poprock wrote:Tempy wrote:So what exactly is being done with these digital profiles that tabloids over here and US shock jocks/lightweight TV news isn't already accomplishing?
It’s powers of ten more effective than past methods.
The feedback loop is what does it. Learn where people’s views lean, block opposing news from ever reaching them, fill their media bubble with personalised arguments nudging them just a little further towards your agenda. Scan the data again and repeat. It’s a vicious circle that genuinely changes minds far more often than anything the ad industry have ever come up with, because it’s based on emotional responses and activities and it functions on a level the end user/victim has barely (if any) awareness of (and in an area the user thinks is private and personal, where they freely share more extreme views).
The same rules could apply anywhere, but it’s Facebook that really is the gold standard right now.
I'm sure there's studies out there regarding advertising and the like.Tempy wrote:... I would be interested in studies that show some real effects of this. I am only hesitant because I feel like it is the latesf in a long line of emotional manipulation going back all the way to convincing oration, and I don't know if i believe it is that exceptionally more effective.
Tempy wrote:I guess my hesitation comes from the fact that my experience of facebook is that it's not particularly great at manipulating views.
poprock wrote:Tempy wrote:I don't think it's the dystopic sci-fi super weapon suggested here, more that it's just another small weapon in the vast suite of a media well equipped to preying on human nature
Yes, and it’s vital to remember that it’s nothing new, but that said it is by far the most powerful weapon that predatory media have ever got their grubby little hands on.
The original German article on this has been lost, because Vice bought it up and did their own English language version (removing unofficial translations from other sites), but here’s Vice’s version for you.
And one example of the insidious (and persuasive) nature of this new style of propaganda tailoring:
In the Miami district of Little Haiti, for instance, Trump's campaign provided inhabitants with news about the failure of the Clinton Foundation following the earthquake in Haiti, in order to keep them from voting for Hillary Clinton. This was one of the goals: to keep potential Clinton voters (which include wavering left-wingers, African-Americans, and young women) away from the ballot box, to "suppress" their vote, as one senior campaign official told Bloomberg in the weeks before the election. These "dark posts"—sponsored news-feed-style ads in Facebook timelines that can only be seen by users with specific profiles—included videos aimed at African-Americans in which Hillary Clinton refers to black men as predators, for example.
You want to prevent people voting for Clinton in an area where the polling indicates she has a chance. So you edit together a spurious piece of news footage that seems to portray her being racist. Then you show that ad only to African-American people who you know are on the fence and care about race as a key issue, in that specific region. Nobody outside that demographic even knows your piece of footage exists, so no counter-arguments are ever given.
GooberTheHat wrote:Tempy wrote:I guess my hesitation comes from the fact that my experience of facebook is that it's not particularly great at manipulating views.
But then you are adept at using the internet, fact checking, researching and the like. To some people, Facebook is the Internet. All their links to external sites comes via Facebook.
Article in The Spectator wrote:The problem, says Jill Lepore, a historian of polling at Harvard, is that while traditional polling was bad for democracy and could be unreliable, data science was still more damaging. Politicians’ views were dictated by consultants, not principle, while voters were told only what they wanted to hear. ‘The effects of data science on the political process are probably considerably worse.
She was talking about the key to it all: ‘microtargeting’. Cambridge Analytica sliced and diced the electorate so Trump could talk to small groups directly, or even one at a time: one email or letter to the timid introvert at No. 22 who cares about jobs and limited government, another to the loud extrovert next door who cares about gun rights and Isis. Psychographics was used in what Oczkowski calls ‘sentiment analysis’ and ‘tonality’, that is in deciding what to say to people and how to say it. Almost 50 years after The Selling of the President was written about the advertising industry’s intrusion into politics, this is the ultimate attempt to manipulate the electorate.
Yossarian wrote:It's worth noting in this that Trump won by a swing of (IIRC) 40K votes in three key swing states. This doesn't need to have been wildly successful for that.
Yossarian wrote:Actually, he likely heard it from Robert Mercer (cross-post from current affairs thread): [url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/26/robert-mercer-breitbart-war-on-media-steve-bannon-donald-trump-nigel-farage
Tempy wrote:I am sure it can but I also don't think it's the dystopic sci-fi super weapon suggested here, more that it's just another small weapon in the vast suite of a media well equipped to preying on human natureTargeted propaganda is a lot like targeted ads. It may nudge undecided people on fb and twitter in the direction the propaganda wants them to. It may not effect you per se but on a population level gains in percentage could be significant enough to turn an election. Thus proving the propaganda's effect on a population level and a nation as a whole.
/shrugTempy wrote:... @chump i'm sure there are studies on ads, but i'd like studies on this particular issue - paradox of that noted above
hunk wrote:The tech has been beta tested in countries like Russia before application in the West during Brexit and US elections. The results speak for themselves no? How much of the win is due to propaganda is up for debate but if it works for ads it'll definitely be serviceable to propaganda purposes. Also, they can dominate certain trending topics and google search results which is kindof scary. Thus opinion becomes public fact?Tempy wrote:I am sure it can but I also don't think it's the dystopic sci-fi super weapon suggested here, more that it's just another small weapon in the vast suite of a media well equipped to preying on human natureTargeted propaganda is a lot like targeted ads. It may nudge undecided people on fb and twitter in the direction the propaganda wants them to. It may not effect you per se but on a population level gains in percentage could be significant enough to turn an election. Thus proving the propaganda's effect on a population level and a nation as a whole.
g.man wrote:Amazon are recommending I stock up on dried cat food at the mo...
Liveinadive wrote:Amazon If you have a Prime account you will recieve your world of tomorrow tomorrow, by then of course it will be the world of Wednesday.
cockbeard wrote:Everyone starting to feel mildly optimistic that the weekend isn't too far away
cockbeard wrote:Liveinadive wrote:Amazon If you have a Prime account you will recieve your world of tomorrow tomorrow, by then of course it will be the world of Wednesday.
Wednesworld
You think that's one of the extra floors in the next series of Westworld
Everyone starting to feel mildly optimistic that the weekend isn't too far away
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!