China Spreads Propaganda to U.S. on Facebook, a Platform it Bans at Home (nytimes.com) 103
Paul Mozur, reporting for the New York Times: China does not allow its people to gain access to Facebook, a powerful tool for disseminating information and influencing opinion. As if to demonstrate the platform's effectiveness, outside its borders China uses it to spread state-produced propaganda around the world, including the United States (Editor's note: the link could be paywalled; alternative source). So much do China's government and companies value Facebook that the country is Facebook's biggest advertising market in Asia, even as it is the only major country in the region that blocks the social network. A look at the Facebook pages of China Central Television, the leading state-owned broadcast network better known as CCTV, and Xinhua, China's official news agency, reveals hundreds of English-language posts intended for an English-speaking audience. Each quarter China's government, through its state media agencies, spends hundreds of thousands of dollars to buy Facebook ads, according to a person with knowledge of those deals, who was unauthorized to talk publicly about the company's revenue streams. China's propaganda efforts are in the spotlight with President Trump visiting the country and American lawmakers investigating foreign powers's use of technology to sway voters in the United States.
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, the original AC troll for this calls for "my DAMN balls" as the appropriate usage.
I wasn't a fan of that short lived meme, but at least do it correctly.
Re: (Score:2)
I wasn't a fan of that short lived meme, but at least do it correctly.
Only one person can settle this: Natalie Portman, naked and petrified, covered in hot oatmeal.
Shocked! (Score:5, Insightful)
Come on people. That foreign adversaries would try to further their agendas using social networks is about a surprising as gambling in a Casablanca.
I bet even "friendly" nations are doing this to some extent too.
Re: (Score:2)
Or other social media for that matter...get out there and meet, deal with and interact with REAL people in meatspace.
FB isn't a news source....
Re: (Score:3)
FB isn't a news source...
I disagree. FB shouldn't be a news source. FB isn't a reliable news source. But, it's as close as many people get to following the news. It is their news source. It's just not a good one.
Re: (Score:2)
FB is not a news source.
And I don't know anyone who is using it for news.
But well, I live in Europe. Perhaps for Europeans FB looks different than for Americans?
(Hint: in case you don't get it, FB does not show anything that remotely resembles 'news' to me )
Re: (Score:2)
...in case you don't get it, FB does not show anything that remotely resembles 'news' to me
I follow CNN & BBC News on FB and see some headlines in my feed, but there's a strange selection of what's presented. I wouldn't list it as one of my news sources, but I do see some legitimate headlines. YMMV.
Re: (Score:2)
Hm, was not even aware you could 'follow' CNN or BBC on FB.
And: why would you do that instead of going to cnn.com or bbc.co.uk?
Re: (Score:2)
Instead? Those are my two main news sources. Some of what they post to their feed isn't on their front page.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Also, is it any wonder that China blocks Facebook? This is why! China doesn't want to deal with foreign interference any more than anyone else does. So they block the channels that interference uses to propagate itself.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
You obviously are not aware of how Communist government works. First of all, it is a dictatorship. They call it that way themselves: "dictatorship of proletariat". No other party is allowed to exist. They rely on mind control for their existence (look at what happened at Russia after Gorbachev relaxed the regime).
The smart communist/dictatorial governments actually allow opposition parties to exist, they just severely neuter them. This preserves the appearance of democracy and participation and allows for an (exceptionally easy to monitor and control) outlet for dissent. When you combine requiring government approval for candidates on the ballots with the classic "the ballots don't make the votes, the counters do"(one of the best lines in Gangs of New York), control by the ruling party is still completely safe.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Remember, FEC versus Citizens United effectively allowed bribery, because money is equivalent to free speech. It is no wonder why countries are legally paying for ads to change voter turnouts.
To boot, FB is doing nothing illegal. They could be showing Daesh videos of people being barbecued and eaten alive, but there is nothing that can be done, as Daesh's money counts as free speech.
Re:Shocked! (Score:5, Insightful)
I would rather have foreign government propaganda than have American government censorship.
Let's not forget that the major influence of the Russians on the American presidential election was their leaking of Hillary's collusion with the DNC ... which was the truth.
Sure, Hillary might have won if the DNC collusion had remained secret ... but she also might have won if she had been more ethical and there had been no dirt to leak.
Re: (Score:1)
The FBI doesn't indict, imbecile.
Re: Shocked! (Score:2)
I would rather have foreign government propaganda than have American government censorship.
That's insane; next you're going to say that you'd rather have liberty over security...
Re: (Score:2)
Those two aren't even related. The most the American government has done is asked that people who purchase ads be identified. And that sound perfectly fair.
But, beyond that, the US government does have a point of view. And the POV should be expressed.
Re: (Score:1)
Let's not forget that the major influence of the Russians on the American presidential election was their leaking of Hillary's collusion with the DNC ... which was the truth.
The issue (which a lot on the right gloss over and ignore-note that I am not necessarily calling you right wing) was not that they leaked false information about a candidate (Clinton deserved the hit that came with that leak). The issue is the asymmetrical release of information. It's quite possible that the Russians had dirt on both and released the info to hurt Clinton and held on to Trump info to influence him. That is the concern. And while it may not have happened this time, it sets a dangerous pre
Re:Shocked! (Score:5, Informative)
That is a silly argument. Should we have censored Watergate reporting because it only hurt one side? Should Woodward and Bernstein have been required to wait until they had some counterbalancing dirt on the Democrats?
