Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Information operations directed at Hong Kong

blog.twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 480 posts

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#71

Post by JumpCrisscross »

rjf72 wrote: post #66
sephamorr wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just looked through Jackie Chan's movies for the past few years, and they're almost exclusively produced by mainland Chinese film companies. I understand he's a Hong Kong national, but it seems that he is toeing the line for the movie industry he's working for. Considering how the Chinese have cracked down on Cathay Pacific (forcing them to fire employees who have participated in the protests), I doubt a mainland m…

Here [1] is Chan's filmography. He's very active in the American industry still. Using the fact he also acts in Chinese films against him is not very reasonable. And Liu Yifei is American Chinese and literally just got her big break playing the lead in Mulan. It seems increasingly disturbing to me that people seem to want to assume that anybody who holds a different view from them must be a "troll" or some sort of se…

> Using the fact he also acts in Chinese films against him is not very reasonable

Sure it is. He's economically and likely personally exposed to Beijing. China has no rule of law. Offending Xi's government carries drastically harsher consequences than doing something similar in a country with the rule of law.

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#72

Post by CaliforniaKarl »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #53
martey wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2019/advertisi... , which was posted to the Twitter blog at approximately the same time as this post.

So, wait...is the BBC no longer allowed to advertise upcoming shows on Twitter?

They might not be able to pay for ads, but they could still use their Twitter accounts:

>Any affected accounts will be free to continue to use Twitter to engage in public conversation, just not our advertising products.

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#74

Post by kevin_b_er »

rjf72 wrote: post #38

This seems like a very slippery slope. Recently Jackie Chan and Liu Yifei are a couple of higher profile individuals have expressed support for the mainland or condemnation of the protesters' riotous behavior. Jackie Chan is a Hong Kong national - Lieu Yifei is Chinese American. The reason that this is relevant is because we live in the day and age where holding the wrong opinion is increasingly frequently grounds fo…

Jackie Chan has, for a good few years now, become negative toward HK and Taiwan and highly nationalistic for Beijing.

The CPC has orchestrated media personalities to also produce similar/identical statements of pre-prepared condemnation. Chan's words are just another angle of CPC's propaganda and disinformation campaigns.

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#75

Post by kryogen1c »

This shit is goddamn terrifying. Since when are american corporations the arbiters of accurate, international, and political, information?

We just crossed the rubicon. Public, proactive action against a relatively hostile foreign power by a non-governmental entity. If this isnt proof positive we need to either bust these monopolies or completely overhaul our view of the power megacompanies wield, idk what is.

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#76

Post by munificent »

kelnos wrote: post #24
groundlogic wrote: post #12

I don't think HN is immune to these kinds of CCP ops.

I doubt HN is even on the CCP's radar. Not only are we a low-value target, we're much harder to subvert.

> we're much harder to subvert.

Surely, "I'm confident I'm not gullible" is the primary risk factor for actually being gullible.

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#77

Post by guerrilla »

kevin_b_er wrote: post #69
ryanchankh wrote: post #22

HongKonger here. I have some friends in China posting similar anti-protest posts on WeChat social media. It's like the news they read has a completely different story than what it's being told in legitimate new sources. The problem of fake news does become very apparent, and I hope people in China can eventually gain awareness or at least start to question the validity of their news sources.

When the fake news is generated and controlled by a government entity, I think the better term is "propaganda".

It seems unreasonable to restrict the term propaganda to government since any organization can produce propaganda, i.e. "information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view."

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#78

Post by tareqak »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #53
martey wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2019/advertisi... , which was posted to the Twitter blog at approximately the same time as this post.

So, wait...is the BBC no longer allowed to advertise upcoming shows on Twitter?

I was confused about this part too, but that link does have this:

> This policy will not apply to taxpayer-funded entities, including independent public broadcasters.

Britain's BBC, Canada's CBC, and the US PBS should be covered by that.

Actually, what's to stop China from making their news agency tax-payer funded to take advantage of this exception?

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#79

Post by JumpCrisscross »

kryogen1c wrote: post #75

This shit is goddamn terrifying. Since when are american corporations the arbiters of accurate, international, and political, information? We just crossed the rubicon. Public, proactive action against a relatively hostile foreign power by a non-governmental entity. If this isnt proof positive we need to either bust these monopolies or completely overhaul our view of the power megacompanies wield, idk what is.

> Since when are american corporations the arbiters of accurate, international, and political, information?

They're not and that's not what this story is about.

These accounts were banned for violating Twitter's platform manipulation policy by spamming, co-ordinating activity across multiple accounts, creating fake accounts, mis-attributing their activity and evading bans.

An individual from Hong Kong or China is free to post exactly what these accounts tweeted.

Post reply on HN