You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘social media’ tag.

On Tuesday, April 10, 2018, Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg appeared before the US Senate Judiciary and Commerce Committees to answer questions on a variety of subjects with regard to Big Data.

Did we know how short he is?

Censorship

According to The Daily Caller, questions were relatively anodyne, until Ted Cruz (R-Texas) stepped up to the plate.

Cruz asked Zuckerberg about the number of conservative and religious pages Facebook has hidden or blocked (emphases mine below):

Cruz noted the number of examples of Facebook censoring conservatives, including labeling conservative commentators Diamond and Silk as “unsafe,” hiding stories about the IRS targeting conservatives and blocking over two dozen Catholic pages.

“To a great many Americans, that appears to be a pervasive pattern of political bias,” Cruz said. “Do you agree with that assessment?”

Zuckerberg, of course, said that his social media platform tries to be unbiased.

Then, Cruz asked about left-leaning pages:

“Are you aware of any ad or page that has been taken down from Planned Parenthood?” Cruz shot at the tech billionaire.

“Senator, I’m not,” Zuckerberg conceded. “But let me just — ”

“How about MoveOn.org?” Cruz continued.

“I’m not specifically aware of those,” Zuckerberg again admitted.

There was more:

Cruz also pointed out that Zuckerberg is unaware of the political breakdown of his employees and the 15,000-20,000 people who police content for the site, leaving Zuckerberg struggling to explain why conservatives should not be worried that the social media site is apt to block their content.

Hmm. Zuckerberg is highly aware of at least some of his employees’ political leanings.

AI for ‘hate speech’

The Daily Caller was one of several media outlets carrying the story that Facebook’s artificial intelligence (AI) would detect ‘hate speech’.

Ben Sasse (R-Nebraska) asked him if conservatives would be targeted:

Zuckerberg did not have an answer.

Of course not, because the answer clearly ‘yes’.

Sasse pressed Zuckerberg on the subject:

“Can you define hate speech?” Sasse asked one of the world’s most powerful CEOs bluntly.

“Senator, I think this is a really hard question,” Zuckerberg said, “It’s one of the reasons why we struggle with it.”

“I am worried about the psychological categories,” Sasse replied. “You used the language of safety and protection. We have seen this happen on college campuses. It’s dangerous.”

Sasse cited a poll that said a high proportion of college students believe the First Amendment is “dangerous” because it “might hurt someone else’s feelings.”

There are some passionately held views about the abortion issue on this panel,” Sasse said. “Can you imagine a world where you might decide that pro-lifers are prohibited from speaking about their abortion views on your platform?

Did Zuckerberg feel uncomfortable?

After a long pause, Zuckerberg said, “I would not want that to be the case.”

Yeah, sure.

Sasse did not let up:

It might be unsettling to people who’ve had an abortion to have an open debate on that, wouldn’t it?” Sasse pressed.

Zuckerberg said that other countries are putting such laws in place. (If so, bad news.) He then said:

I think America needs to figure out and create the principles we want American companies to operate under.

The Daily Caller said that Sasse looked less than impressed by that response.

Zuckerberg — and Twitter’s Jack Dorsey — want to change the paradigm and suppress the First Amendment by saying that their platforms fall under private enterprise. Therefore, users have to play by their rules.

Yet, courts have ruled against conservative businesses that do not want to accept every customer coming through their doors.

Talk about a double standard.

Political data mining

On March 22, after the Cambridge Analytica data flap hit the media (Brexit and Trump campaigns), I wrote about the mining of Facebook data with during Obama’s 2012 campaign. That was even bigger, and even the former director of integration and media analytics for Obama for America called it ‘creepy’.

The Daily Caller also noticed that everyone is ignoring the 2012 Obama campaign’s data scrape:

… little was made of the fact that the Obama presidential campaign in 2012 used the same tactic with the social network. Former Obama campaign staffers have openly bragged about how Facebook turned a blind eye to the practice and even congratulated them. (RELATED: Obama Staffer: Facebook Knew Presidential Campaign Improperly Seized Data, Looked the Other Way)

Whilst acknowledging Cambridge Analytica, Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina) had his chance to question Zuckerberg on the massive Obama data harvest:

“Somebody asked you earlier if it made you mad about what Cambridge Analytica did,” Tillis noted, saying Zuck should be “equally mad” about the Obama campaign.

