I found black-hat content marketers: sockpuppet bloggers, fake Reddit/HN accts • Hacker News Board

Re: I found black-hat content marketers: sockpuppet bloggers, fake Reddit/HN accts

#131

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 4:18 AM UTC

dang wrote: post #129

momokoko wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This very site denies it happens even though it is often quite obvious. > Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html If you mention this kind of thing at all, dang will pop in and w…

That's no denial. That guideline specifically asks people to notify us so we can investigate. We do that every time anyone asks. I've personally spent hundreds (probably thousands) of hours investigating such things, have banned many accounts and sites for it, and have put tons of effort into writing code to combat it. We take it seriously. We just need some evidence. Surely you don't think we should lower the bar be…

[deleted]

Re: I found black-hat content marketers: sockpuppet bloggers, fake Reddit/HN accts

#132

Post by momokoko » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 4:24 AM UTC

dang wrote: post #129

momokoko wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This very site denies it happens even though it is often quite obvious. > Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html If you mention this kind of thing at all, dang will pop in and w…

That's no denial. That guideline specifically asks people to notify us so we can investigate. We do that every time anyone asks. I've personally spent hundreds (probably thousands) of hours investigating such things, have banned many accounts and sites for it, and have put tons of effort into writing code to combat it. We take it seriously. We just need some evidence. Surely you don't think we should lower the bar be…

> I've personally spent hundreds (probably thousands) of hours investigating such things, have banned many accounts and sites for it, and have put tons of effort into writing code to combat it.

> No, that is not what's happening.

Not to try and get clever and twist your words, but these statements do not appear to line up particularly well with one another.

Re: I found black-hat content marketers: sockpuppet bloggers, fake Reddit/HN accts

#133

Post by walrus01 » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 4:25 AM UTC

masswerk wrote: post #55

justiceforsaas wrote: post #21

"I didn't know that black-hat content marketing existed" (from the Twitter thread) I haven't laughed so hard in months :))) I've talked with over 150 founders (I'm running a website that deals with acquisition channels & user growth [1]) and this is like uncovering 0.01% of what's going on out there. I became friends with some of these founders, and some of them admitted that a significant part of their growth was "p…

Anecdotally, my website has apparently cracked some SEO metrics threshold, as I'm enjoying the questionable honour of receiving various offerings on a daily basis. These are from agencies either directly asking for link placements, or offering payed posts, or, the other way round, offering ready made content (which may or may not contain an endorsement of some kind, most probably the latter). One thing these have in…

Without naming your site or sharing any details, would you be willing to share how many daily unique visitors you are getting that it has reached over this threshold?

Re: I found black-hat content marketers: sockpuppet bloggers, fake Reddit/HN accts

#134

Post by walrus01 » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 4:27 AM UTC

nitrogen wrote: post #97

masswerk wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotally, my website has apparently cracked some SEO metrics threshold, as I'm enjoying the questionable honour of receiving various offerings on a daily basis. These are from agencies either directly asking for link placements, or offering payed posts, or, the other way round, offering ready made content (which may or may not contain an endorsement of some kind, most probably the latter). One thing these have in…

Do you happen to know if the follow-up emails were manual or scheduled/automated? I think it'd be interesting if someone actually wrote 8 automated follow-up emails and deliberately went aggressive in the later automated steps. Maybe that actually works enough times to be worth it?

You've obviously never got into the CRM system radar of a low level sales person at Cogent.

Re: I found black-hat content marketers: sockpuppet bloggers, fake Reddit/HN accts

#135

Post by nl » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 4:27 AM UTC

ineedasername wrote: post #125

nl wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're not acting maliciously, illegally, and/or destructively, which is how I've always defined black-hat. Am I missing something? It probably is illegal if they aren't disclosing a paid relationship: https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/dis...

Not really, according to their page, disclosure is a best practice, but doing otherwise isn't inherently illegal. Their own guide [0] begins by talking about adhering to their guidelines as "voluntary compliance", and that a failure to do so would require their investigation into the specifics to determine if it was a violation of law: It is not automatically a violation. [0] https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/a…

Those guidelines are voluntary, sure. But there are actual laws included (section 5 of of the FTC Act (15 U.S.C. 45)) that make some things actually illegal.

Specifically: "Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful."[1]

This voluntary guide helps people understand how the FTC inteprates that law. Deciding not to comply because the guide is voluntary doesn't preclude prosecution.

You are right insofar as there is no law that specifically says "on the website reddit.com you must disclose if you are paid".

[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/45

Re: I found black-hat content marketers: sockpuppet bloggers, fake Reddit/HN accts

#136

Post by tbodt » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 4:27 AM UTC

momokoko wrote: post #132

dang wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's no denial. That guideline specifically asks people to notify us so we can investigate. We do that every time anyone asks. I've personally spent hundreds (probably thousands) of hours investigating such things, have banned many accounts and sites for it, and have put tons of effort into writing code to combat it. We take it seriously. We just need some evidence. Surely you don't think we should lower the bar be…

> I've personally spent hundreds (probably thousands) of hours investigating such things, have banned many accounts and sites for it, and have put tons of effort into writing code to combat it. > No, that is not what's happening. Not to try and get clever and twist your words, but these statements do not appear to line up particularly well with one another.

