Fake news, propaganda, and censorship. NOW (2022) with a Ministry of Truth!
POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Monday, April 27, 2026 21:49
VIEWED: 13456
PAGE 8 of 10
Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Troll.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
dreamtrove
---------------------
lol. why? I wasn't ever here.
some day you can read over these threads and your own posts and see that i wasn't a troll.
Eta: I just double checked. I was so not on this thread, anywhere, until now.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I am willing to say there might be some truth to the conspiracy of elite globalists, an illuminati so to speak or a secret society of internationalists wanting to change America, Europe, Asia the world into one government, one currency...I'm not sure how real the conspiracy is but many alt-news blogs on the left and right did talk about it
Its not just David Icke, Alex Jones ro piratenews level stuff
People have ranted about this since the 50s and 1960s
Although I'm not sure how true
One example Myron Fagan, a speech 1967 ALL About Illuminati, Zionism, Masonry, Skull & Bones, The CFR etc People used to share this stuff on vinyl tape and other recorder devices, the interent made conspiracy like this go viral
but once again I'm not sure how true this could be?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Trump's former top aide launches GETTR, a new pro-Trumpish social media platform? Team Launches Twitter-like Social Media Platform Called 'Gettr'
Social Media App Launched By Trump Adviser Was Hacked On Its Launch Day
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/gettr-social-media-platform-trump-a
dviser-hacked
'He's a fake news humpty dumpty': Sean Hannity hits back at Brian Stelter after the CNN host accused his Fox News rival of 'spouting poison'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9736143/Sean-Hannity-brands-B
rian-Stelter-humpty-dumpty-CNN-host-accused-spouting-poison.html
'Editing out fake news'
https://techxplore.com/news/2021-06-fake-news.html
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
After Russiagate, Why WOULDN’T People Be Skeptical About Covid?
You hardly ever hear about Russiagate anymore. ...
Looking at mainstream news outlets in 2021, you’d hardly know they’d recently spent years hammering the (Russiagate) story into public consciousness that Vladimir Putin had infiltrated the highest levels of the US government, day after day after day after day after day.
But they did. Vast fortunes were raked in off the public interest generated by click-friendly stories about the latest BOMBSHELL revelation involving some peripheral member of Trump’s associates perhaps maybe having some kind of contact with a Russian national at some point. Entire careers were built on this.
Then the Mueller investigation invalidated the entire claim by failing to indict a single American for conspiring with the Russian government, and the mass media who’d spent the previous few years bashing everyone in the face with that story just kind of slowly sidled away from it.
And now they act like it never happened.
Now I'm going to ask you to put yourself in the shoes of someone you might not normally be inclined to.
Imagine you’re someone on the political right watching this whole thing unfold. Imagine that from late 2016 to mid-2019 you were watching the mass media aggressively shove this story down everyone’s throat that a US president, whom you support, is secretly working for a hostile foreign government with the goal of subverting the United States of America. The media you consume have been highlighting all the massive, glaring plot holes in this narrative the entire time, so you know it’s not true, yet you’ve still got friends, coworkers and family members who believe it is.
Can you imagine how disgusted you’d get with the media watching this happen day after day? How outraged? How resentful? If you’re really putting yourself there, I think you probably can.
Now imagine a year later these exact same media institutions start telling you there’s a novel coronavirus which we’re all going to have to sacrifice some personal liberties in order to stop. We might have to stay in our homes, wear a mask, get injected with new drugs we’re not sure about, possibly while watching our bank account drain and our business go under, and all these media institutions you just watched lie to everyone’s face for years on end are aggressively saying you need to do this and support this or you’re a dangerous monster whose voice should be banned from social media.
How well do you imagine that would go over with you?
https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2021/08/04/after-russiagate-why-wouldnt-p
eople-be-skeptical-about-covid/#comment-68414
That's not a particularity interesting question to me. Anyone who looks for evidence before accepting a story understood that Russiagate was just as empty as Iraq's WMDs. And besides, why WOULD you believe anything the media tells you without evidence? There's no reason to at all. Without evidence, claims are clearly propaganda.
But evidence is exactly what distinguishes Iraq's WMDs and Russiagate from COVID-19. There's evidence about COVID-19 not just from the US government ... and the US medical system ... and US academia ... and US individuals ... and the western m$m ...
... but also from official news media sources from around the globe ... international organizations ... foreign academics ... and foreign institutions ...
... all accessible via the internet.
Unless you imagine the ENTIRE PLANET IS COOPERATING TOGETHER WITHOUT EXCEPTION IN SOME VAST GLOBAL CONSPIRACY, AND THAT EVERY SINGLE THING YOU SEE IS FAKED ... the evidence for COVID-19 is abundant.
