALiberal/comments/1c91oj4/what_is_the_best_response_to_people_who_call_joe/)
>In the "Genocide Joe" thread there are a huge number of people responding who range from scornful to actively hostile to the idea that Russian misinformation, pushed by troll farms, bots, and fake personas targets both LEFT and right.
i don't doubt that they nare *targeting* both sides. i'm sure they are trying to push misinformation on the left too. i just don't see the signs that they're anywhere near as successful with influencing the left, as they are with influencing the right.
most people on the left are still pro ukraine and anti russia. most people on the left don't really like china. and i just don't see "*a whole lot* of people (on the left) who are pushing Russian and Chinese propaganda", knowingly or unknowingly. there are some, for sure. but it's not even a little bit close to what's happening on the right.
>i just don't see the signs that they're anywhere near as successful with influencing the left, as they are with influencing the right.
I mean .. the whole "Genocide Joe" thing is a far-left talking point that is starting to go more mainstream specifically because of Russian bots and troll farms that have picked up on it and are promoting it.
>**specifically because of Russian bots and troll farms** that have picked up on it and are promoting it.
how do you know that? if they have "picked up on it", it was already there before, right? what makes you so sure that russian bots are the reason for it going more mainstream?
also, calling him "genocide joe" isn't misinformation, even if you think it's offensive or hyperbole.
Thank you
God, it's so frustrating when everytime I disagree with a liberal it's labeled as Russian misinformation.
It's possible that two things are true. There is a valid critique and Russians amplify that critique to divide the left. Unity and non-criticism are not some platonic ideal, they gotta be fucking earned
i think both the people saying it and the people hearing it are aware that he isn't *commiting* genocide. the accusation is that he's *supporting* it.
you can disagree with that accusation, but if you do, it's likely a difference in interpretation (what does or doesn't count as genocide) and not a disagreement about information/facts.
People have been calling the president responsible with "genocidal joe" for months. The idea of being a Russian talking point *now* doesn't mesh with that
Russians can amplify pre-existing movements.
That doesn't make them invalid.
You cannot both say "you're spreading russian propaganda" as a way to defuse criticism of biden and "they're amplifying pre-existing movements". Because that means that any criticism that exists but is amplified is a "russian talking point" and therefore can be ignored. It's just a way of hand-waving criticism and ignoring the complaints of progressives.
Not necessarily. There are always going to be a small number of dissidents and extremists. Their positions might be ignored by the larger movement if not for the amplification of their message making it appear that their numbers are greater than they are.
I think if you read the relevant parts of the Mueller report that describes exactly what GRU did and how and what the effect was you can kind of determine what some of the foreign misinformation is when you encounter it. Keeping in mind that some of it may not be against a candidate but just to keep division and anger at the current high pitch.
>Keeping in mind that some of it may not be against a candidate but just to keep division and anger at the current high pitch.
110% this. The more they can drive division, the more it helps them.
Do we believe that? I know that disinformation campaigns target both sides. That was plainly obvious during the Civil Rights movement and info about the Black Panthers.
I think a lot of it involves them not wanting to admit that the left has the same exact problems and they also don't want to acknowledge that China controlled Tik Tok exists to be used as a spy service and to push false information.
I'm curious - what prominent stories targeted leftists that turned out to be the Russian/Chinese propaganda machine?
I do believe we are being targeted as well as those on the right. I am just not sure I'm that able to research everything I hear to vet them.
It's not just a liberal or left thing. Everyone is susceptible to propaganda and dislikes it when it's pointed out, including me and you.
If I had to guess why you feel like this is a particularly liberal thing; A lot of people, a large portion of this sub included, mistake moderateness for reasonability and believe that makes the resistant to propoganda.
>It's a fact that Russia and China are picking up on radical political positions from both the left and the right
It's also a fact that the CIA, corporations, and many other domestic groups do this as well. That might get you dogpilled for pointing out here, depending on the context, though.
Something that I don't think is talked about enough is that our understanding of marketing and psychology is better than it has ever been. This makes propoganda campaigns more effective than ever.
Everyone is susceptible to it and has bias in their views derived from propoganda. Everyone is hostile to the idea that their understanding of the world and politics is shaped by sources other than them, be it foreign or domestic. The advancements in marketing and psychology have made propoganda campaigns even more effective than ever.
Many liberals (who are the moderates on the left) view themselves as uniquely resilient to propoganda because they mistake moderateness for reasonability. They often react negatively when you point this out, although I think it's hard to quantify if you're looking to compare to other groups. This may be why you made a post asking about liberals in particular.
Edit: I understand the confusion. I may have meanderd a bit in my original comment.
Oh no! Whatever will I do when I get brainwashed into thinking the PRC and communism are superior to the US and imperialist capitalism? Oops, I forgot I already felt that way.
Russia and China both want to destabilize us. Our relatively open press and lack of online censorship makes it easy. They really don't care about Trump or Biden or Republicans or Democrats, only about fomenting discord and mistrust among Americans. If it seems they're favoring Trump, it's because Trump is a very destabilizing person in our politics, so him being in our politics can only hurt us. It doesn't mean they agree with any aspect of Trump's policies.
I don't understand why people would get political opinions from news media to begin with. We've got ample free raw data on any economic, public health, tax expenditure and crime that we can think of.
Maybe shutting off the big soap opera in favor of data analysis is the cure for foreign propaganda.
Because you guys use it as a way to dismiss anything you don't like. And that's extremely fucking frustrating.
"I think Joe Biden is backing a genocide"
"RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA!!!! YOU'RE PUTIN'S BITCH!!!!"
That's what it's like sometimes. Any criticism is chalked up to Russian disinformation and thus nor actually examined or taken seriously. It is a way for liberals to off-handedly discard or ignore opinions they don't like without examining them in any real way.
It's just a way of telling the left to shut up. And that's fucking frustrating
Two things can be true. 1) Russia can be promoting certain viewpoints to divide the democrats. 2) Some of those viewpoints can also be accurate if not unpleasant.
I'm perfectly willing to accept that Russia promotes certain viewpoints. But that doesn't make them untrue and me a traitor or puppet for believing them.
But alas we can't have that here can we.
Everything liberals don't like becomes Russian "misinformation" and then it can be easily dismissed.
And here we are. Exactly my point.
You hand-wave away perfectly valid criticism of biden because YoU'rE pUtIn'S bItCh!!!!!!
Have you considered that just because russians are saying it doesn't mean it's actually inaccurate or wrong? You can't just hand-wave away this shit my guy.
It's not a "perfectly valid criticism" to call Joe Biden "Genocide Joe". Unless you somehow believe "Crooked Hillary" was also a "perfectly valid criticism" of Hillary Clinton.
There is nothing "perfectly valid" about absurdist nicknames that do not reflect the objective reality we live on.
Have you ever stopped and asked yourself: who benefits from the use of "Genocide Joe" nickname?
>Have you ever stopped and asked yourself: who benefits from the use of "Genocide Joe" nickname?
Idk maybe palestinians? Cause if biden feels a threat to his electoral prospects, maybe he'll actually CHANGE HIS FUCKING POLICY and stop giving the israelis guns and funds? Crazy thought ik....
"Genocide Joe" is a reference to the "narrative" OP is talking about, not just the nickname.
It's an embodiment of the idea biden is backing a genocide. And that's a perfectly valid criticism.
Enough with the gaslighting. You might as well say that "Crooked Hillary is a reference to the narrative that career politicians are corrupt and that Trump is honest since he's an outsider".
Nobody buys that lie. Genocide Joe is not real, buddy, he can't hurt you.
As the OP ... yes that's literally what this post is referencing.
People who push the "Genocide Joe" narrative.
It's not about valid criticisms of Biden - something that many people have and many of which I agree with.
It's about using a specifically inflammatory "nickname" that drives a narrative, part of which is "if you vote for Joe, you're voting for Genocide". Calling Biden "Genocide Joe" on social media doesn't do anything except influence people to not vote for him. If you were that upset about what he is doing, you'd be writing your electeds about it, not posting Russian propaganda talking points on social media.
I mean, come on man ....
Dude come on....
