[DON'T] Get Out Your Tinfoil Hats

[Caro]

In no way is this, below, tin foil hat territory. Every time you read a comment on a blog or news website that seems oh so reasonable but casts doubt on anything bad the writer or the commentors are saying about a company or a candidate, you should be suspicious that the writer is a ringer for the entity being called to task. I really noticed the tactic when the DCCC put up a primary candidate against Christine Cegelis in the Illinois 6th last fall. DCCCers were all over the political blogs, artfully casting doubt, and successfully fooling the netroots into failing to fully support the grassroots candidate.

BUT THIS TACTIC IS NOT NEW.

The first instance I ever heard of was microserfs being sent out in the mid 80s to the message boards of the time, without identifying themselves as Microsoft employees, to trash OS/2 and sing the praise of Windows. I never used OS/2, but someone whose judgment I value highly in these matters said that OS/2 was far superior to Windows. The highly successful campaign to make Windows the dominant operating system was documented by longtime Windows and Microsoft expert Brian Livingston, in one of his Windows secrets books.

I no longer have the book, and so cannot at this time give you a link or a citation. But thinking that PR pushers are writing for and commenting on websites today is in no way a stretch. Anyone who thinks otherwise is being unbelievably naïve. There are big bucks at stake.

From AGITPROP:

GET OUT YOUR TINFOIL HATS

Blanton's & Ashton's reports that a group called Netvocates has been watching their blog. Who or what is Netvocates, you might ask? Their website claims they go after blogs who say bad things about a company or its products, but B&A has them dead to rights:

Basically, Netvocates is an organization that sends people out to web logs to post propoganda in comments. They appear to be tied to conservatives and there appears to be a tie to townhall.com, the ultra-right-wing web site. Cybersoc.com spent time running down the facts on Netvocates and the man behind Netvocates. I recommend that people who read blogs check out the Cybersoc.com posting. Education is armor…

Agitprop respectfully suggests that all bloggers, big or small, tag all your posts with the Netvocates label. We've got to help them watch us, after all.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com

[Minnesota Libra]

1. This same issue was presented in another thread on Thursday nt

[rosesaylavee]

2. This is not surprising - I am sure

that we have paid and unpaid posters here who work for the neocons. We just need to use our critical judgment, our ignore button and when a post is really disruptive, that wonderful little 'alert' button at the bottom of any post.

Now it would be surprising if they weren't doing it.

[originalpckelly]

3. This sounds like that...

weird kind of advertising, I can't remember what it is called, but I think I saw a special about it on MTV or was it Discovery (of Doom) channel?

This is scary by itself. We can never know who is who. I wonder how many people pushing tinfoil on things around here are pukes? It seems that is the most damaging to cause.

Of course on the other hand, people could also be out here to quell rumors?

Why is this so hard? Maybe that's apart of their plan.

I think this could be a challenge, but we can rise to it. From now on when we have suspicions about something * says, we just have to make sure we get a good case about it before posting. That way if it is true we can prove it. On the other hand if it isn't we won't find any evidence, and these spies won't be able to use to exploit our few differences.

This sounds like something they would do in China, and I mean that entirely seriously.

[originalpckelly]

4. K & R'ed

:kick:

Keep his kicked so people can read about it, and recommend it to get it on the main page.

[Junkdrawer]

19. Viral Marketing. n/t

[DoYouEverWonder]

5. Good thing it's usually so easy

to pick out the bots. They think they're slick, but they're not.

[SidDithers]

6. Perhaps you could post a list somewhere...

so that we can tell the difference between the real bots, and the people who simply have a different opinion than you.

Sid

[Warpy]

8. It was incredibly easy to pick them out in political forums

on IRC. The posts were gramatically correct declarative sentences and the posters rarely conversed. If they did, it was obvious presidential syndrome: any attempt at ad libbing demonstrated gross illiteracy and total poverty of thought.

Don't kid yourself. These people are out there and their functions are to testify and to spread doubt. Either you realize what's going on or you fall prey to the tactics.

I know you'd like a nice little list. Too bad, none is available. You're just going to have to think.

[SidDithers]

10. Thinking...

see, that's the problem. Labelling a dissenting poster as a paid shill is a taking the easy way out of a discussion. It's an intellectually lazy tactic (but I admit that I've used it myself - not proud of that btw). It doesn't take any thinking to shout "Paid Shill!!!" and point your finger.

I know they're out there. Everyone knows they're out there. However, I worry that honest disagreement will be too quickly dismissed as "You're disagreeing? Do you work for Netvocates?".

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1438787&mesg_id=1438867

Sid

[havocmom]

13. Labels also can be used to divert attention from the REAL troubles

too. Neocons do that trick all the time. You are onto something, Sid ;)

[SidDithers]

14. Cheers, havocmom...

Go Oilers!

:toast:

Sid

[havocmom]

12. Not so easy in many cases

Lots of them are pretty smooth and really do understand basic psy-ops techniques. There are some VERY skilled and manipulative people out there. Look no further than your closest dysfunctional family. Chances are good there is a most adroit manipulator in the clan keeping things from ever getting better. Lots of people marry manipulators and have trouble ever accepting they are not good for them.

They are out there and they always have been. The really skilled ones do quite well. Look at the neocons.

Web mind bending is a perfect job for such people.

The bots are easier to spot. Their passion generally gets the better of them and they out themselves. The operatives are skilled and dangerous.

[SidDithers]

7. Link to the other thread here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1438787&mesg_id=1438787

For those who are interested.

Sid

[cosmicdot]

16. another thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2681125#2681620

[Virginia Dare]

9. It's not a conspiracy theory, it is a fact...

there is a known facility here in Virginia in the professional troll business.

There is a member here on DU who posted about it sometime ago that had first hand knowledge of it, confirmed what many of us have heard. This is just further proof.

[TreasonousBastard]

11. Personally, I think a much larger problem is...

our own lack of knowledge in certain areas to be able to refute the claims of the alleged trolls. If they just post erroneous information, that should be easy enough to deal with.

Much more disruptive are the silly flame wars and kneejerk responses by people who just have to have something to say.

[Junkdrawer]

15. Betcha that website disappears soon...

Just a guess... :evilgrin:

[rman]

17. It's COINTELPRO in new clothes,

defending the same interests as it did back then.

http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/cointel.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

"Deep Throat" & COINTELPRO
by Noam Chomsky
http://blog.zmag.org/ee_links/deep_throat_cointelpro

[Caro]

18. Yes, it's COINTELPRO...

... and every other dark conspiracy you can think of. Dick Cheney and his cohorts are among the scariest people who have ever existed. They'll do anything, anything at all to obtain and maintain power. And there's never enough power for them. No matter how much they have, they always want more.

The first step in solving a problem is to recognize the problem. I'm always suspicious when I see a posting that seems reasonable, calm, persuasive, and just tries to tilt the discussion slightly away from the criticism at hand. I always call them on it, and have never yet gotten a response. But my questioning may help others evaluate the shill's comment and keep from accepting it completely.

Yesterday I got a message in response to a mailing of this same information. It was from an AOL user who said she's noticed a lot of new screen names lately on the AOL message boards, all pushing the Republican agenda.

I even noticed something strange on a software support message board recently. I complained that the software download page should have warned me that I might need to download a patch to make it, you know, actually RUN. It took me over an hour of poking around the website to find that information, so I complained about that. Some right-wing stooge told me I shouldn't try to blame my problems on others. I replied that I tell my clients the same thing, but for some reason they still want me to fix their problems.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com

[rman]

20. kick