More than 90% of the bots are Pro-Ukrainian, with fewer than 7% pro-Russian
1–10 of 61 posts
Re: More than 90% of the bots are Pro-Ukrainian, with fewer than 7% pro-Russian
#2Why is this surprising or newsworthy? Putin is the villain.. straight up.
Edit: thx for the drive-by downvote feedback, would appreciate if you'd engage directly if I'm missing something
Re: More than 90% of the bots are Pro-Ukrainian, with fewer than 7% pro-Russian
#3>We use Botometer to quantify the extent of bot activity in the dataset by assigning scores to a random sample of accounts
Re: More than 90% of the bots are Pro-Ukrainian, with fewer than 7% pro-Russian
#4No post body was provided.
Re: More than 90% of the bots are Pro-Ukrainian, with fewer than 7% pro-Russian
#5Why is this surprising or newsworthy? Putin is the villain.. straight up. Edit: thx for the drive-by downvote feedback, would appreciate if you'd engage directly if I'm missing something
A play by play approach of US that it did in Syria
https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/02/22/is-there-ac...
Note that this person from NATO who wrote this nytimes article asking to arm ISIS with anti-aircraft is now the content director of reddit.
Re: More than 90% of the bots are Pro-Ukrainian, with fewer than 7% pro-Russian
#6Why is this surprising or newsworthy? Putin is the villain.. straight up. Edit: thx for the drive-by downvote feedback, would appreciate if you'd engage directly if I'm missing something
I read the abstract but not the paper. If it's accurate, it is an incredibly surprising result. We already know the Russians are pros at manipulating social media for the purposes of HUMINT, propaganda, etc. If they only represent 7% of bots, that means that:
1. Another actor, possibly a nation-state, is putting even more resources than Russia is into shaping the narrative,
2. Russia isn't actually trying very hard manipulate the narrative this time around.
Both these scenarios are new and somewhat frightening. If #1 - what is the motivation? Who is doing it? If #2 - why would they abandon a previously successful strategy? Where did they redirect those resources to? Are they up to something even worse?
None of this discussion requires you to be pro-Putin, which is what you seemed to imply. Your comment is being down-voted because it criticizes while lacking any sort of imagination or insight.
Re: More than 90% of the bots are Pro-Ukrainian, with fewer than 7% pro-Russian
#7Why is this surprising or newsworthy? Putin is the villain.. straight up. Edit: thx for the drive-by downvote feedback, would appreciate if you'd engage directly if I'm missing something
[deleted]
Re: More than 90% of the bots are Pro-Ukrainian, with fewer than 7% pro-Russian
#8Why is this surprising or newsworthy? Putin is the villain.. straight up. Edit: thx for the drive-by downvote feedback, would appreciate if you'd engage directly if I'm missing something
I think what you're missing is that "who's the villain" has no relevance whatsoever to "who the bots side with". They're orthogonal axes.
Re: More than 90% of the bots are Pro-Ukrainian, with fewer than 7% pro-Russian
#9Why is this surprising or newsworthy? Putin is the villain.. straight up. Edit: thx for the drive-by downvote feedback, would appreciate if you'd engage directly if I'm missing something
I read the abstract but not the paper. If it's accurate, it is an incredibly surprising result. We already know the Russians are pros at manipulating social media for the purposes of HUMINT, propaganda, etc. If they only represent 7% of bots, that means that: 1. Another actor, possibly a nation-state, is putting even more resources than Russia is into shaping the narrative, 2. Russia isn't actually trying very hard m…
Or 3. Western media got a lot better at filtering out Russian disinformation and propaganda, once the put their minds to it.
I'm not sure I entirely believe that. The Russians aren't amateurs.
Re: More than 90% of the bots are Pro-Ukrainian, with fewer than 7% pro-Russian
#10Why is this surprising or newsworthy? Putin is the villain.. straight up. Edit: thx for the drive-by downvote feedback, would appreciate if you'd engage directly if I'm missing something
A play by play approach of US that it did in Syria https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/02/22/is-there-ac... Note that this person from NATO who wrote this nytimes article asking to arm ISIS with anti-aircraft is now the content director of reddit.
Good? NATO is on the right side of this.