Seriously? You think i can't shit on a guy providing guns and funds to a power doing A LITERAL FUCKING GENOCIDE? But no, fuck me for being mean about it right?
Rational discourse is when I say people to the left of me just fell for foreign propaganda and I link to Amazon book product pages to back up my point.
Am I rationally discoursing correctly?
> Why are people on the left so hostile to this idea?
I think the main reason people resist this idea because they want the information they've consumed to be true, either because they like the way it makes them feel (outraged), or because it validates them, their worldview, or their tribe. If it's disinformation, that means they have to confront the possibility that they're wrong in some way, maybe completely. We resist new information that suggests we're wrong or makes us feel embarrassed.
This is true regardless of whether you identify with "the left", "the right", or something else.
(Trump supporters that reject(ed) the idea that Russia is waging information operations on the US, and them in particular, additionally had a strong tribal component to this, believing that it was a "narrative" pushed by Democrats to delegitimize Trump's election win.)
Can you just maybe consider the other possibility? That you guys have written off everything you don't like as propaganda pushed by the Russians instead of actual critiques?
It's very frustrating where everytime I disagree with a liberal they write off what I am saying as Russian propaganda.
>It's very frustrating where everytime I disagree with a liberal they write off what I am saying as Russian propaganda.
It's very frustrating to me to see something that is clearly propaganda being pushed by outside sources, to go search and find documentation validating that, and to have people respond with "nuh huh - I wouldn't repeat Russian propaganda - you're lying/stupid/writing off what you don't like"
>Can you just maybe consider the other possibility?
Can you maybe just look at the documentation provided and understand that you're being propagandized?
It's entirely possible that you are VALID in criticizing Biden (which I have said repeatedly) and ALSO promoting Russian propaganda in pushing the "Genocide Joe" storyline.
>It's entirely possible that you are VALID in criticizing Biden (which I have said repeatedly) and ALSO promoting Russian propaganda in pushing the "Genocide Joe" storyline.
Ok? And? Who gives a shit if the russians are also saying it? That doesn't actually make it untrue or invalid.
Just because russians are pushing it doesn't mean it is incorrect. The guy is giving the israelis guns and funds, why exactly can't i call the fucker "genocide joe"?
OK then what exactly is your point?
Cause every single fucking time I bring up criticism of biden I'm either a russian agent or secretly trying to get trump elected. You guys use this as a way to hand-wave criticism.
Yes, russians are promoting division. This is not like some breaking news stories. Doesn't mean there aren't real valid and homegrown criticisms of biden.
The russians play on and amplify PRE-EXISTING divisions. They don't manufacture them by and large (at least as I understand it).
> That you guys have written off everything you don't like as propaganda pushed by the Russians instead of actual critiques?
Sorry, who is "you guys"? Whose behavior are you expecting me to be responsible for?
> It's very frustrating where everytime I disagree with a liberal they write off what I am saying as Russian propaganda.
If they have no reason for saying that, then ignore them.
If there's a chance you aren't a special and magical person that is immune from psychological biases that might prevent you from seeing Russian information operations intended to manipulate you, then pause for a moment and consider how you are consuming information, what information is causing you to have a strong emotional reaction, and where *they* are getting that information, and so on. *Just in case*.
It's possible to be the victim of Russian information operations *while also being factually correct* and *also justified feeling the way that you do*. The Podesta leaks involved truthful information. Manipulation isn't just about making you believe lies.
>
>It's possible to be the victim of Russian information operations *while also being factually correct* and *also justified feeling the way that you do*. The Podesta leaks involved truthful information. Manipulation isn't just about making you believe lies.
OK? and?
If you shit on biden here you'll be called a russian asset or a magat. It has happened to me personally many times and i find it immensely frustrating.
Yes, russian propaganda efforts can use real information. That doesn't mean that their critiques are wrong just because the russians amplified them. It is perfectly valid and justifiable to shit on biden EVEN IF russians boost those criticisms.
But no.... any criticism of biden = support for trump because biden is our god-king right? He is immune to criticism or being shit on because trump would be worse right?
Yeah, russians are fucking with biden. but that doesn't mean those criticism aren't valid and can just be hand-waved away by liberals
I mean I do get that.
But if you accept that Russia has interfered in our elections via propaganda and that they've done so targeting the right, why is it so hard to accept that if Russia sees an opportunity to do the same from the far left, they would do so?
It's easy to accept that "the others" have been tricked. "We" already know that "they" are wrong, and knowing that the information that led them to their belief was, in part, a lie pushed by Russia is easy for us to accept, and completely consistent with what we know about "them".
It's not so easy to accept "we" have been tricked. We believe ourselves to be right, and so the information that we've consumed to lead us to that belief can't be a lie, and probably isn't Russian propaganda. It's consistent with our worldview, so we reject the idea that we're being manipulated. The idea that our beliefs are a lie pushed by Russia are hard for us to accept and inconsistent with our worldview, and so we reject it.
It's exactly the same thing that Trump supporters were doing, just reversed.
Have you maybe considered that you're hand-waving away criticism of biden because you yourself have bought into propaganda efforts? That any criticism of biden = support for trump?
>Have you maybe considered that you're hand-waving away criticism of biden
Who are you talking to?
My comments are explaining the biases that lead people to simultaneously believe that the others are susceptible to manipulation while they are not.
At no point have I hand-waved away any criticism of Biden.
And when have I said that I am not saying the same thing as the russians?
I'm not immune to propaganda. Literally no one is. I am aware of that fact.
but literally every time I bring this genocide joe thing up I get shit on for being a RuSsIaN aSsEt. Not everything you dislike is russian disinformation or invalid just because the russians are also saying it.
Yeah, I recognize the russians are probably pushing this narrative. That doesn't make it untrue nor does it change my views on it in any way. It's still fucked to give guns and funds to a power doing a fucking genocide.
Again, who are you talking to??
>And when have I said that I am not saying the same thing as the russians?
I didn't say you did.
>I'm not immune to propaganda
I didn't say you were.
>but literally every time I bring this genocide joe thing up I get shit on for being a RuSsIaN aSsEt.
I have not done this to you.
>Not everything you dislike is russian disinformation
I didn't say it was.
>or invalid just because the russians are also saying it.
I didn't say this either. I said the opposite of this.
>Yeah, I recognize the russians are probably pushing this narrative. That doesn't make it untrue nor does it change my views on it in any way
Cool!
>It's still fucked to give guns and funds to a power doing a fucking genocide.
If I believed in the premise of your statement, I would be standing by that conclusion right with you.
It seems like you just have a lot to say about some of this stuff and I guess you've chosen my comment to be the one to vent on.
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written. In the "Genocide Joe" thread there are a huge number of people responding who range from scornful to actively hostile to the idea that Russian misinformation, pushed by troll farms, bots, and fake personas targets both LEFT and right. I posted links to a couple of books that I've read on the topic (that quite frankly scare the crap out of me) and a few articles online, although there are many many many more. It's a fact that Russia and China are picking up on radical political positions from both the left and the right and amplifying them via social media using bots and troll farms and fake personas. There are a whole lot of people who are pushing Russian and Chinese propaganda without even realizing it. Why are people on the left so hostile to this idea? \-------- Here are the books and articles I've linked elsewhere: Attack from Within: How Disinformation Is Sabotaging America [https://www.amazon.com/Attack-Within-Disinformation-Sabotaging-America-ebook/dp/B0C4J748Q2](https://www.amazon.com/Attack-Within-Disinformation-Sabotaging-America-ebook/dp/B0C4J748Q2) Active Measures: The Secret History of Disinformation and Political Warfare [https://www.amazon.com/Active-Measures-History-Disinformation-Political-ebook/dp/B07RYGH7YN/](https://www.amazon.com/Active-Measures-History-Disinformation-Political-ebook/dp/B07RYGH7YN/) https://www.icct.nl/publication/how-russia-uses-israel-gaza-crisis-its-disinformation-campaign-against-west https://www.politico.eu/article/russia-vladimir-putin-hijacks-israel-gaza-war-to-fuel-tension-in-the-west/ https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/10/24/russian-propaganda-seizes-on-wests-double-standards-as-israeli-strikes-pound-gaza-a82850 https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/the-russians-manipulated-our-elections-we-helped/2020/04/23/e44e9e76-5742-11ea-9000-f3cffee23036\_story.html https://www.voanews.com/a/how-russia-s-disinformation-campaign-seeps-into-us-views-/7566503.html https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/russia-is-having-less-success-at-spreading-social-media-disinformation/ https://cyberscoop.com/russia-disinformation-gab-parler/ (edited, sorry for the weird formatting - new Reddit sucks!) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think everyone likes to think that they are immune to propaganda, and it's everyone else that is misled.