“When you do your research on Cambridge Analytica, I would appreciate it if you would start back from the first high-profile national campaign that exploited Facebook data,” the senator said

Facebook has been silent on the Obama campaign scraping for data.

Exactly!

This double standard has been in operation for years (see ANDERSON 4 SENATE’s tweet; TheLastRefuge’s will feature next week):

Tillis said that the Facebook employee who mined the Obama data shouldn’t be working there:

I also believe that that person who may have looked the other way when the whole social graph was extracted for the Obama campaign, if they are still working for you, they probably should not.

He concluded:

At least there should be a business code of conduct that says that you do not play favorites. You are trying to create a fair place for people to share ideas.

Except Facebook, Twitter and Google do not care about fairness. They are trying to shape the way people think — with some dastardly success, too.

Appalling user agreement

The Daily Caller reported that John Kennedy (R-Louisiana) bluntly criticised Facebook’s user agreement:

Kennedy said, “I do not want to have to regulate Facebook. I will. A lot of that depends on you.”

Kennedy called what Zuckerberg has done “magical,” before noting that “there is some impurities in the Facebook punch bowl.

He did not stop there:

The senator then got to the point, “I say this gently. Your user agreement sucks.”

Kennedy told the laughing hearing room that Facebook was covering their “rear end” with the user agreement before bluntly stating, “I am going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite it…Tell them you want it written in English and not in Swahili.”

The two then got into ‘another heated exchange’ over access to private data.

Zuckerberg apologises, nothing changes

A March 26 article I cited in yesterday’s post from web hosting site easyDNS, ‘Should You Delete Your Facebook Page?’, stated that Facebook has often apologised in the past but nothing changes. It appears to be company policy. On the Cambridge Analytica controversy:

Mark Zuckerberg has issued yet another “Mea Culpa” on CNN, and Facebook will take out full page ads in newspapers to apologize to the public. Yet, by now, “Groveling Zuckerberg apologies” are just part of the Facebook playbook, as Liz Gannes observed back in 2011, after Facebook had just settled with the US Federal Trade Commission over still more privacy violations:

“At this point, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s pattern on privacy is clear. Launch new stuff that pushes the boundaries of what people consider comfortable. Apologize and assure users that they control their information, but rarely pull back entirely, and usually reintroduce similar features at a later date when people seem more ready for it.”

It becomes clear, as Futurist (and easyDNS member) Jesse Hirsh made this point on Steve Pakin’s “The Agenda” over the weekend: “Facebook ships with all privacy enhanced settings disabled” – further, my personal findings are that they use obfuscation to make it harder to disable data sharing settings. You have to jump through hoops to do it.

Zuckerberg knows exactly what’s going on, which shows what contempt he has for Facebook users.

Zuckerberg’s possible 2020 presidential run

In August 2017, news emerged that Mark Zuckerberg is considering running for US president in 2020.

CNBC reported:

Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan have hired Joel Benenson, a Democratic pollster, adviser to former President Barack Obama and chief strategist of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, as a consultant for their joint philanthropic project, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.

The pair also hired David Plouffe, campaign manager for Obama’s 2008 presidential run; Amy Dudley, former communications adviser for Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va.; and Ken Mehlman, who directed President George W. Bush’s 2004 re-election campaign.

The couple plan a ‘listening tour’ of all 50 states.

Imagine if Zuckerberg goes ahead with this and consider all the Facebook data he has at his disposal.

The public would not know if he were data mining or not, although, surely, he would be.

Facebook users, beware. Do you really need that account? If it’s to share socio-political articles and opinion, why not start a (non-Google) blog featuring short posts with relevant links instead?

Advertisements

Is it time to delete your Facebook account?

If so, actor James Woods recently tweeted a Wall Street Journal video which tells you how to go about it. The lady talks quickly, so you might have to replay it or pause it as you go:

While the Wall Street Journal is behind a paywall, this video is not.

The downside to Facebook is that, even if you delete your account, all your data belong to them:

The website hosting company easyDNS’s CEO responded to Woods with a link to an article on his website:

His article has excellent information, including a section on Messenger, excerpted below:

Facebook harvests your contact lists from your mobile devices (don’t believe me, go here)

There are people in that list that I do not know. There are phone numbers from people who work for my competitors in there. My daughter’s (age 11) cell phone number is in there.

You can “delete” all this here: (but as you know Facebook never actually deletes anything).

Then when you go to “delete” all your contacts you get a message

“We won’t be able to tell you when your friends start using Messenger if you delete all your uploaded contact info.”

They say that like it’s a bad thing. But there is also this curious sentence:

“If you have Continuous Uploading turned on in the Messenger app, your contact info will be uploaded again the next time the app syncs with Facebook servers.”

I had deleted the Facebook mobile app from my phone a long time ago. I kept messenger installed because sometimes customers would contact easyDNS or Zoneedit via our Facebook pages for support.

But writing this I wanted to turn off “continuous uploading” in the app. Despite this Facebook help article not explaining how to do it, while this third party article from 2016 did.

It turned out I had already disabled continuous uploading but I was surprised to find that the messenger app had defaulted permission to access my phone’s microphone.

After this exercise I simply deleted the Messenger app from my phone as well.

I’ve never had a Facebook account. From my time in IT marketing during the DotCom boom 20 years ago, it was apparent that Big Data was on its way. Data harvesting and targeted ads were already being talked about. Both have been with us for some time.

The best thing is not to be on Facebook at all, but, for those with a presence, why continue to feed the beast?

This will be my last political post before Easter.

Below are useful memes and a brief news update which can be discussed with family, friends and — for those online — readers.

Memes

This one is for those who don’t understand how they are being conned by the Uniparty:

If I’d done that photo, I would have replaced ‘Conservatives’ with ‘Deplorables’ (i.e. Trump supporters), but no matter. Not all Trump supporters are conservatives, and a number of conservatives are not Trump supporters.

Some Republican legislators are also part of the Uniparty in terms of preserving the status quo with regard to personal enrichment. They are called RINOs — Republicans In Name Only. Below are Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin):

Here’s more about those two Swamprats:

The next one is for people who are upset at Trump’s signing the Omnibus bill on Friday, March 23:

It is essential to know that Obama (D) did a great job of hollowing out the military, work which began in 2004 under his predecessor Bush II (R): two sides of the same coin. See how the Uniparty works?

As for the anti-Trumpers (D) and never-Trumpers (R), the normally sensible people who are angry about the Omnibus bill would do well to focus instead on the mid-terms this year:

By the way, the Wall will get built. The Omnibus bill provides funding for chain link fence to complete the existing border reinforcement and repair existing parts. The Army Corps of Engineers is likely to build the new construction from Department of Defense funds:

The Swamp approaches drainage

Concerning the Swamp, we can thank Representative Bob Goodlatte (R-Virginia) for his dogged pursuit of the truth as Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. Chad Pergram of Fox News posted two important tweets on March 22:

Spare a prayer for Melania Trump

First Lady Melania Trump must be going through hell with the media pounding on women who supposedly had affairs with President Donald Trump.

Notice that these women all claim their dalliances happened in 2005 or 2006. Interesting. Melania got married in 2005 and gave birth to Barron in 2006.

One could say that the media are bullying her with this constant onslaught of alleged infidelity. To turn on the television and find them interviewing these women — the latest being 60 Minutes on March 25 — and reporting on them day after day is unconscionable. The media are trying to break the First Lady down, get her to look depressed and, best of all (for them), file for divorce.

Therefore, please spare a prayer for Mrs Trump. The past few years, from 2015 to the present, must have been and continue to be very difficult for her.

She is making good on her 2016 promise to help tackle cyberbullying. Her critics are attacking her because they deem her husband to be a cyberbully. (He’s actually telling the truth about bad people.) On March 20:

Melania Trump pushed back against critics Tuesday, declaring her commitment to combating cyberbullying despite the hits she has endured for taking on the issue while her husband routinely goes on Twitter to berate foes and call them names.

“I am well aware that people are skeptical of me discussing this topic,” the first lady said. “I have been criticized for my commitment to tackling this issue, and I know that will continue. But it will not stop me from doing what I know is right. I am here with one goal: helping children and our next generation.”

Mrs. Trump commented as she convened executives from major online and social media companies at the White House to discuss cyberbullying and internet safety. The meeting came more than a year after she announced that cyberbullying would be her cause if Trump were elected president.

The choice was immediately assailed. On Tuesday, a defiant sounding Mrs. Trump said she’s not backing down.

The first lady said she gets many letters from children who have been bullied or who feel threatened on social media. She told the executives “I believe together we can make a real difference in encouraging positive behaviors on social media.”

Amazon, Snap, Facebook, Google, Twitter and Microsoft sent representatives, as did the Internet Association and the Family Online Safety Institute.

I wish her much success. A year from now, Barron Trump will turn 13, at which point he will be eligible for social media.

More to come after Easter.

This week everyone’s been talking about the Cambridge Analytica Facebook scandal with regard to the Trump campaign.

I wrote about it the other day but with the intention of pointing out how many of us are leaving our data open to manipulation by third parties.

Of course, the Cambridge Analytica scandal is only a big deal because it is connected to then-candidate Donald Trump, a Republican.

The much larger scandal involves Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign, when Facebook was perfectly happy to let Democrats mine their users’ data.

Former Obama for America manager speaks

On Sunday, March 18, 2018, Carol Davidsen, former director of integration and media analytics for Obama for America, tweeted about an IT project used in his 2012 re-election campaign, Taargus:

And this:

Carol Davidsen received many interesting responses, including these:

Incidentally, other third parties have also tapped into social media data:

Looking at Obama’s re-election campaign, on March 19, IJR.com posted two articles about Ms Davidsen, ‘Ex-Obama Campaign Director Drops Bombshell Claim on Facebook: ‘They Were on Our Side’ and ‘Ex-Obama Campaign Director: It’s ‘Unfair’ Facebook Let Us ‘Ingest Entire Social Network of US’.

Wow, that’s quite an admission to make.

The first article displays her tweets (posted above) as well as these two:

Davidson tweeted that ‘the other side’ are at it, too.

Yes, but probably not to the extent that the Democrats have been.

The second IJR.com article refers to a 2015 video of a 23-minute talk Davidsen gave that year about Big Data, a term she herself uses, and how such information is analysed:

Because she has been working with Big Data for so many years, it is easy for her to be blasé and say that the average social media user has nothing to worry about. She did, in fact, say that such information could be misused, but she did not think it had been to date.

The problem I have with her reasoning is that, by the time data are being misused, we will be so accustomed to being analysed by third parties, we won’t even care. Therein lies the danger.

She also discussed buying advertising near the end. That part went over my head a bit, but a 2012 article in Time, ‘Obama Wins: How Chicago’s Data-Driven Campaign Triumphed’, explains what his campaign manager, Jim Messina, did (emphases mine):

Data helped drive the campaign’s ad buying too. Rather than rely on outside media consultants to decide where ads should run, Messina based his purchases on the massive internal data sets. “We were able to put our target voters through some really complicated modeling, to say, O.K., if Miami-Dade women under 35 are the targets, [here is] how to reach them,” said one official. As a result, the campaign bought ads to air during unconventional programming, like Sons of Anarchy, The Walking Dead and Don’t Trust the B—- in Apt. 23, skirting the traditional route of buying ads next to local news programming. How much more efficient was the Obama campaign of 2012 than 2008 at ad buying? Chicago has a number for that: “On TV we were able to buy 14% more efficiently … to make sure we were talking to our persuadable voters,” the same official said.

Obama campaign’s use of Big Data in 2012

The link Davidsen tweeted to (see above) is for a November 20, 2012 Time article explaining how Obama won his re-election thanks to Big Data from social media: ‘Friended: How the Obama Campaign Connected with Young Voters’.

This is the campaign on which that Davidsen worked.

A few weeks before Election Day, Obama’s people wanted to get phone numbers for younger potential voters. Most of these men and women had mobile phones but no land line:

For a campaign dependent on a big youth turnout, this could have been a crisis. But the Obama team had a solution in place: a Facebook application that will transform the way campaigns are conducted in the future. For supporters, the app appeared to be just another way to digitally connect to the campaign. But to the Windy City number crunchers, it was a game changer.

Technically, there is nothing wrong with that until:

the more than 1 million Obama backers who signed up for the app gave the campaign permission to look at their Facebook friend lists.

Did their Facebook friends know that? Unlikely.

It was a resounding success:

In an instant, the campaign had a way to see the hidden young voters. Roughly 85% of those without a listed phone number could be found in the uploaded friend lists. What’s more, Facebook offered an ideal way to reach them. “People don’t trust campaigns. They don’t even trust media organizations,” says Goff. “Who do they trust? Their friends.”

The campaign called this effort targeted sharing. And in those final weeks of the campaign, the team blitzed the supporters who had signed up for the app with requests to share specific online content with specific friends simply by clicking a button. More than 600,000 supporters followed through with more than 5 million contacts, asking their friends to register to vote, give money, vote or look at a video designed to change their mind.

This is concerning because it could be abused in future:

A geek squad in Chicago created models from vast data sets to find the best approaches for each potential voter.

Big Data can change behaviour:

A study of 61 million people on Facebook during the 2010 midterms found that people who saw photos of their friends voting on Election Day were more likely to cast a ballot themselves. “It is much more effective to stimulate these real-world ties,” says James Fowler, a professor at the University of California at San Diego, who co-authored the study.

Conclusion

The Time articles are very upbeat: Obama’s people are geniuses for using Big Data to win.

Four years later, a Republican wins the presidency with a sophisticated use of social media information. The world condemns this because Republicans were involved.

Only the Left can play.

Yesterday’s post was about social media bots, one aspect of what I call Big Data.

Today’s is about another Big Data component: how data harvesting is used.

On March 17, 2018, The Guardian published the latest article in its Cambridge Analytica File series. ‘I made Steve Bannon’s psychological warfare tool’: meet the data war whistleblower’ is fascinating.

The Guardian is looking into Cambridge Analytica because the firm was hired for Brexit in the UK and Donald Trump’s campaign in the US. The paper is trying to make the firm look like a bad guy, even though the Left have more powerful social media and data tools to hand — not to mention censorship. That said, Britain’s Electoral Commission and a select committee of MPs are investigating Cambridge Analytica as is Robert Mueller in his stateside investigation of Russian collusion. This is because of alleged use of Facebook user data.

In the US:

Aged 24, while studying for a PhD in fashion trend forecasting, he came up with a plan to harvest the Facebook profiles of millions of people in the US, and to use their private and personal information to create sophisticated psychological and political profiles. And then target them with political ads designed to work on their particular psychological makeup.

In the UK:

Last month, Facebook’s UK director of policy, Simon Milner, told British MPs on a select committee inquiry into fake news, chaired by Conservative MP Damian Collins, that Cambridge Analytica did not have Facebook data. The official Hansard extract reads:

Christian Matheson (MP for Chester): “Have you ever passed any user information over to Cambridge Analytica or any of its associated companies?”

Simon Milner: “No.”

Matheson: “But they do hold a large chunk of Facebook’s user data, don’t they?”

Milner: “No. They may have lots of data, but it will not be Facebook user data. It may be data about people who are on Facebook that they have gathered themselves, but it is not data that we have provided.”

Personally, even if Big Data and social media didn’t exist, there would have been a Brexit vote and a Trump victory regardless.  Furthermore, to still loathe Steve Bannon now is pointless. He was fired from the White House in 2017. He left Breitbart in January 2018. He’s annoyed various people greatly, from President Trump to the Mercers (more about whom below). Rebekah Mercer bankrolls Breitbart.

What I found interesting about The Guardian‘s article was how social media data are gathered, analysed and used. The genius whose idea led to the founding of Cambridge Analytica is 28-year-old Christopher Wylie. He was 24 at the time. Now he has turned whistleblower, largely because of the results of the UK referendum and US election in 2016.

Before getting into Big Data, the Left also use the same analytical tactics. Wylie learned from Obama’s campaign team (emphases mine below):

Wylie grew up in British Columbia and as a teenager he was diagnosed with ADHD and dyslexia. He left school at 16 without a single qualification. Yet at 17, he was working in the office of the leader of the Canadian opposition; at 18, he went to learn all things data from Obama’s national director of targeting, which he then introduced to Canada for the Liberal party. At 19, he taught himself to code, and in 2010, age 20, he came to London to study law at the London School of Economics.

For me, the big issue here is how data from social media users are used to shape public thinking.

Cambridge Analytica is far from being the only firm to do this. The primary customers for such data analyses are likely to be national security agencies, the military and defence companies:

at Cambridge University’s Psychometrics Centre, two psychologists, Michal Kosinski and David Stillwell, were experimenting with a way of studying personality – by quantifying it.

Starting in 2007, Stillwell, while a student, had devised various apps for Facebook, one of which, a personality quiz called myPersonality, had gone viral. Users were scored on “big five” personality traits – Openness, Conscientiousness, Extroversion, Agreeableness and Neuroticism – and in exchange, 40% of them consented to give him access to their Facebook profiles. Suddenly, there was a way of measuring personality traits across the population and correlating scores against Facebook “likes” across millions of people.

The research was original, groundbreaking and had obvious possibilities. “They had a lot of approaches from the security services,” a member of the centre told me. “There was one called You Are What You Like and it was demonstrated to the intelligence services. And it showed these odd patterns; that, for example, people who liked ‘I hate Israel’ on Facebook also tended to like Nike shoes and KitKats.

“There are agencies that fund research on behalf of the intelligence services. And they were all over this research. That one was nicknamed Operation KitKat.”

The defence and military establishment were the first to see the potential of the research. Boeing, a major US defence contractor, funded Kosinski’s PhD and Darpa, the US government’s secretive Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, is cited in at least two academic papers supporting Kosinski’s work.

The article says that, in 2013, a paper on the subject was published. Christopher Wylie read it and offered to replicate the technique for Britain’s Liberal Democrats, who were starting to become a political non-entity. Wylie made a formal presentation for them with the pitch that such an analysis could bring them more new voters. However, the Lib Dems were not interested.

That said, there was a silver lining. One of the Lib Dems Wylie was in touch with introduced him to a company called SCL Group:

one of whose subsidiaries, SCL Elections, would go on to create Cambridge Analytica (an incorporated venture between SCL Elections and Robert Mercer, funded by the latter). For all intents and purposes, SCL/Cambridge Analytica are one and the same.

Alexander Nix, then CEO of SCL Elections, made Wylie an offer he couldn’t resist. “He said: ‘We’ll give you total freedom. Experiment. Come and test out all your crazy ideas.’”

Wylie was hired as research director for the SCL Group, which had defence and political contracts:

Its defence arm was a contractor to the UK’s Ministry of Defence and the US’s Department of Defense, among others. Its expertise was in “psychological operations” – or psyops – changing people’s minds not through persuasion but through “informational dominance”, a set of techniques that includes rumour, disinformation and fake news.

SCL Elections had used a similar suite of tools in more than 200 elections around the world, mostly in undeveloped democracies that Wylie would come to realise were unequipped to defend themselves.

Wylie holds a British Tier 1 Exceptional Talent visa. He worked from SCL’s headquarters in London’s Mayfair.

He first met Steve Bannon in 2013. Bannon, the then-editor-in-chief of Breitbart came to England to support Nigel Farage and his pursuit of a national referendum on whether to leave the European Union.

Bannon, Wylie says, found SCL in an interesting way:

When I ask how Bannon even found SCL, Wylie tells me what sounds like a tall tale, though it’s one he can back up with an email about how Mark Block, a veteran Republican strategist, happened to sit next to a cyberwarfare expert for the US air force on a plane. “And the cyberwarfare guy is like, ‘Oh, you should meet SCL. They do cyberwarfare for elections.’”

It was Bannon who took this idea to the Mercers: Robert Mercer – the co-CEO of the hedge fund Renaissance Technologies, who used his billions to pursue a rightwing agenda, donating to Republican causes and supporting Republican candidates – and his daughter Rebekah.

Wylie and his boss Alexander Nix flew to New York to meet the Mercers. Robert Mercer had no problem understanding the SCL concept, as he had worked in AI (artificial intelligence) himself. He had also helped to invent algorhithmic trading. The pitch Wylie made to him was based on:

an influential and groundbreaking 2014 paper researched at Cambridge’s Psychometrics Centre, called: “Computer-based personality judgments are more accurate than those made by humans”.

