Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Congratulations to our presumptive Democratic nominee, Joe Biden!
Democratic Primaries
In reply to the discussion: New Studies Show Pundits Are Wrong About Russian Social-Media Involvement in US Politics [View all]Uncle Joe
(58,355 posts)66. So what is your rebuttal to University of Oxford's Computational Propaganda Research Project
which the article was based on?
Philip N. Howard is a sociologist and communication researcher who studies the impact of information technologies on democracy and social inequality. He studies how new information technologies are used in both civic engagement and social control in countries around the world. He is Professor of Internet Studies at the Oxford Internet Institute and Balliol College at the University of Oxford.[1] He is the author of eight books, including New Media Campaigns and The Managed Citizen, The Digital Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, and Pax Technica: How the Internet of Things May Set Us Free or Lock Us Up.[2][3]
(snip)
Howard has been a Fellow at the Pew Internet & American Life Project in Washington D.C., the London School of Economics' Stanhope Centre for Communications Policy Research, Stanford University's Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, and Princeton University's Center for Information Technology Policy. In 2013 he moved to Budapest, Hungary where he helped to found the School of Public Policy at Central European University. He has courtesy appointments or fellowships with the Department of Communication at the University of Washington and the Center for Media, Data and Society at Central European University and Columbia University's Tow Center for Digital Journalism.
(snip)
Howard was one of the first to investigate the impact of digital media on political campaigning in advanced democracies, and he was the first political scientist to define and study "astroturf" political movements as the managed perception of grassroots support through astroturfing in his research on the Gore and Bush presidential campaigns. New Media Campaigns and the Managed Citizen (2005) is about how politicians and lobbyists in the United States use the internet to manipulate the public and violate privacy.[4] His research on technology and social change has been prescient. The subject's study of the 2016 U.S. presidential election did not identify the Russian sources of disinformation that other investigations have alluded to.[5]
(snip)
In 2014 he hypothesized that political elites in democracies would soon be using algorithms over social media to manipulate public opinion, a process he called "computational propaganda." His research on political redlining, astroturf campaigns and fake news inspired a decade of work and became particularly relevant during the Brexit referendum and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Campaign.[13][14] His research has exposed the global impact of bots and trolls on public opinion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_N._Howard
If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
83 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
New Studies Show Pundits Are Wrong About Russian Social-Media Involvement in US Politics [View all]
Uncle Joe
Apr 2019
OP
Indictment: Russians also tried to help Bernie Sanders, Jill Stein presidential campaigns
George II
Apr 2019
#28
Stories like that are often suppressed or dismissed. We deserve to know the truth.
NurseJackie
Apr 2019
#29
Well, maybe the "pundits" are wrong, but I'm sure Robert Mueller III is 100% correct.
George II
Apr 2019
#45
So? I'm sure at one time you were a new member. This one joined about 10 months prior....
George II
Apr 2019
#31
I'm more concerned about American Oligarchs like the Koch Brothers influencing our
jalan48
Apr 2019
#2
I'm sure the Koch Brothers prefer we focus on Russia which is what has been happening. This focus
jalan48
Apr 2019
#8
It would be nice but focusing on a bogeyman outside of our society is much easier than focusing
jalan48
Apr 2019
#14
Yep, and focusing on outside takes our attention off the inside. Imagine Rachel spending three hours
jalan48
Apr 2019
#32
You don't think we should focus on a "bogeyman" who has been documented to have...
George II
Apr 2019
#36
Mueller found that Russia helped Bernie Sanders and targeted Hillary Clinton.
stonecutter357
Apr 2019
#7
Do you see any statistics in the un-blacked version of Muller's Report that dispute
Uncle Joe
Apr 2019
#9
Just a reminder that the redacted portion of Mueller's report is ongoing criminal matters
Indygram
Apr 2019
#61
What "Pundits"? It mentions 2 that I see. Also, although those percentages might seem low...
PeeJ52
Apr 2019
#10
Are you aware of any studies, reports or investigations which dispute the findings
Uncle Joe
Apr 2019
#16
Indeed. THE CEO of NEW KNOWLEDGE was suspended for disseminating fake news by FACEBOOK
hlthe2b
Apr 2019
#19
No one disputes Russian meddling in the 2016 election but nothing in Mueller's report
Uncle Joe
Apr 2019
#38
What precisely in Mueller's report disputes the findings or statistics in the OP?
Uncle Joe
Apr 2019
#40
Yeah, them and Democracy Now! seem to be forming an alliance with Glenn Greenwald...
PeeJ52
Apr 2019
#20
Gee lookie what comes up from cited "NEW KNOWLEGE" who participated in these studies!
hlthe2b
Apr 2019
#17
Exactly.. Your research promoter fraudulently tried to press a pedophile into office.
hlthe2b
Apr 2019
#33
So what is your rebuttal to University of Oxford's Computational Propaganda Research Project?
Uncle Joe
Apr 2019
#53
I'd say the issue is very difficult to study and though they have made attempt, their methodology
hlthe2b
Apr 2019
#55
Taking a single unvalidated study of questionable methods as Gospel while ignoring Mueller/FBI
hlthe2b
Apr 2019
#68
Nothing in the OP contradicts the Mueller Report (at least what is visible) nor FBI/CIA findings.
Uncle Joe
Apr 2019
#70
If you can't find my last post to you sequentially numbered then I think I'm not able to assist you
hlthe2b
Apr 2019
#73
No one is ignoring the Mueller Report, CIA or FBI investigations, and you can't present
Uncle Joe
Apr 2019
#74
so they were working for Doug Jones against Roy Moore and trying to copy Russian Rethug models
Celerity
Apr 2019
#79
background on it, a large Democratic donor funded the company, but apparently knew nothing that they
Celerity
Apr 2019
#82
Does this analysis look at the US as a whole or does it analyze specific swing districts
pnwmom
Apr 2019
#42
Thank you. And the answer is they didn't focus on the swing states, and they included data
pnwmom
Apr 2019
#56
We know that in at least one of those states, the tallies didn't match up to the ballots
pnwmom
Apr 2019
#75
So what is your rebuttal to University of Oxford's Computational Propaganda Research Project
Uncle Joe
Apr 2019
#66
Thank you. I didn't know that but I'd noticed the odd bias toward Russia long ago. n/t
pnwmom
Apr 2019
#76
"Putinistas?" so everyone that doesn't follow along with the 21st century version of a red scare
Uncle Joe
Apr 2019
#69
I still wonder if the anti Wasserman-Schultz anointing of Hillary theme was amplified by Russia?
Freethinker65
Apr 2019
#78