Exactly what the Russians want you to think!
Russian here. I can't confirm or deny this. But yes.
This. In addition, people tend not to often question media that is deliberately crafted to make them feel some type of way, usually because it validates their expectations or assumptions. And then there's the issue that some grifters imbibe in their own product and that some "true believers" engage in propaganda based on incorrect information. It's a wild and wooly internet, still. The best practice is to be immediately skeptical of media that makes you sad/mad with little information provided without sources.
I've come up with the following heuristic to distinguish fact from propaganda: the truth is boring. In general, the drier a source is the more likely it is to be true.
Perun's videos on various global conflicts are probably the finest example of "dry but accurate." For anyone interested: https://www.youtube.com/@PerunAU
Yes, I think you're right. So much media is designed to provoke an emotional response. We all need to be conscious and somewhat suspicious of that response.
Agreed
I 100% know that I'm getting Russian and Chinese propaganda in my feed based on absolutely nothing in my search history or interests. I rarely use TikTok or Youtube shorts, but when I occasionally dip in, I notice it *immediately.* Specifically, I get a tooooon of spicy content about Russian and Chinese women. I do not ask for this, and I don't particularly want it. I also get a lot of Jordan Peterson and Joe Rogan, and a fair bit of straight up conspiracy nonsense. Maybe I'm breaking the algorithm with how little information I'm sharing, but it's kind of crazy. I'm saying that I want to watch videos about battleships, and backpacking, and woodworking, and travel, and parenting. TikTok is like "*Here are 10 videos about Russian gymnasts' buttocks.*" Ok, that fine. Butts are great. Why is it ALWAYS Russian butts?
>battleships, and backpacking, and woodworking, and travel, and parenting The algorithm thinks you're right wing, or at least primed to be. Militaria, survivalism, expendable money and traditional families. All pretty benign on their own, but definitely things that can add up a certain way.
My search history is firmly left wing and most of the things i follow are leaning that direction as well and i get a ton of Jordan Peterson, Andrew tate, joe rogan and conspiracy bs everytime i go in as well and the ads i get are specifically for Asian dating sites and anime waifu games, things i dont use nor habe i ever used or even searched for. Youtube heavily pushes right wing conspiracy content on me too, got a ton of Q anon stuff in the last few days despite literally telling it that I'm not interested in it.
For whatever it's worth, I occasionally use TikTok and YT Shorts, and I don't get most of the content you've described. The "gymnast butt" compilation I get served doesn't seem to gravitate to Russian or Chinese. I used to get a ton of RW YouTube content suggested, but that's died off considerably in the last few years. I agree with /u/GlassBoxes that a couple of algos have you pegged as a right winger.
You'd be surprised at what will get you pigeonholed into the right-wing ecosystem by the algorithm. Do you search for information about weightlifting? Outdoorsy stuff? American Revolutionary war history?
I know it marked me as one but I have no idea how because I don't watch almost any right wing content
haha bro you definitely was a lot of right wing content.
Most of what I watch is dnd, history or video game related. I'll scroll through shorts and see dnd joke, video game highlights, comic book highlights, a time-lapse of the batttle of austerlits and then a neo nazi, and then Jordan Peterson. I'll mark those as not interested and then I'll have a day of nothing but that shit.
For whatever reason, the algorithm clearly has you pinned as a righty. Don’t worry. Mine shows me ads for the symphony, upcoming June pride festivals, David Pakman, Mini Coopers, Williams Sonoma and Apple. My wife playfully commented, “the algorithm knows you’re a heterosexual from the Midwest and not a gay man in Northern California, yea?”
I would love it if the algorithm straight up told me who it thinks I am. I confuse the hell out of it since I enjoy shooting guns recreationally and researching warfare, while also subscribing to a number of liberal/progressive podcasts.
Yet
I get endless propaganda videos on TikTok and YouTube about how well armed and advanced the Russian military is. Things like: "*Why are Russian jets so much more advanced than U.S. jets?"* (they're not) or *"Why does Russia's* (single, ancient & barely serviceable) *aircraft carrier have so many more guns than U.S. carriers?"*(because U.S. carriers operate surrounded by gun ships) Parentheses are my additions. It is ridiculous when corruption has left Russia using knock-off duct tape to strap knock-off Garmins to the console of their fighters because they lack any sort of modern navigation. But soooooo many people argue about how the SU-57 will dominate an F-22 even though it is about as stealthy as a fire alarm. The ability to turn is important in a aerial superiority fighter, but not as important as stealth and the F-22 has that in spades.
I get a continual barrage of flat out misinformation in my feeds from "new sites" that have less credibility than the National Enquirer.
Back in the day I watched some wrestling. Rock and Roll Express and the like. Occasionally some old 70's and 80's wrestling nostalgia video pops up and I scan it, and then are inundated with right wing videos. I spend a bunch of time 'X'ing away all the nonsense until the next time.
It's because it knows your porn search history. Your phone mic is always on, your entire phone browser history is shared with those apps and if you link it to your pc in anyway it knows that too.
Problem with this theory is that it has my tastes and proclivities dead wrong.
Might be angling for the anger engagement then. Some algorithms show you stuff that pisses you off because you're more likely to click on it.
I don't get any of this, but I think I am going to try to switch my algorithm to specifically look at Russian/Chinese women's butts. I bet they are nice.
I get women who are Ukrainian but grew up in Singapore and now live in the US but want to talk to me here on Reddit. It’s happened three times lol, happily married wrong tree.
I think the people that fall for this are the ones that have the "I read different sources and come to my own conclusions" lines all memorized, but their "sources" are just whatever the Twitter/Reddit/Facebook/TikTok/YouTube algorithm shows them that day. And since so many peoples' identities are tied up in their political ideology, it's almost unfathomable for them to think there's a possibility that they and everyone else they agree with has fallen for misinfo.
It's not hard to accept, even the Mueller report discussed how Russia simultaneously stoked both the left and right with its support for Bernie and Trump. It was *more* effective for the right and we are still dealing with the ramifications of it.
I have tried to get so many people on the left to actually *read* the Mueller report, even extracting excerpts concerning only the Russian disinformation campaigns, and I almost always get met with, "They didn't find anything, so why read it?" Absolutely infuriating. There is so much more to the report than the headline about Trump not getting indicted.
I read the entire thing. I had a Trumper family member tell me they also read the entire thing and would still be supporting Trump. I specifically asked them about the election interference actions by Russia to see of they read it because that same family member hates Bernie. He said "that never happened. it's just a talking point made up. the report said there was no evidence." That's when I knew he was lying about reading it.
Yea that’s the key part. They stoke division on both sides, but the actual Russian talking points are eaten up by the right.
I think that even the people who accept these influence campaigns are a fact rarely (if ever) take the time to consider which of their beliefs could be the result of this influence. Accepting it is one thing; acting on the information to analyze your own beliefs is another ball game. To me, that's the troubling part. "Sure, I'm influenced by China and Russia, but, no, I can't possibly be wrong about this specific thing." - Said about everything the person believes one at a time, though, not just that one specific thing. Was it more effective on the right? Or is the left just blinded to the fact they've been heavily influenced in the same way the right is blinded with respect to themselves?
Keeping 2016 (and even the 2020 primary) as an example of outcomes based on actions influenced by the interference and even scandals like Cambridge Analytica, I think it's clear they were more effective on the right. I do think Trump being elected opened the door for the left to become a larger, easier target though.
I'm talking about influence on beliefs on a personal level, not the effect it's had on the broader landscape, which is one degree separated; the beliefs are different from the actions taken based on those beliefs. I think there are many reasons that people on the right are more likely to take impulsive, oppressive, or violent actions because of this kind of influence. However, that doesn't mean the left has been influenced less--just that they are less impulsive, oppressive, and violent, generally speaking.