The Constitution says "no law" abridging free speech. It doesn't make an exception for "unbalanced" speech, nor does it make an exception for censorship of foreigners.
Re:Shocked! (Score:4, Insightful)
The issue (which a lot on the right gloss over and ignore-note that I am not necessarily calling you right wing)
I did not vote for Trump, and I oppose pretty much everything he stands for. I am not defending Trump at all, I am defending the Constitution and the principle of freedom of expression. It is sad that so many people feel that is "right wing".
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I would rather have foreign government propaganda than have American government censorship.
Let's not forget that the major influence of the Russians on the American presidential election was their leaking of Hillary's collusion with the DNC ... which was the truth.
Sure, Hillary might have won if the DNC collusion had remained secret ... but she also might have won if she had been more ethical and there had been no dirt to leak.
Was there really collusion between the DNC and Clinton? Or was foreign influence involved to make it look that way?
Does Putin really have Trump over a barrel for peeing on a bed with prostitutes in Russia? Or is it all just fake news?
Good thing we got a honest and respectful president in the White House after all that! I would have hated to just get someone who wanted to grab the world by the pussy!
Re: Shocked! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They could be showing Daesh videos of people being barbecued and eaten alive...
The trick to eating somebody alive is to barbecue them very lightly.
Re:Shocked! (Score:5, Informative)
Huge difference (Score:2)
I'm not saying "This is immoral, therefore China is bad." I'm saying "This is a (propaganda) fight between two sides. China is on the other one, therefore it's bad."
It's similar to how I'll root for the military forces of my country in a war against another one, even if both sides are using the same tactics I disagree with.
Re: (Score:3)
Upon reflection, one difference between Voice of America and the use of social media is obvious. A radio station like Voice of America is operated by a known entity, and the entity's bias can be judged along with the content of the messages. Social media postings may originate from unknown entities, making the entity's bias opaque and difficult to judge along with the message content.
I doubt, however, that there is a blanket refusal by the USA (or other state actors) to use social media targeted at forei
Re: (Score:1)
The real surprise to all of this is that OUR politicians were the last ones to figure this out. Apparently it is money well spent, as compared to the billion dollars each one sinks for a presidential campaign for who knows what.
Re: (Score:1)
What is weird is that the USA population is buying into it. Russia is united. China is united. Mexico is united. The United States is completely divided along lines of left and right, black and white. When you want to conquer a country set its population against itself. The Europeans did this very effectively in the Americas, and used old tribal animosities to keep the natives fighting among themselves and not joining forces against the 'White Eyes'. Yet the population of the USA has completely miss
Live and Let Live (Score:2)
The United States is very big, and throughout its history it has contained many different subcultures and social mores. Utah isn't anything like New York, and rural areas aren't anything like metropolitan areas. Yet these people must coexist within the same body. The only cultural thing that really matters in the US the respect for another's right to think and express themselves freely. Your neighbor's God, sports preference, favorite foods, marriage status, or politics is not a matter of national security.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Here comes the alt-right (Score:5, Funny)
It would make more sense that you're the Russian! spy sent here to make Democrats look like imbeciles. The Russians! collusion narrative fell apart a long time ago. Now it just looks like a Clinton campaign op meant to excuse her loss to the circus clown and giver her the nomination again 2020 on the premise that The Russians! stole it from her in 2016.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes
Re: (Score:3)
Good question; China funded Bill's campaign and got MFN status for their money.
It's non-candidate specific propaganda; the leftist world view of hegemonic America unjustly imposing it's will on others. More of the usual Blame America First BS we're all awash in 24/7/365.
Well, it's working (Score:2)
They even got "Weird Al" Yankovic. [wikipedia.org]
Art of War (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Surely there must be something in The Art of War about using your opponents own weapons against them....
Master Sun did indeed say one of the most important strategic possessions is information, and you should strive both to have accurate information for yourself and provide inaccurate information to your opponent.
Re: (Score:2)
Tzu is a title that translates roughly to "Master". His family name was Sun. So, yes, "Master Sun" is correct.
Re: (Score:2)
"When you are strong, feign weakness; when you are weak, feign strength" was always one of my favorites
Re: (Score:2)
Voter? (Score:1)
News-flash: U.S. spreads propaganda to U.S. (Score:1)
and other countries. Don't kid yourself, if your country does it, other countries will return the favor. Stop trying to play the victim, it's not working.
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
A UK cyber version of the "Near East Broadcasting Station" for the USA?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
So do liberals and the feds (Score:1)
Hell about everything could be considered propaganda.
not the least surprised (Score:2)
Basically, China and Russia have been using the internet and traitors like Trump against America. Even now, Trump CORRECTLY pointed out how bad China was WRT to economics, and then he turned after his family got what they wanted.
Re: not the least surprised (Score:2)
Of Course They Ban It (Score:3)
North Korea too!!! (Score:2)
I once found what appeared to be a genuine DPRK propaganda facebook page. Almost everyone that was subscribed was there to laugh at it and throw tomatoes.
Eventually I unsubscribed. I couldn't shake the feeling that liking the page was signing me up for additional review by some NSA watchlist.
china is evil. (Score:1)