Hacker News Reader

Comment by weirdstuff | Hacker News Reader

This is the elephant in the room. U.S. based interests spent billions to influence public opinion here and abroad.

But less than $1 million spent by a Russia media organization (to maybe attract viewers?) and some trolls tossed the election? I’m more than skeptical.

This is a distraction campaign if here ever was one.

View on HN

The underreported fact is that the vast majority of activity traced to the Internet Research Agency (Russian Federation) was in the free portion of Facebook and Twitter with automated and manually-curated accounts, not through ad spending.

There is a situation where enterprising researchers planned a protest via Facebook Events and also the counter-protest for an event in Texas. Altogether an impressive feat.

Facebook underplays this fact in Congress, in the hopes of evading regulation.

None of this should invalidate a lawfully-conducted election. There is no evidence ballots were tampered with whatsoever. Democratic leaders should do their best to allow Republicans to save face to their constituents by emphasizing the election is final and that all Americans are victims in this matter.

trump spent tens if not hundreds of millions on this company to discourage voter turnout, per their own guy:

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:cHYYHF...

Well, that's what makes Cambridge Analytica so good, they have the data, and they're cheap. They just needed to target undecided voters in swing states, and through trawling Facebook data, they knew which voters to influence, and how to influence them, because they also have their psychological profiles. And how do you target them? By posting Facebook ads where you define your "target market" so narrowly that it basically hits individuals.

Actually, I suspect what makes Cambridge Analytica "so good" is that (big data aside) it was revealed just today: they use bribes and sex workers to entrap politicians, amongst other illegal techniques...

https://www.channel4.com/news/cambridge-analytica-revealed-t...

Isn't the low amount of money a key part of the allegation? That foreign actors were able to have such (alleged) influence so cheaply and without disclosure is a problem. If it had cost them billions to have that kind of influence, then it would have been an unfeasible or at least inefficient strategy.

i360 Themis have been far more invasive for far longer in influencing US elections. Why aren't they being investigated and outed by a pitchfork and flaming pikes mob?

Good question, as they are equally undemocratic (they hew to the goals of the billionaires that control the GOP - which is to destroy the gov't to cut taxes on the rich.) To be fair, Obama's team also used data. But right now the threats come from billionaires or foreign powers. i360 should be the next subject of scrutiny. And they as well as think tanks and 'nonprofits' like Jud Watch should disclose who donated each and every dollar.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com