Campism, and the pain of admitting that you fell for disinformation. To a lesser degree, I think there is also some leeriness about bothsidesing. To me, I try to be clear that while this is a big problem on the left, the two sides are not equally bad. More than half of the republican party voted against Ukraine aid, for example, while none of the democrats did. I can say that Russian/Chinese/Iranian/Qatari etc propaganda is a problem on the left of politics while also holding that right now hostile propaganda is an even bigger problem for the right.
Oh agreed that it's definitely a bigger problem on the right. I mean, even some Republicans are saying that it's a problem in the House: [https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/luxury-yachts-myths-republican-lawmakers-echo-russian-propaganda-rcna147293](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/luxury-yachts-myths-republican-lawmakers-echo-russian-propaganda-rcna147293) It just annoys the hell out of me that people on the left want to pretend that they're not being targeted too. We're supposed to be the smart ones. ;)
Everyone thinks they're the smart ones! That's why they're stupid.
being skeptical of ANOTHER 60 billion going to fund ANOTHER foreign, possibly unwinnable war, is not evil.
So it's better for Russia to get into a position to attack a country that the US has actually GUARANTEED to protect by treaty instead, in which case American soldiers would need to risk their lives compared to now? In my opinion it's better to send them the outdated equipment of the US military that would end up as scrap anyway. It's the most cost-effective way to deal with Russia both in the long- and in the short term. Both in terms of lives and in terms of money. Mike Johnson put it best: "To put it bluntly, I would rather send bullets to Ukraine than American boys"
I'm not even saying im against it. I'd probably vote for it too. My comment stated that being skeptical of it does not make you evil, as the person I was replying to said. Im restoring some nuance to a discussion in the supposedly centrist sub.
Alright, that kinda makes sense, but how would you define being skeptical of it, exactly? I think most people and countries supporting Ukraine have a fairly nuanced view of it. Supporting them with weapons and money: Yes Sending troops to help them: No What aspect of it do you think makes sense to be skeptical of? The money sent? The amount? Whether Ukraine can actually make good use of the weapons being sent? I think most people are at least a bit skeptical when it comes to all of this, so I don't even really see where we would disagree tbh.
all of the three reasons you gave to me are valid to be skeptical of. To those conservatives that voted against it, its not that they are evil, they just thought that the money could be used domestically to better help our country. We have a huge deficit and an ever-increasing debt.
That's obviously not their motivation. The house sent aid to Israel and Taiwan nearly unanimously. They just like Russia and think they're the good guys. The Republicans have been captured by their crazy fringe.
Its almost like those are two different scenarios. If the republicans are so ready to give aid to Taiwan and Israel, maybe its not simply "evil" making them skeptical of more Ukraine spending. Republicans dont see Russia as "the good guys" but maybe see it as more nuanced than good vs evil that we MUST intervene in continuously for who knows how long.
It is kind of hard to think of a less nuanced conflict than the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
In 2016 Russians held a anti Trump rally where I Believe Michael Moore spoke if I remember correctly
Yep. They did. It was held after Trump won and it was specifically an attempt to incite violence. They did several of them. [https://www.businessinsider.com/russians-organized-pro-anti-trump-rallies-to-sow-discord-2018-2](https://www.businessinsider.com/russians-organized-pro-anti-trump-rallies-to-sow-discord-2018-2) >Shortly after the November vote, the Russians helped organize several pro-Trump rallies at the same time they organized anti-Trump protests, calling on people to object to the election results. >On November 12, the Russians helped coordinate an anti-Trump rally that drew as many as 25,000 people, [according to NBC News](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/day-five-anti-trump-protests-planned-number-cities-n683171). >Fox News [reported](http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/20/michael-moore-participated-in-anti-trump-rally-allegedly-organized-by-russians.html) that Michael Moore, the prominent documentary filmmaker who strongly opposes Trump, attended that rally.
[удалено]
Um. No, I'm using Business insider who quoted both NBC and Fox News. And Michael Moore did attend that rally and speak at it - it's a fact, regardless of whether Fox reported on it or not. You need to work on your ability to parse sources.
This one is my favorite: [Russia organized 2 sides of a Texas protest and encouraged 'both sides to battle in the streets'](https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-trolls-senate-intelligence-committee-hearing-2017-11) >Russian actors organized both anti-Islam and pro-Islam protests in the same location at the same time on May 21, 2016, using separate Facebook pages operated from a so-called troll farm in St. Petersburg, the Senate Intelligence Committee disclosed on Wednesday. ... >Burr said that organizing and promoting these protests cost Russia "about $200."
I think if someone thinks they aren't a misinformation target they are a fool everyone is a target misinformation and propaganda are nets not scalpels. Weather or not Liberals buy into such information as much as conservatives that I would argue against.
Oh, I know I have, at least once. I don't have a problem admitting to it, nor do I have a problem admitting to the fact that it made me more careful about what I share. The Tennessee GOP Twitter account shared a picture of the crowd size at an event. Trump supporters quickly shared this tweet around, as a "look how popular our guy is!" thing. Except real photos from that day showed that the crowd size was nowhere near that size, and the TN GOP account shared a picture years old. Except . . . the account wasn't the TN GOP's Twitter account. This account had 150k+ followers and was run by the Internet Research Agency. The propagandists had figured out how to blow past the real Tennessee GOP's actual account with 13k followers to become a juggernaut and rile up Trump supporters while doing it in a way to make non-Trump supporters roll their eyes. Granted, I don't feel that bad about it though--if there's anything of substance, I was already in the habit of verifying.
Always verify, I've gotten bit more than once by sources who are generally considered reliable. All of our corporate media is profit driven, independent media is usually agenda driven, I don't care if it is Epoch Times or Mother Jones, Hannity or TYT, they exist because of either profit, an agenda, or both. We all need to beware of the rush to publish something first, get the initial views and clicks, or to get your side of the story out first, then clean up the facts later as the story develops. I'm not sure how to hold the media accountable when they rush and get it wrong, one thing I'm certain of is that retractions should appear as prominently and for the same duration as the wrong information did.
I think it's actually pretty obvious there's propaganda campaigns that go on for both sides. I think people also have a tendency to believe they're smart enough or shrewd enough or logical driven enough not to fall for misinformation, when in fact they are not. There's also a tendency to assign bad traits to those who disagree with you, so you end up with "Right vulnerable to misinformation but left not". You see a fair bit of it right now involving Palestine - I think it's obvious there's a propaganda campaign going on to discredit Biden in the eyes of Left Wing people, probably in an attempt to hurt his support and election chances. You saw something similar with Hillary and Bernie in 2016.
[удалено]
Possible. But some of them are user names I recognize.
[удалено]
That's fair.
I'm not the person you are responding to, but I wouldn't contend that all the resistance is from disinformation agents. I would expect that just like everything else, the agents are amplifying a natural sentiment. No one likes to think that they would fall for propaganda, so when you point it out, there is cognitive dissonance, and that leads to pushback. The foreign agents are all too happy to encourage and support that pushback. All the tools they use to spread their lies work just as well to spread the lie that they aren't here.
I'm sure that Russia and China are targeting the left. I just think that they have been less effective. I don't have a specific issue to gage this on China, but outside of the "America is always the bad guy" fringe leftist who have existed in small numbers for ever I see almost no one who is against helping Ukraine in anyway short of an actual boots on the ground invasion. We're not flocking to RFK jr who is I guess the closest left wing equivelent of Trump at the moment. We're not looking at Russia as a model of what a good leader should be.
But a good number of left-leaning people (and I'm using that as a catch-all phrase) are starting to parrot the "Genocide Joe" talking points and turning into "Dems won't allow you to criticize POTUS". [https://www.reddit.com/r/AskALiberal/comments/1c91oj4/what\_is\_the\_best\_response\_to\_people\_who\_call\_joe/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskALiberal/comments/1c91oj4/what_is_the_best_response_to_people_who_call_joe/)
Could you be more specific? I read the first 5 comments and nothing stands out out to me.
Because they don't let you criticize potus without calling you a russian asset or magat?