Now, that doesn't mean that fact-based contrary research isn't being hidden. Or that the m$m and social media aren't suppressing contrary POVs. Or that governments and their media servants aren't spinning narratives around the facts as quickly as possible to herd people in a preferred direction, beca
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
We Research Misinformation on Facebook. It Just Disabled Our Accounts.
Aug. 10, 2021
By Laura Edelson and Damon McCoy
Ms. Edelson is a Ph.D. candidate in computer science at N.Y.U.’s Tandon School of Engineering, where Dr. McCoy is an associate professor of computer science and engineering. They are affiliated with the nonpartisan research group Cybersecurity for Democracy.
We learned last week that Facebook had disabled our Facebook accounts and our access to data that we have been using to study how misinformation spreads on the company’s platform.
We were informed of this in an automated email. In a statement, Facebook says we used “unauthorized means to access and collect data” and that it shut us out to comply with an order from the Federal Trade Commission to respect the privacy of its users.
This is deeply misleading. We collect identifying information only about Facebook’s advertisers. We believe that Facebook is using privacy as a pretext to squelch research that it considers inconvenient. Notably, the acting director of the F.T.C.’s consumer protection bureau told Facebook last week that the “insinuation” that the agency’s order required the disabling of our accounts was “inaccurate.”
“The F.T.C. is committed to protecting the privacy of people, and efforts to shield targeted advertising practices from scrutiny run counter to that mission,” the acting director, Samuel Levine, wrote to Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s founder and chief executive.
Our team at N.Y.U.’s Center for Cybersecurity has been studying Facebook’s platform for three years. Last year, we deployed a browser extension we developed called Ad Observer that allows users to voluntarily share information with us about ads that Facebook shows them. It is this tool that has raised the ire of Facebook and that it pointed to when it disabled our accounts.
In the course of our overall research, we’ve been able to demonstrate that extreme, unreliable news sources get more “engagement” — that is, user interaction — on Facebook, at the expense of accurate posts and reporting. What’s more, our work shows that the archive of political ads that Facebook makes available to researchers is missing more than 100,000 ads.
There is still a lot of important research we want to do. When Facebook shut down our accounts, we had just begun studies intended to determine whether the platform is contributing to vaccine hesitancy and sowing distrust in elections. We were also trying to figure out what role the platform may have played leading up to the Capitol assault on Jan. 6.
We are privacy and cybersecurity researchers whose careers are built on protecting users. That’s why we’ve been so careful to make sure that our Ad Observer tool collects only limited and anonymous information from the users who agreed to participate in our research. And it is also why we made the tool’s source code public so that Facebook and others can verify that it does what we say it does.
We strongly believe we are not violating Facebook’s terms of service, as the company contends. But even if we had been, Facebook could have authorized our research. As Facebook declared in announcing the disabling of our accounts, “We’ll continue to provide ways for responsible researchers to conduct studies that are in the public interest while protecting the security of our platform and the privacy of people who use it.”
Our research is responsible and in the public interest. We’ve protected the privacy of our volunteers. Essentially, our ad tool collects the ads our volunteers see on their Facebook accounts, plus information provided by Facebook about when and why they were shown the ads and who paid for them. These ads are seen by the specific audience the advertiser targets.
This tool provides a way to see what entities are trying to influence the public, and how they’re doing it. We think that’s important to democracy. Yet Facebook has denied us important access to continue to do much of our work.
One of the odd things about this dispute is that while Fac
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I know that it's been mentioned in various threads, but I think that Biden's* Ministry of Truth demands its own thread. So, here it is.
Quote:
Who Is Nina Jankowicz? Head of Joe Biden's Disinformation Governance Board
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/who-is-nina-jankowicz-head-of-joe
-bidens-disinformation-governance-board/ar-AAWGYT5
I could provide horrifying example after horrifying example of Jankowicz (If this is Polish it's pronounced YANK-o-wich) spreading disinformation and censoring truth, but I'm running late, so please feel free to add.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
BTW, don't expect Elon Musk to save you from Big Bad Tech and grant you Free Speech. The uber-wealthy don't act in our interest, they act in theirs. I'm sure he'll turn Twitter into a revenue stream by doing what google does: scraping your ID and selling your info to advertisers, and requiring a monthly subscription for "free speech".
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:From the early posts of this thread. Excellent example of why pizmobeach keeps deleting his hilariously inept posts and viewpoints.
Originally posted by THGRRI:Quote:I see our Russian troll is still at it. With her it's spin, spin, spin.
