Disclosing networks of state-linked information operations we’ve removed

Re:Disclosing networks of state-linked information operation... by killjoywashere on Friday June 12, 2020 @12:34AM (#23496059)

If the US is conducting psy-ops on social media against adversaries, wouldn't they use media companies popular in that country? And, if that were Twitter, wouldn't the language barrier still make it relatively harder for Twitter (a company staffed predominantly by English-speaking employees) to investigate?

Additionally, does it merit discriminating between offensive and defensive psy-ops? Might there, for example, be government-controled bots injecting wholesomememes content into the feeds of depressed government employees? Does Twitter have a different obligation in that context?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Disclosing networks of state-linked information operation... by yorwba on Friday June 12, 2020 @05:17AM (#23497468)

> wouldn't the language barrier still make it relatively harder for Twitter (a company staffed predominantly by English-speaking employees) to investigate

That doesn't seem to have stopped them from banning accounts posting in Chinese.

> government-controled bots injecting wholesomememes content into the feeds of depressed government employees

That would still be "coordinated inauthentic behavior".

[ Parent | on HN ]