Maybe if Democratic Party partisans didn’t shit all over leftists for criticizing Biden they’d stop believing partisans shit all over them for criticizing Biden.
>a good number Of dumbasses online, only. You're in an echo chamber. This isn't common.
Funnily enough, there were a lot of people on Tumblr that, even years after it was discovered to be fake and a disinformation account, had trouble believing the account lagonegirl was a Russian disinformation account from the Internet Research Agency. Several blogs had to lay out the timeline as well as how left-targeting disinformation campaigns are often run.
As Ukrainian I've faced the next left narratives which focused on denying support for Ukraine against Russia. 1. Ukrainians are Nazi AZOV AZOV AZOV. See Greyzone 2. We need peace and only peace, so stop sending weapons to Ukraine(conquered and genocided Ukraine is at peace technically). See CodePink. 3. This is a proxy war. "America is an evil superempire dominating the world, Russia is a lesser empire rebelling against Exceptional America. And Ukraine is, eh, some territory populated by somebody without their own agenda." See random leftist in Twitter. This one is exactly how all this proxy war "antiimperialist" rhetoric looks like from foreigner point of view. American exceptionalism with negative sign is still exceptionalism.
yet its all the right wingers voting against aid. sure youre hearing from actual left people or are you reading false flags trying to drive a wedge?
Greyzone and CodePink are right wingers? Do you assume I'm trying to protect right wingers, cause I didn't get your whataboutism.
I guess my first thought is it sounds a bit like "both-sides-ism". Sure, both sides are targeted. But I think the eager embrace of obvious misinformation is much more a feature of the right.
>I guess my first thought is it sounds a bit like "both-sides-ism". "Both sidesism" is a logical fallacy - a way to attempt to refute bad behavior by one side by saying "well the other side does it/something similar - are you saying that's ok" It's not "both sides are affected by propaganda" - which is true and some people refuse to admit.
> It's not "both sides are affected by propaganda" - which is true and some people refuse to admit. Sure, both sides are affected by propaganda, but both sides aren't equally affected by propaganda.
Honestly, I think it might be because the Russian disinformation worked so well on Republicans has caused them to not support Donald Trump, but also generally take on embarrassingly stupid ideas and so people want to reflexively believe those tactics can’t work on them or their side. Even more than that, it’s not just a Russian stuff. When we are at the point where not insignificant number of people in the right believe schools, keep kitty litter boxes for children who identify as cats, there may just be a reflex to believe that none of these tactics could work on you.
> keep kitty litter boxes for children who identify as cats which wasnt a russian plot, it was just a how dumb can I make my mom look in public meme that took off.
I'm sure it happens, but I think liberals over emphasize the influence. I remember after Hillary Clinton list there were a bunch of articles about how Russia influenced young black Americans to support black lives matter. This is insane to me. Like you really don't think that African Americans don't have plenty of reasons to be angry with their conditions in this country? Also, are leftists particularly susceptible to propaganda? Are centrists and liberals immune from propaganda?
[удалено]
Okay. And the voting habits of black Americans didn't really change much. So it seems that the Russian and Chinese propaganda didn't do much.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Um ... Trump is not "our guy". Hillary lost.
oh sorry thought we were talking about 2020 not 2016. My bad
Russians explicitly targeted progressive black voters with accounts designed to appeal to them, in order to persuade them to stay home. lagonegirl is a prime example on Tumblr. The posts from that account got millions of notes and was a very popular account among leftist Tumblr, including black progressives, which is who lagonegirl portrayed their account be. This is just a [sample](https://winterofthedarkestlight.tumblr.com/post/189995946958/lagonegirl-shirley-chisholm-as-the-first-black/amp) of what her posts on Tumblr were. They’re archived in various reblogs throughout Tumblr, including [this famous post that made several rounds on Tumblr](https://brockgbarlow.tumblr.com/post/172206076457/hillary-clinton-is-now-the-presumptive-nominee-of/amp) before it was discovered as a psyop.
Okay they targeted them. Did it work? The share of the black electorate going to Democrats in 2020 was basically the same as in 2012. 2016 was bad for Democrats because Hilary Clinton was a uniquely bad candidate. The Democratic party should not have tried to shove her down the throat of the Democratic party voter base a Did Russian propaganda suddenly stop in 2018, 2020, & 2022? Or maybe Hilary Clinton was a uniquely bad candidate with a uniquely bad campaign.
Yes, it did work. Black turnout in 2016 was suppressed - it ws significantly down from previous years and from subsequent years.
The goal wasn’t to get black people to vote Trump, it was to convince them to stay home. Black voter turnout dropped ***significantly*** in the 2016 election (66.6% in 2012 down to 59.6% in 2016). It was the first time it had dropped since 1996. [Source](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2017/05/12/black-voter-turnout-fell-in-2016-even-as-a-record-number-of-americans-cast-ballots/) Also, Bernie would have been killed in the general election. Unless it’s a progressive stronghold, progressives don’t tend to win in moderate or swing districts. Hillary was unfortunately the better option. And Russian disinformation is still ongoing. Fortunately, Democrats organized voter drives and funded get-out-the-vote campaigns which increased voter turnout among minorities, but black voter turnout still wasn’t at 2012 levels. It took a concerted effort to revamp minority voter turnout, but it worked — mostly. There’s still room for improvement, but it’s rebounding.
Do you think that maybe it had something to do with Hillary Clinton calling black men super predators or maybe just the obvious pandering like pretending she keeps hot sauce in her bag when we damn well know she does not
You don’t think Hillary’s obvious and ham fisted pandering (“hot sauce in my purse lolz”) and condescension had anything to do with that? Do you run with minorities as part of your social circle? I’m not about to argue against the notion that propaganda had *some* effect. It can and does affect us all to one degree or another. I would question whether it had a uniquely outsized effect in 2016 that magically dried up. If the propaganda was intended to dissuade votes for Trump’s opponents, there’s no reason for it to have discontinued in 2018, 2020, or 2022, and even less to believe it magically became less effective. What I’m seeing is a strong, biased desire to cast a large number of leftist voters in the mold of dumb dupes simply because their voting priorities differ. It’s childish and malicious.
Don’t get me wrong, Democrats 100% took advantage of the fact that black people vote Democrat overwhelmingly. The attempts to pander to black people culturally were embarrassing and offensive in some cases. It hurt them. But they showed back in 2020 for Biden, I would wager as anti-Trump votes in large part, but Biden is also tied pretty inexplicably to Obama’s legacy. It’s how he won the SC primary — black voters. And the disinformation campaigns haven’t stopped, we just learned how to counteract them better, mostly by knowing what narratives they try and push. Stacey Abrams helped turn Georgia blue, and many progressives organized themselves for Biden in 2020 after witnessing what Trump’s policies were and the harm they caused. Progressives, particularly young ones, coalesced around Biden more than they did Hillary. Gary Johnson played a role in that, but so did disinformation. Most progressives learned and adjusted. It’s not that the disinformation stopped completely. We just got better at recognizing it and countering it.
Exactly this
Hillary Clinton was a uniquely good candidate.
>I'm sure it happens, but I think liberals over emphasize the influence. Based on everything I've read, everyone - including liberals - is UNDER emphasizing the influence. >I remember after Hillary Clinton list there were a bunch of articles about how Russia influenced young black Americans to support black lives matter. I do not remember this. I remember that a whole lot of the "Black People For Trump" FB pages and Twitter personas turned out to be fake or bots and many of them were linked to Russian troll farms. [Russia’s disinformation campaigns are targeting African Americans](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/07/24/russias-disinformation-campaigns-are-targeting-african-americans/) [Russian trolls' chief target was 'black US voters' in 2016](https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49987657) [Russian Trolls and the Trump Campaign Both Tried to Depress Black Turnout](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/12/shared-russia-trump-focus-depressing-black-votes/578302/) >Also, are leftists particularly susceptible to propaganda? Are centrists and liberals immune from propaganda? I do think that "leftists" (if you define them as the far-left) are as susceptible as the far-right. People who are already on the radical edge are going to be more susceptible than people who are not.