Originally posted by G:Quote:So much to unpack:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:
FBI disagrees with CIA on Russian influence in the presidential election
The FBI did not corroborate the CIA’s claim that Russia had a hand in the election of President-elect Donald Trump in a meeting with lawmakers last week.
A senior FBI counterintelligence official met with Republican and Democrat members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in order to give the bureau’s view of a recent CIA report. The official did not concur with the CIA, frustrating Democrats. ... The different conclusions reached by the two intelligence agencies is a reflection of their different institutional styles. CIA officials often use past behavior and analysis based on gathered intelligence to advise leaders, whereas the FBI comes from a more legalistic background which relies on hard evidence to make a case.
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2016/12/12/fbi-disagrees-cia-russian-influ
ence-presidential-election-422763
Because who needs evidence when simple accusation will do?
I see a fight shaping up between the DIA and FBI on the one hand, and the CIA on the other.
1. At least your source bizpac, is upfront about their bias:
"Conservative News You Can Trust
Based in Palm Beach County, BizPac Review is a privately held, for-profit news and opinion website covering news that matters to conservatives throughout Florida and the United States."
2. This statement: "FBI disagrees with CIA on Russian influence in the presidential election" Disagrees how? Did bizpac say what specifically they disagreed on? No - they teased they would, but fishtailed away from being specific, only citing: "The different conclusions reached by the two intelligence agencies is a reflection of their different institutional styles." Ok, they're different entities so it's normal they would have different styles. On other words - BS article.
3. The money shot from the article only fizzles: "The official did not concur with the CIA, frustrating Democrats..."
Not no concur could mean ANYTHING. Did not think 1% was correct? It's wide open - again, a BS article.
4. Gathered Intelligence versus hard evidence? They're not the same? BS.
5. It is widely known that for many many years those 2 agencies have not played well together. That's messed up, but it explains why these 2 aren't slurping each other's work.
6. "The FBI did not corroborate the CIA’s claim that Russia had a hand in the election of President-elect Donald Trump in a meeting with lawmakers last week." Define: "had a hand in the election of President-elect Donald Trump." I'd like to see what the FBI thought had happened. Do they think there were no Russian hacks of the DNC or connection to Wikileaks? I really need to see a reputable source say that with facts to back it up before I would believe it.
7. It's easy to say Russia is being used by main stream media to sell papers/ads, but that would be true either way, so that proves nothing.
8. You have to ask: isn't it logical that Russia would want to influence our election? Of course.
9. Why would the CIA break a false story now? How would that change anything? What do they have to gain?
10. SIGNYM: "Because who needs evidence when simple accusation will do?"
OR, what you do:
"Because who needs evidence when Fake News will do?"
____________________________________________
Now in the full light of how inept his lies were, nice to see it laid out how he always supports disinformation and Fake News.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:That is hilarious.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I know that it's been mentioned in various threads, but I think that Biden's* Ministry of Truth demands its own thread. So, here it is.Quote:
Who Is Nina Jankowicz? Head of Joe Biden's Disinformation Governance Board
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/who-is-nina-jankowicz-head-of-joe
-bidens-disinformation-governance-board/ar-AAWGYT5
I could provide horrifying example after horrifying example of Jankowicz (If this is Polish it's pronounced YANK-o-wich) spreading disinformation and censoring truth, but I'm running late, so please feel free to add.
In a redirected thread about Lord Darth's new Fake News Propaganda Machine, you cite as source the most robust Fake News Generator in the world.
Not even sure if you did that on purpose.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Golly. Actually referring to Master Traitors Clapper and Comey in the midst of their perpetrating crimes.
Originally posted by second:
Ynet in Israel is reporting that Israeli intelligence officials are deciding not to share intelligence with the incoming Trump administration. The report indicates they came to this conclusion after a recent meeting with American intelligence officials, who told them the Russians have "leverages of pressure" to use against Trump.
www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4906642,00.html
This is an extraordinary story. If our intelligence community really believes this, then playtime is over.
Nothing in the behavior of officials like Director of National Intelligence James Clapper or FBI chief James Comey has offered any clarity to the situation. Both appear determined to keep taking the fork in the road all the way to inauguration.
No more Clapper-style hedging or waffling. If Israel gets to hear why the CIA thinks Trump is compromised, how is the American public not also so entitled?
But if all the CIA has are unverifiable rumors, they can't do this, not even to Donald Trump.
The only solution is an immediate unveiling of all the facts and an urgent public investigation. A half-assed whispering campaign a half week from a Trump presidency, with BuzzFeed at the center of the action, isn't going to cut it. We need to know what the likes of Clapper and Comey know, and we need it all now, before it's too late.
www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-russia-story-reaches-a-cris
is-point-w460806
Good example of how gullible secondbot always has been.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME