Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Another Reason to Avoid Twitter


Recommended Posts

As if you needed one more reason not to Tweet.....

 

Thousands of those indignant, inflammatory Tweets about the NFL, kneelers and social injustice actually come from..........Putin!

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-russian-trolls-inflamed-nfls-anthem-controversy-1540233979?mod=hp_major_pos26

 

"In total, over the final months of 2014 through the middle of this year, 491 accounts linked to the IRA sent more than 12,000 tweets about the NFL or the anthem. Researchers from Clemson University provided The Wall Street Journal with the tweets, which come from accounts shut down by Twitter after congressional investigations revealed their connection to the IRA."      

 

The IRA referenced here is the Internet Research Agency, a Kremlin-backed trolling operation.

 

You really need to think about what "news" and information sources you rely upon.

 

LL

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 said:

I doubt everything I hear and read.  Damn, life is difficult.

 

With current computer technology you can't believe anything you see either.  Both still pictures and video can be manipulated in ways that even experts are having a hard time telling real from fake.  When I find the link to the near real time video editing software I'll post it

Link to post
Share on other sites

But...But I thought if it was on the internet, it was true. :blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said:

Twitter is for Twits. 

 

Edit: Sorry, got a little carried away. Deleted my diatribe. :D

 

 

Why delete it? after all, they don't call it Twit-ter for nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Wild Will Bartell said:

Why delete it? after all, they don't call it Twit-ter for nothing.

Oh, I don’t know...maybe I like coming here:D

 

I went on a bit of a rant. Mods frown on political rants laced with colorful expletives. :lol:;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said:

Oh, I don’t know...maybe I like coming here:D

 

I went on a bit of a rant. Mods frown on political rants laced with colorful expletives. :lol:;)

:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Sedalia Dave said:

 

With current computer technology you can't believe anything you see either.  Both still pictures and video can be manipulated in ways that even experts are having a hard time telling real from fake.  When I find the link to the near real time video editing software I'll post it

S.D., I believe you.  ^_^

 

 

I think??:unsure:

 

 

Has anybody wondered why my parents named me Birdgun?:blush:

 

 

 

.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Sedalia Dave said:

 

With current computer technology you can't believe anything you see either.  Both still pictures and video can be manipulated in ways that even experts are having a hard time telling real from fake.  When I find the link to the near real time video editing software I'll post it

 

1 hour ago, Birdgun Quail, SASS #63663 said:

S.D., I believe you.  ^_^

 

 

I think??:unsure:

 

 

Has anybody wondered why my parents named me Birdgun?:blush:

 

 

 

.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't that convenient.  So all of you people who thought you were upset about the dis-repect weren't really upset.  What else can the wall street journal tell me about myself that I don't know yet?  Maybe I'm secretly yearning to change my gender and vote democrat too!  I better pick up one of them 'news'papers and find out. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ramblin Gambler said:

Isn't that convenient.  So all of you people who thought you were upset about the dis-repect weren't really upset.  What else can the wall street journal tell me about myself that I don't know yet?  Maybe I'm secretly yearning to change my gender and vote democrat too!  I better pick up one of them 'news'papers and find out. 

 

 

 

 

?????

 

Ya lost me, Gambler.  The WSJ isn't saying that there was no reason to be upset about the players' behavior.....just that SOME of the on-line inflammatory comments were coming from a Russian source, apparently with the intent to stir up discontent. 

 

Or am I missing your point?
 

LL

Link to post
Share on other sites

The headline was that russian trolls inflamed the controversy.  The reason they run a headline like that is to convince everyone it's not really as big a deal as it seems.  It's just russian trolls, man.  The implication is that any real people who got caught up in it were just duped by the russians.  It's the same thing they said about the russian trolls who tricked us into voting for trump.  I didn't read the article because it's behind a paywall, and they know that will be the case for most people.  Did they even mention that the russian trolls are just looking for clicks, and so will say anything that's popular?  The headline puts the cart before the horse and it's not an accident. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I've retreated to the WSJ because its one of the last national papers that has not fallen victim to TDS, and has managed to maintain some degree of objectivity and decent journalistic standards.  If you read the entire article, I believe you will get the sense NOT that they are trying to dismiss the controversy as a Russian plot, but rather just that the Russians are trying to sow unrest in our society by using Twitter to gin up a higher level of unrest.  I believe that many Americans are righteously upset with the NFL and the players; but I also believe that some of the comments you see on Twitter (and in other social media and the comments sections in newspapers) are dishonest attempts to influence public perception of controversial topics.

 

Maybe it's time for media sources to require that folks who write comments use their real names and a verifiable email address......

 

LL

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even so-called "trusted" news sources like CNN will often lie and deceive, so it's important to take everything you read and hear with a grain of salt. The problem is that news is posted faster than it can be edited or fact-checked, and it seems that the old journalistic standards have gone out the window. Nobody needs to state their sources anymore. This has become such common knowledge that if you blindly believe everything you hear then you're part of the problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've only been exposed to the WSJ when it was put under my door for free* at hotels.  They focused on financial stuff, which didn't interest me.  But the current events section made me long for the days of my youth when we had a conservative paper and a liberal paper in town and we got them both.  Until the liberal paper went out of business and the conservative paper hired all the folks from the liberal paper. 

 

 

*not really free.  I paid for it unless I told them at check in that I didn't want it and wanted the charge removed from my bill.  It was in the fine print of the stuff they had you sign.  "by signing this you agree to pay $1.25 (or whatever) for delivery of the wall street journal"

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.