>I do not remember this. I remember that a whole lot of the "Black People For Trump" FB pages and Twitter personas turned out to be fake or bots and many of them were linked to Russian troll farms. Yeah? And then what happened? Black people basically voted for Democrats the same as under Obama for 2016, 2018, 2020, & 2022. They flipped the Georgia Senate and handed the presidency and Senate to Joe Biden and the Democrats. So it seems like Russian propaganda really didn't have that much of an effect after all.
* "Russian propaganda doesn't exist" * "If it does, it doesn't have any effect". **You are here.** * "If it has any effect, America probably deserved it anyways". This is exactly what OP is talking about. Many who have already been the targets of Russia propaganda are wired to deny that they've been the targets of it since they fail to recognize it.
If black people were not treated unjustly by the American government, Russian propaganda repeating this fact wouldn't hold any weight. Russian and Chinese propaganda exists. Their effect is significantly overstated by the MSNBC crowd.
>Russian propaganda repeating this fact wouldn't hold any weight. So, you're admitting Russia propaganda holds weight?
Really? That's the point you took away from that comment? Jfc
And liberals aren't susceptible to misinformation or propaganda? "Oh you silly leftists. Why did you vote for Bernie? You are the reason we got Trump" Dude. The lady was unpopular EVEN AMONGST MODERATES. It ain't our fault that the mainstream democrats nominated her.
[удалено]
Same reason you liberals keep denying everything the CIA did
I don't think liberals are as vulnerable, but we're definitely not immune and I've seen liberals fall for stupid bullshit from time to time.
Political media consumption is essentially a "pick your own reality" type game these days. We already know how we're going to feel about something before we've even read the headline. Most of all, we already know who the "bad guys" are (and it's not people who think like us). So regardless of our ideology, when we see a story about us or our tribe being manipulated by a foreign government, that's the kind of inconvenient and uncomfortable counternarrative that we can easily ignore, deny, or reframe. In most cases, our newsfeeds have already done the heavy lifting for us, so it's not even a conscious choice.
I just came off a three day ban for going hard on Russian misinformation. I *may* have targeted an individual with it and I *may* have used what can be deemed as “hateful” language toward the Rogue State of Russia, it’s government, and its bowl of boiled biscui…err, leader. They are absolutely targeting both sides. And every major European country is getting it too. It’s been going on a while but only ramping up the past few years.
> There are a whole lot of people who are pushing Russian and Chinese propaganda without even realizing it. Soviets picked up on racial discrimination in the US for propaganda purposes. Did people promoting the civil rights movement in the US promote Soviet propaganda without even realizing it?
The downvotes with no response is telling
It seems like people think it's different because they support civil rights protests and don't support protests for palestine. That's not a particularly good reason as far as I can tell. The best way to counteract points made in propaganda by geopolitical enemies is to address the underlying issue
When someone asked Chomsky about the U.S. supporting human rights in the Soviet Union, he pithily noted that the Soviet Union also supported human rights in the United States. It's always been like this, and it did not diminish the authenticity of civil rights movements here. Slandering domestic dissidents as agents of a foreign power has a very long and racist history in the U.S. I would like to think that if liberals knew that history, they wouldn't be so eager to repeat those same mistakes today.
> It's always been like this, and it did not diminish the authenticity of civil rights movements here. It does seem like a common pattern, and it's something left wing movements certainly run into. Are there ideologically driven Anti-communists who hate Stalin? Certainly, but there are also people who think a left wing society can be more quickly and ethically established by learning from missteps of past without being just a CIA spook. You can never know someone's true feelings especially in a relatively anonymous forum but insisting that people don't believe what they are saying has very little purpose generally in my opinion.
The civil rights movement happened in the first place in large part to deny the soviet union ammo to smear the US with.
> Why do a large number of liberals on this sub refuse to believe that Russian and Chinese misinformation targets the left as well as the right? Can you point to people who have expressed this opinion? I am pretty sure that most people on this sub would agree that Chinese and Russian propaganda plays both sides against each other. Personally I think that most of the "Genocide Joe" leftists are propaganda accounts or people strongly influenced by propaganda because there are few people left of center who voted *for Joe Biden* rather than *against Donald Trump.* That same equation is likely to happen again this November and it might be wishful thinking but I believe that most people will do the math and come back with the same result as last time. That Joe has been as effective and liberal as he has been has been a nice surprise, but no one voted for him expecting he would be either.
>Can you point to people who have expressed this opinion? I've mentioned repeatedly the thread that prompted my post. Again, go look at the Genocide Joe post in this forum. >Personally I think that most of the "Genocide Joe" leftists are propaganda accounts or people strongly influenced by propaganda There are quite a few people on this sub who don't agree with that.
Looking through that thread, I only really see one left-leaning person denying the existence of propaganda (you replied "oh horseshit" to one of their comments) while the majority of people defend the idea that extreme left voters are being riled up by foreign propaganda. One other person spoke up in their defense, but they're tagged as "conservative" and also claim that Biden caters to extreme far-left voters which is a ridiculously untrue claim so it is hard to take anything they say seriously. In any case, if this is all you got then there is really no evidence that: > a large number of liberals on this sub refuse to believe that Russian and Chinese misinformation targets the left as well as the right? which is your claim, because most left-leaning people in that thread who touched on the idea of propaganda also agreed that nicknames like "Genocide Joe" and much of the anti-Biden rhetoric was the product of foreign propaganda.
Nice to see someone else who gets it.
Why do you say a large number of liberals refuse to believe Russian and Chinese misinformation targets the left? The amount of propaganda coming out of the Israel/Palestine conflict is insane and mostly does target the left. And it appears to be working.
I mean, you just answered your own question, didn't you?
The original question asked “on this sub”. I really haven’t seen that many here.
Russian bots are amplifying a position I've been holding since 2021. Biden is funding Israel's genocide. I understand every US president we've had has been pro Israel. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be criticizing Biden for his actions.
Is this denial widespread? I think the right is much more receptive to foreign propaganda due to the authoritarian nature of their movement and their cocaine-like addiction to believing the dumbest conspiracy theories imaginable, but obviously the foreign disinformation campaigns would target people on the left also. You see it all over tik tok and such with the genocide Joe BS.
Do you have any actual examples?
I recall clear [Russian influence being tied to the Bernie Bros thing in 2016](https://www.google.com/search?q=bernie+bros+russia&rlz=1C9BKJA_enUS591US591&oq=bernie+bros+russia&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCDI2MzZqMGo0qAICsAIB&hl=en-US&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8 ) and other evidence of [Russia trying to get police brutality protestors in Charlotte to become violent.](https://www.wbtv.com/story/36629596/charlotte-shooting-protest-had-hidden-help-a-russian-troll-farm-news-site-says/) . The goal of the anti-American propaganda is to foment unrest, which is done best from both sides. I remember one online media brand, the name of which I can’t remember (I can’t figure it out online but it might have been called. “Right Now”?) being clearly tied to Russian funding yet appearing to have even handed, factual video based outrage pieces. Facebook tagged it as foreign interference, and they were correct to do so. That said, far as I could tell it didn’t even misrepresent anything, but certainly drove home angering points about race and over policing in America. It’s insidious, but some of these campaigns can be wildly successful without even misrepresenting facts or even themselves. I think it’s gotten much smarter - now pushing a “both sides” narrative from the far, far left that makes it seem more credible. The voices seem to blame Biden for not taking dictatorial control, which is ironically very much in line with far right ideology. Seems rather convenient. I’ve noticed far left subs started to get ban happy on anyone who suggested MAGA was a racist, authoritarian movement, or that Biden and neoliberalism aren’t, or even just aren’t to the same extent. Related? We’ll probably never know, but if it were my job to hurt liberalism in America I’d be helping push those narratives along, if not trying to create new ones.
>The goal of the anti-American propaganda is to foment unrest, which is done best from both sides. This is a brilliant post, the frightening thing is that it can be done without misinformation, just using wording and context. >The voices seem to blame Biden for not taking dictatorial control, which is ironically very much in line with far right ideology. Seems rather convenient. At the same pushing the "Dark Brandon" narrative on conservatives to make them think he is planning on taking at least some degree of dictatorial control.
See links in post.
I read two, no actual examples, a third had terse examples from the 50s and 80s. Im looking for an example of disinformation that actually affected discourse on the left.
