cross-posted from: https://scribe.disroot.org/post/11858823
…
Over the weekend, Ukraine carried out a co-ordinated drone strike against several major Russian data centres. This completely decimated Russia’s Yandex, … which controls more than 70% of search traffic in the country, and has reportedly resulted in a dramatic fall in bot traffic from the Yandex network.
As per the bot analysts at Tom’s Hardware, bot traffic from the Yandex network has dropped to just 0.4% of the maximum number of HTTP requests recorded in the past two weeks. That means activity from automated, Russian-hosted accounts has been virtually eliminated on social media.
…
As a result, the social media engagement on posts from [far-right] Reform UK figures appears to have dropped in the wake of Ukrainian strikes on Russian data centres.
…
There has already been a strong and significant impact on bot traffic in countries such as France and Germany.
David Colon, a French information operations researcher, has noted a huge difference in the performance of narratives generated by the Russia-linked information operations group, Storm-1516.
The silencing of the bots also appears to have caused a dramatic drop in activity around Germany’s far-right AfD…
…
Amongst others, the article is citing Britain’s Reform politician Richard Tice. Three posts on X from the Reform deputy leader to his almost 400,000 followers on Monday, 11 October [hadn’t] hit triple figures for reposts or comments, with one not even reaching 10,000 views … Before the Ukrainian strikes on the Russia data centres, Tice’s posts got considerably more engagement, consistently hitting triple figures for comments and reposts, whilst racking up hundreds of thousands of views.
…
A similar pattern can be seen when it comes to other far-right figures such as Nigel Farage [the linked article is given evidence about that].
…
As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky himself said after the strikes on Russian data centres, it’s suddenly become a “little easier to breathe” on social media.
…
i assume you’re probably saying i “spread propaganda” because i posted something you disagreed with elsewhere, but do you actually think i’m spreading propaganda here in this thread? i am honestly, out of personal curiosity, trying to determine if there is any truth in this narrative about the yandex datacenter strikes. i think i’ve been clear that i’m not actually absolutely certain that there is not, but so far all of the “evidence” for it i’ve seen presented is falling apart.
I am saying you spread propaganda because it has been proven time and time again that you do. Same goes for tardigrade. In this instance, tardigrade is more wrong, because the claims have been partially debunked.
PS: Also nowhere did I say it was propaganda in this instance, but that you are known to spread propaganda in general.
you didn’t say it but you strongly implied it by saying in this thread that i “spread propaganda” without mentioning (until your later comments, thanks) that you don’t actually think what i’m saying here is “propaganda” (by which you mean, i infer, “incorrect”).
proven! lol ok, sorry i missed my trial 😂
fwiw depending on the definition of propaganda i could actually agree with you - a lot of what i post is advocacy for something (as is some of what you post).
eg, looking at a few of my recent posts: is this propaganda? or this? or this? i would say all three definitely are, in the sense that they are politically motivated communication, and i stand by them.
but you’re obviously using the term “propaganda” in its pejorative sense because you disagree with (some) of what you’ve seen me advocating for (and/or agree with other things you’ve seen me debunking), which imo is intellectually dishonest. rather than say “i disagree with arthur about XYZ, but in this case the evidence is lacking for the claims being debunked in this thread” you just said that i “blatantly spread propaganda” and drew a spiderman meme equivalency between me and the other person who you now acknowledge (thanks) is “more wrong” in this case.
Honestly, this shit had been debunked like an hour after the original tweet. While there may have been a dip in some activity, the original tweet didn’t prove anything since http requests don’t prove user activity.
And of course you will try to convince yourself you arent spreading propaganda in other instance and cherry pick stuff that obviously isnt propaganda.
Additionally, removing this comment comparing Hamas with Republicans was you:
Also you seem to like using PressTV, an Iran state-controlled outlet, in your posts on World News on lemmy.ml. You think there is no propaganda there?
Indeed it was, and I stand by that removal! In context they were actually saying the Palestinian people deserve genocide because… checks notes Hamas won an election in 2006.
You must have noticed this was their previous comment in that thread:
… but for some reason you decided to only show their second comment here? 🤔
Anyway, if you don’t think that is bigotry we’ll have to agree to disagree; I’m not interested in debating it. But icymi do see also the rest of that user’s modlog 🙄 (spoiler: this person claiming LGBTQ rights as their reason to support genocide was eventually banned by their own instance for transphobia)
PressTV is absolutely propaganda, and I am selective about what I repost from them - it’s usually something I think is news (or a newsworthy perspective) which is not being reported by western sources. Eg, this is the most recent thing I posted from there. The primary source for the story (the IRGC) is named in the headline; it isn’t like it is pretending to be something it isn’t. Do you think that post is not newsworthy? Is it better for people not to know that the IRGC is saying that? Or, what alternate source could I have linked to about it? I also post things from NYTimes, BBC, NPR, DW, etc, but I don’t think any of them covered that story. (Are those outlets all strictly not propaganda in your view?)
The comment you links absolutely is shit with that last part. However the other comment wasn’t something worth removing unless it was a site ban + content removal.
And with the outlets and propaganda. NPR and DW aren’t good examples of western propaganda, as they tend to be less biased. NYT more. BBC is mixed.
And you seem to misunderstand something here. I am not a campist. Propaganda exists on both sides and it is important to keep that in mind. Though propaganda from dictatorships tend to be a bit more wild and obvious.
imo it was ignorant bigotry also. 🗑
If you think NPR is “less biased” I highly recommend reading this which might help you see how they are anything but - that article in particular is about how NPR was instrumental in bolstering domestic support (particularly “reluctant” or “critical” support among their “progressive” listener demographic) for the Iraq war from the beginning right up to the end of it. See also this and this for somewhat-more-recent analyses of NPR’s propaganda form.
So, for example, in the current war in Iran… you’d say both sides are wrong? You think the US should stop attacking them… but also Iran should stop defending themselves? 🤔
And you think people who read DW’s Iran section are getting an unbiased view of the situation, while people who read [email protected] are being fed “propaganda” because I post some PressTV reporting of IRGC statements there?
So your proof is a nearly 20 year old article on a pro-Iraq war correspondence and interviewing a right wing pundit during Trump’s first candidacy? It hardly says that NPR is a propaganda mouthpiece, but rather says they have made mistakes as all outlets have done. Additionally, you dont have to accept 100% of what an outlet reports.
And US was wrong to attack Iran, but that doesn’t rule out both sides from doing bullshit reporting. It isn’t that black and white when it comes to sources.
And I am almost certain that stuff in [email protected] is pretty biased because it is lemmy.ml. As long as Dessalines, Nutomic and davel are around, I am pretty sure it will stay pretty biased.
If you just listen to (or read) their reporting about the current wars you’ll see they’re still doing the exact same things described in that (almost) 20-year-old article. These aren’t mistakes, it’s their standard operating procedure.
it does, actually. Even when they are being critical of the Trump administration (which they often are) they’re doing it from the standpoint of the (to borrow a lovely term from UK English) loyal opposition.
I agree here. Which reminds me that after you called me out for posting PressTV links you didn’t answer when I asked you this:
These weren’t rhetorical questions; I’m actually curious what you think.
Which news communities do you think are unbiased, though? You said earlier:
Are there some news communities which you would consider “less biased” but which would actually remove (what you acknowledge is) propaganda from the NYT? (I doubt it, but, surprise me?)
I think every outlet has biases, and I agree some are more obvious than others. But allowing only the less-obviously-so propaganda from one “side” doesn’t strike me as being less biased at all.
Fwiw if you look at [email protected] right now you’ll see plenty of western propaganda outlets there amongst the Iranian and Chinese etc sources.