Re:Things You Can’t Say About Assange or WikiLeaks
by fixermark on Monday January 07, 2019 @02:40PM
(#18849144)
Maybe. They likely had an impact. The money spent by Russian intelligence to run propaganda via social media should likely be counted as at least as influential.
Re:Things You Can’t Say About Assange or WikiLeaks
by darkpuma on Monday January 07, 2019 @03:09PM
(#18849457)
How much money did Russian intelligence spend on such ads on social media? I googled "how much money did russia spend on facebook ads" but the numbers I see in that result are surprisingly small, so I'm wondering if you have a better source.
Re:Things You Can’t Say About Assange or WikiLeaks
by fixermark on Monday January 07, 2019 @03:34PM
(#18849719)
It's not the quantity they spent; it's the efficacy of the micro-targeting.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/us/politics/russia-2016-e...
Re:Things You Can’t Say About Assange or WikiLeaks
by Varcht on Monday January 07, 2019 @04:13PM
(#18850148)
But it doesn't work, right? Just look at "Project Birmingham"...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/secret-ca...
Re:Things You Can’t Say About Assange or WikiLeaks
by darkpuma on Monday January 07, 2019 @03:52PM
(#18849929)
All parties involved were microtargetting, no? The Trump side certainly was, what with all that Cambridge Analytical shit and whatnot.
How much did Trump and similar non-Russian PACs spend on microtargetted facebook ads, compared to Russian intelligence? Your article contains no hint of this. I think we're all aware that Russian intelligence was buying a lot of ads on social media, but I'm trying to understand the relative scope of this. To be frank, the scope of Russian propaganda seems dwarfed by domestic propaganda. The propagandists who deserve the most blame are probably Americans, or were paid by Americans.
they did change the outcome of a US election, and probably the course of world history, which is more than all of the anti-trump media combined, so that is a pretty big accomplishment ...