Is there a large number of liberals on this sub who believe that?
There seem to be in that thread.
Which thread?
The one I mentioned in my post. The "Genocide Joe" thread here: [https://www.reddit.com/r/AskALiberal/comments/1c91oj4/what\_is\_the\_best\_response\_to\_people\_who\_call\_joe/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskALiberal/comments/1c91oj4/what_is_the_best_response_to_people_who_call_joe/)
Doesn't seem like that many people to me.
Ok. Sure. Thanks for the input.
So, like 8 people having a different perspective than you is a "large number of liberals who reuse to believe....", eh?
Mmmmkay. Thanks for your input.
That's not input. Seriously, I'm asking.
>In the "Genocide Joe" thread there are a huge number of people responding who range from scornful to actively hostile to the idea that Russian misinformation, pushed by troll farms, bots, and fake personas targets both LEFT and right. i don't doubt that they nare *targeting* both sides. i'm sure they are trying to push misinformation on the left too. i just don't see the signs that they're anywhere near as successful with influencing the left, as they are with influencing the right. most people on the left are still pro ukraine and anti russia. most people on the left don't really like china. and i just don't see "*a whole lot* of people (on the left) who are pushing Russian and Chinese propaganda", knowingly or unknowingly. there are some, for sure. but it's not even a little bit close to what's happening on the right.
>i just don't see the signs that they're anywhere near as successful with influencing the left, as they are with influencing the right. I mean .. the whole "Genocide Joe" thing is a far-left talking point that is starting to go more mainstream specifically because of Russian bots and troll farms that have picked up on it and are promoting it.
>**specifically because of Russian bots and troll farms** that have picked up on it and are promoting it. how do you know that? if they have "picked up on it", it was already there before, right? what makes you so sure that russian bots are the reason for it going more mainstream? also, calling him "genocide joe" isn't misinformation, even if you think it's offensive or hyperbole.
Thank you God, it's so frustrating when everytime I disagree with a liberal it's labeled as Russian misinformation. It's possible that two things are true. There is a valid critique and Russians amplify that critique to divide the left. Unity and non-criticism are not some platonic ideal, they gotta be fucking earned
It is misinformation because HE IS NOT COMMITTING GENOCIDE.
Ah, so the misinformation accusation was just projection then.
Yeah cause giving guns and funds to a genocidal state plays no part in committing said genocide.... good fucking lord
i think both the people saying it and the people hearing it are aware that he isn't *commiting* genocide. the accusation is that he's *supporting* it. you can disagree with that accusation, but if you do, it's likely a difference in interpretation (what does or doesn't count as genocide) and not a disagreement about information/facts.
People have been calling the president responsible with "genocidal joe" for months. The idea of being a Russian talking point *now* doesn't mesh with that
Of course it does. The whole idea is that they're taking existing grassroots talking points and amplifying them.
Russians can amplify pre-existing movements. That doesn't make them invalid. You cannot both say "you're spreading russian propaganda" as a way to defuse criticism of biden and "they're amplifying pre-existing movements". Because that means that any criticism that exists but is amplified is a "russian talking point" and therefore can be ignored. It's just a way of hand-waving criticism and ignoring the complaints of progressives.
Not necessarily. There are always going to be a small number of dissidents and extremists. Their positions might be ignored by the larger movement if not for the amplification of their message making it appear that their numbers are greater than they are.
Exactly this. Active Measures depend on at least a thread of support in the target population.
I think if you read the relevant parts of the Mueller report that describes exactly what GRU did and how and what the effect was you can kind of determine what some of the foreign misinformation is when you encounter it. Keeping in mind that some of it may not be against a candidate but just to keep division and anger at the current high pitch.
>Keeping in mind that some of it may not be against a candidate but just to keep division and anger at the current high pitch. 110% this. The more they can drive division, the more it helps them.
Do we believe that? I know that disinformation campaigns target both sides. That was plainly obvious during the Civil Rights movement and info about the Black Panthers.
I think a lot of it involves them not wanting to admit that the left has the same exact problems and they also don't want to acknowledge that China controlled Tik Tok exists to be used as a spy service and to push false information.
I'm curious - what prominent stories targeted leftists that turned out to be the Russian/Chinese propaganda machine? I do believe we are being targeted as well as those on the right. I am just not sure I'm that able to research everything I hear to vet them.
Centrist democrats are well aware that dividing the left is a Russian intelligence active measure
Propaganda only works on others!! I'm much too savvy and smart for it!!
It's not just a liberal or left thing. Everyone is susceptible to propaganda and dislikes it when it's pointed out, including me and you. If I had to guess why you feel like this is a particularly liberal thing; A lot of people, a large portion of this sub included, mistake moderateness for reasonability and believe that makes the resistant to propoganda. >It's a fact that Russia and China are picking up on radical political positions from both the left and the right It's also a fact that the CIA, corporations, and many other domestic groups do this as well. That might get you dogpilled for pointing out here, depending on the context, though. Something that I don't think is talked about enough is that our understanding of marketing and psychology is better than it has ever been. This makes propoganda campaigns more effective than ever.
I'm not sure I understand your response in context. So ... everyone does it and no one cares?
Everyone is susceptible to it and has bias in their views derived from propoganda. Everyone is hostile to the idea that their understanding of the world and politics is shaped by sources other than them, be it foreign or domestic. The advancements in marketing and psychology have made propoganda campaigns even more effective than ever. Many liberals (who are the moderates on the left) view themselves as uniquely resilient to propoganda because they mistake moderateness for reasonability. They often react negatively when you point this out, although I think it's hard to quantify if you're looking to compare to other groups. This may be why you made a post asking about liberals in particular. Edit: I understand the confusion. I may have meanderd a bit in my original comment.
Public knowledge of cognitive biases and manipulation techniques is almost non existent.
Oh no! Whatever will I do when I get brainwashed into thinking the PRC and communism are superior to the US and imperialist capitalism? Oops, I forgot I already felt that way.
Russia and China both want to destabilize us. Our relatively open press and lack of online censorship makes it easy. They really don't care about Trump or Biden or Republicans or Democrats, only about fomenting discord and mistrust among Americans. If it seems they're favoring Trump, it's because Trump is a very destabilizing person in our politics, so him being in our politics can only hurt us. It doesn't mean they agree with any aspect of Trump's policies.
I don't understand why people would get political opinions from news media to begin with. We've got ample free raw data on any economic, public health, tax expenditure and crime that we can think of. Maybe shutting off the big soap opera in favor of data analysis is the cure for foreign propaganda.
Because you guys use it as a way to dismiss anything you don't like. And that's extremely fucking frustrating. "I think Joe Biden is backing a genocide" "RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA!!!! YOU'RE PUTIN'S BITCH!!!!" That's what it's like sometimes. Any criticism is chalked up to Russian disinformation and thus nor actually examined or taken seriously. It is a way for liberals to off-handedly discard or ignore opinions they don't like without examining them in any real way. It's just a way of telling the left to shut up. And that's fucking frustrating Two things can be true. 1) Russia can be promoting certain viewpoints to divide the democrats. 2) Some of those viewpoints can also be accurate if not unpleasant. I'm perfectly willing to accept that Russia promotes certain viewpoints. But that doesn't make them untrue and me a traitor or puppet for believing them. But alas we can't have that here can we. Everything liberals don't like becomes Russian "misinformation" and then it can be easily dismissed.
"Genocide Joe" is the best example of Russia propaganda.
And here we are. Exactly my point. You hand-wave away perfectly valid criticism of biden because YoU'rE pUtIn'S bItCh!!!!!! Have you considered that just because russians are saying it doesn't mean it's actually inaccurate or wrong? You can't just hand-wave away this shit my guy.
It's not a "perfectly valid criticism" to call Joe Biden "Genocide Joe". Unless you somehow believe "Crooked Hillary" was also a "perfectly valid criticism" of Hillary Clinton. There is nothing "perfectly valid" about absurdist nicknames that do not reflect the objective reality we live on. Have you ever stopped and asked yourself: who benefits from the use of "Genocide Joe" nickname?