First statement is absolute numbers. Second statement is regarding relative numbers. They can both be true.

Re: I found black-hat content marketers: sockpuppet bloggers, fake Reddit/HN accts

#137

Post by lemax » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 4:30 AM UTC

Is this really any less ethical than a more sophisticated marketing scheme?

"Black Hat Firm" vs. Expensive Growth Marketing Firm:

– unestablished writer vs credentialed, domain experienced writer (with a salary?)

– spammy Medium.com presence vs Editor Connections at TechCrunch

– network of "dozens" of nearly ineffectual sockpuppets vs dozens of employees with "real" accounts ready to upvote and engage on Boss's call

If you're surprised by this, spend a day in the pits of a product launch in literally any industry. We welcome ingenuity when we talk about growth hacks but criminalize it when it's not classy. This is all a matter of access, Marketing and PR generally comes down to what resources people have and what they can get away with.

Re: I found black-hat content marketers: sockpuppet bloggers, fake Reddit/HN accts

#138

Post by bepvte » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 4:31 AM UTC

troydavis wrote: post #3

The Twitter thread has a lot more. There's a person or firm who is doing black-hat content marketing at scale. They either approach freelance bloggers to write articles about their clients (to be submitted to Medium-hosted and similar blogs as if written by unaffiliated users), or create Medium profiles for fake names and write the posts themselves. Posts have appeared in Better Programming, DEV.to, FAUN, freeCodeCam…

Uninstalling climacell... know any alternatives?

Re: I found black-hat content marketers: sockpuppet bloggers, fake Reddit/HN accts

#139

Post by dang » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 4:34 AM UTC

momokoko wrote: post #132

dang wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's no denial. That guideline specifically asks people to notify us so we can investigate. We do that every time anyone asks. I've personally spent hundreds (probably thousands) of hours investigating such things, have banned many accounts and sites for it, and have put tons of effort into writing code to combat it. We take it seriously. We just need some evidence. Surely you don't think we should lower the bar be…

> I've personally spent hundreds (probably thousands) of hours investigating such things, have banned many accounts and sites for it, and have put tons of effort into writing code to combat it. > No, that is not what's happening. Not to try and get clever and twist your words, but these statements do not appear to line up particularly well with one another.

Ok, I'll give you a detailed breakdown. You said that three things were happening which in reality are not:

(1) that we "realize the exact opposite [of what we say]" — in reality, I tell the truth as far as I know it, because I respect this community (edit: plus, for the cynical, it would be a stupid and unnecessary risk not to);

(2) that we're "terrified what will happen if the public finds out how common it is" — in reality, I'm confident that the community would be bowled over by how diligently we work on this, and my only woe is that half the commenters don't want to hear it when I tell them how common it is (namely, that it's uncommon relative to the insinuations that they love to fill the threads with, and that such insinuations are the harder problem to solve and a heavier burden on moderators);

(3) that "the percentage of this stuff is absolutely massive" — in reality, unless I'm wildly ignorant of my job, it's tiny relative to the quantity of imaginary things people make up about it. The latter is the greater threat to HN. With real astroturfing and other forms of abuse, it's possible to find evidence and take action. But how do you persuade the internet not to hurl shit-soaked spaghetti everywhere? (Sorry for the unhinged metaphors, but it's demoralizing to argue about this in HN comments, because none of the users making grand insinuations want to hear about that side of the problem, and when I raise it they say things like "dang denies that astroturfing exists".)

We have a rule that you can't manipulate voting, commenting, or submissions on HN (because some people do that and shouldn't). We have another rule that you can't smear others with insinuations of abuse without evidence (because some people do that and shouldn't). There's no contradiction there. That doesn't seem hard to understand.

Re: I found black-hat content marketers: sockpuppet bloggers, fake Reddit/HN accts

#140

Post by ineedasername » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 4:36 AM UTC

nl wrote: post #135

ineedasername wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, according to their page, disclosure is a best practice, but doing otherwise isn't inherently illegal. Their own guide [0] begins by talking about adhering to their guidelines as "voluntary compliance", and that a failure to do so would require their investigation into the specifics to determine if it was a violation of law: It is not automatically a violation. [0] https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/a…

Those guidelines are voluntary, sure. But there are actual laws included (section 5 of of the FTC Act (15 U.S.C. 45)) that make some things actually illegal. Specifically: "Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful."[1] This voluntary guide helps people understand how the FTC inteprates that law. Deciding no…

Yep, there's lots of gray area. But not disclosing a financial arrangement isn't illegal in itself. It's only in the last few years that Youtube even had an option to flag videos as "contains paid promotions", though now they do require that to be flagged if you're getting paid.