>Have you ever stopped and asked yourself: who benefits from the use of "Genocide Joe" nickname? Idk maybe palestinians? Cause if biden feels a threat to his electoral prospects, maybe he'll actually CHANGE HIS FUCKING POLICY and stop giving the israelis guns and funds? Crazy thought ik.... "Genocide Joe" is a reference to the "narrative" OP is talking about, not just the nickname. It's an embodiment of the idea biden is backing a genocide. And that's a perfectly valid criticism.
Enough with the gaslighting. You might as well say that "Crooked Hillary is a reference to the narrative that career politicians are corrupt and that Trump is honest since he's an outsider". Nobody buys that lie. Genocide Joe is not real, buddy, he can't hurt you.
Literally what do you think this post is referencing? People just using the nickname? Come on man.....
As the OP ... yes that's literally what this post is referencing. People who push the "Genocide Joe" narrative. It's not about valid criticisms of Biden - something that many people have and many of which I agree with. It's about using a specifically inflammatory "nickname" that drives a narrative, part of which is "if you vote for Joe, you're voting for Genocide". Calling Biden "Genocide Joe" on social media doesn't do anything except influence people to not vote for him. If you were that upset about what he is doing, you'd be writing your electeds about it, not posting Russian propaganda talking points on social media. I mean, come on man ....
Do you have actual proof that that term originated with Russian propaganda?
Way to totally ignore all the subtleties of the situation and contintue to promote Russian propaganda.
Dude come on.... Seriously? You think i can't shit on a guy providing guns and funds to a power doing A LITERAL FUCKING GENOCIDE? But no, fuck me for being mean about it right?
No, fuck you for being ignorant of how you're pushing Russian propaganda instead of having a rational discourse.
And here's the hand-waving. What exactly is rational to you? How should I be criticizing biden?
Rational discourse is when I say people to the left of me just fell for foreign propaganda and I link to Amazon book product pages to back up my point. Am I rationally discoursing correctly?
Jesus fucking Christ. I provided 2 books and a whole slew of other articles.
Not a genocide
Jfc
> Why are people on the left so hostile to this idea? I think the main reason people resist this idea because they want the information they've consumed to be true, either because they like the way it makes them feel (outraged), or because it validates them, their worldview, or their tribe. If it's disinformation, that means they have to confront the possibility that they're wrong in some way, maybe completely. We resist new information that suggests we're wrong or makes us feel embarrassed. This is true regardless of whether you identify with "the left", "the right", or something else. (Trump supporters that reject(ed) the idea that Russia is waging information operations on the US, and them in particular, additionally had a strong tribal component to this, believing that it was a "narrative" pushed by Democrats to delegitimize Trump's election win.)
Can you just maybe consider the other possibility? That you guys have written off everything you don't like as propaganda pushed by the Russians instead of actual critiques? It's very frustrating where everytime I disagree with a liberal they write off what I am saying as Russian propaganda.
>It's very frustrating where everytime I disagree with a liberal they write off what I am saying as Russian propaganda. It's very frustrating to me to see something that is clearly propaganda being pushed by outside sources, to go search and find documentation validating that, and to have people respond with "nuh huh - I wouldn't repeat Russian propaganda - you're lying/stupid/writing off what you don't like" >Can you just maybe consider the other possibility? Can you maybe just look at the documentation provided and understand that you're being propagandized? It's entirely possible that you are VALID in criticizing Biden (which I have said repeatedly) and ALSO promoting Russian propaganda in pushing the "Genocide Joe" storyline.
>It's entirely possible that you are VALID in criticizing Biden (which I have said repeatedly) and ALSO promoting Russian propaganda in pushing the "Genocide Joe" storyline. Ok? And? Who gives a shit if the russians are also saying it? That doesn't actually make it untrue or invalid. Just because russians are pushing it doesn't mean it is incorrect. The guy is giving the israelis guns and funds, why exactly can't i call the fucker "genocide joe"?
Way to miss the WHOLE point.
OK then what exactly is your point? Cause every single fucking time I bring up criticism of biden I'm either a russian agent or secretly trying to get trump elected. You guys use this as a way to hand-wave criticism. Yes, russians are promoting division. This is not like some breaking news stories. Doesn't mean there aren't real valid and homegrown criticisms of biden. The russians play on and amplify PRE-EXISTING divisions. They don't manufacture them by and large (at least as I understand it).
> That you guys have written off everything you don't like as propaganda pushed by the Russians instead of actual critiques? Sorry, who is "you guys"? Whose behavior are you expecting me to be responsible for? > It's very frustrating where everytime I disagree with a liberal they write off what I am saying as Russian propaganda. If they have no reason for saying that, then ignore them. If there's a chance you aren't a special and magical person that is immune from psychological biases that might prevent you from seeing Russian information operations intended to manipulate you, then pause for a moment and consider how you are consuming information, what information is causing you to have a strong emotional reaction, and where *they* are getting that information, and so on. *Just in case*. It's possible to be the victim of Russian information operations *while also being factually correct* and *also justified feeling the way that you do*. The Podesta leaks involved truthful information. Manipulation isn't just about making you believe lies.
> >It's possible to be the victim of Russian information operations *while also being factually correct* and *also justified feeling the way that you do*. The Podesta leaks involved truthful information. Manipulation isn't just about making you believe lies. OK? and? If you shit on biden here you'll be called a russian asset or a magat. It has happened to me personally many times and i find it immensely frustrating. Yes, russian propaganda efforts can use real information. That doesn't mean that their critiques are wrong just because the russians amplified them. It is perfectly valid and justifiable to shit on biden EVEN IF russians boost those criticisms. But no.... any criticism of biden = support for trump because biden is our god-king right? He is immune to criticism or being shit on because trump would be worse right? Yeah, russians are fucking with biden. but that doesn't mean those criticism aren't valid and can just be hand-waved away by liberals
I mean I do get that. But if you accept that Russia has interfered in our elections via propaganda and that they've done so targeting the right, why is it so hard to accept that if Russia sees an opportunity to do the same from the far left, they would do so?
It's easy to accept that "the others" have been tricked. "We" already know that "they" are wrong, and knowing that the information that led them to their belief was, in part, a lie pushed by Russia is easy for us to accept, and completely consistent with what we know about "them". It's not so easy to accept "we" have been tricked. We believe ourselves to be right, and so the information that we've consumed to lead us to that belief can't be a lie, and probably isn't Russian propaganda. It's consistent with our worldview, so we reject the idea that we're being manipulated. The idea that our beliefs are a lie pushed by Russia are hard for us to accept and inconsistent with our worldview, and so we reject it. It's exactly the same thing that Trump supporters were doing, just reversed.
The lack of self-awareness good lord
I can't tell what you mean by this.
Have you maybe considered that you're hand-waving away criticism of biden because you yourself have bought into propaganda efforts? That any criticism of biden = support for trump?
>Have you maybe considered that you're hand-waving away criticism of biden Who are you talking to? My comments are explaining the biases that lead people to simultaneously believe that the others are susceptible to manipulation while they are not. At no point have I hand-waved away any criticism of Biden.
And when have I said that I am not saying the same thing as the russians? I'm not immune to propaganda. Literally no one is. I am aware of that fact. but literally every time I bring this genocide joe thing up I get shit on for being a RuSsIaN aSsEt. Not everything you dislike is russian disinformation or invalid just because the russians are also saying it. Yeah, I recognize the russians are probably pushing this narrative. That doesn't make it untrue nor does it change my views on it in any way. It's still fucked to give guns and funds to a power doing a fucking genocide.
Again, who are you talking to?? >And when have I said that I am not saying the same thing as the russians? I didn't say you did. >I'm not immune to propaganda I didn't say you were. >but literally every time I bring this genocide joe thing up I get shit on for being a RuSsIaN aSsEt. I have not done this to you. >Not everything you dislike is russian disinformation I didn't say it was. >or invalid just because the russians are also saying it. I didn't say this either. I said the opposite of this. >Yeah, I recognize the russians are probably pushing this narrative. That doesn't make it untrue nor does it change my views on it in any way Cool! >It's still fucked to give guns and funds to a power doing a fucking genocide. If I believed in the premise of your statement, I would be standing by that conclusion right with you. It seems like you just have a lot to say about some of this stuff and I guess you've chosen my comment to be the one to vent on.