Wylie had to prove to Mercer that such a statement was true. Therefore, he needed data. This is where another company, Global Science Research (GSR), entered the frame:

How Cambridge Analytica acquired the data has been the subject of internal reviews at Cambridge University, of many news articles and much speculation and rumour …

Alexander Nix appeared before Damian Collins, an MP, in February 2018. He downplayed GSR’s work for Cambridge Analytica in 2014:

Nix: “We had a relationship with GSR. They did some research for us back in 2014. That research proved to be fruitless and so the answer is no.”

Collins: “They have not supplied you with data or information?”

Nix: “No.”

Collins: “Your datasets are not based on information you have received from them?”

Nix: “No.”

Collins: “At all?”

Nix: “At all.”

Yet, The Guardian states:

Wylie has a copy of an executed contract, dated 4 June 2014, which confirms that SCL, the parent company of Cambridge Analytica, entered into a commercial arrangement with a company called Global Science Research (GSR), owned by Cambridge-based academic Aleksandr Kogan, specifically premised on the harvesting and processing of Facebook data, so that it could be matched to personality traits and voter rolls.

He has receipts showing that Cambridge Analytica spent $7m to amass this data, about $1m of it with GSR. He has the bank records and wire transfers. Emails reveal Wylie first negotiated with Michal Kosinski, one of the co-authors of the original myPersonality research paper, to use the myPersonality database. But when negotiations broke down, another psychologist, Aleksandr Kogan, offered a solution that many of his colleagues considered unethical. He offered to replicate Kosinski and Stilwell’s research and cut them out of the deal. For Wylie it seemed a perfect solution. “Kosinski was asking for $500,000 for the IP but Kogan said he could replicate it and just harvest his own set of data.” (Kosinski says the fee was to fund further research.)

Kogan then set up GSR to do the work, and proposed to Wylie they use the data to set up an interdisciplinary institute working across the social sciences. “What happened to that idea,” I ask Wylie. “It never happened. I don’t know why. That’s one of the things that upsets me the most.”

Meanwhile, I’m breathing a sigh of relief. That’s scary.

This is how the project worked — simply incredible and rather alarming:

Kogan was able to throw money at the hard problem of acquiring personal data: he advertised for people who were willing to be paid to take a personality quiz on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk and Qualtrics. At the end of which Kogan’s app, called thisismydigitallife, gave him permission to access their Facebook profiles. And not just theirs, but their friends’ too. On average, each “seeder” – the people who had taken the personality test, around 320,000 in total – unwittingly gave access to at least 160 other people’s profiles, none of whom would have known or had reason to suspect.

What the email correspondence between Cambridge Analytica employees and Kogan shows is that Kogan had collected millions of profiles in a matter of weeks. But neither Wylie nor anyone else at Cambridge Analytica had checked that it was legal. It certainly wasn’t authorised. Kogan did have permission to pull Facebook data, but for academic purposes only. What’s more, under British data protection laws, it’s illegal for personal data to be sold to a third party without consent.

Wylie told The Guardian that Facebook knew this was going on by looking at their security protocols. The article says Kogan reassured Facebook by saying the data were for academic use.

In any event, Cambridge Analytica had its data:

This was the foundation of everything it did next – how it extracted psychological insights from the “seeders” and then built an algorithm to profile millions more.

For more than a year, the reporting around what Cambridge Analytica did or didn’t do for Trump has revolved around the question of “psychographics”, but Wylie points out: “Everything was built on the back of that data. The models, the algorithm. Everything. Why wouldn’t you use it in your biggest campaign ever?”

Wylie left Cambridge Analytica in 2014. He was not involved in the company’s work on Brexit or for the Trump campaign.

Facebook didn’t really think about the data mining until 2016, when Cambridge Analytica were working for Ted Cruz during the GOP primary season. The Guardian‘s Harry Davies wrote an article in December 2015 about the use of Facebook data in his campaign:

But it wasn’t until many months later that Facebook took action. And then, all they did was write a letter. In August 2016, shortly before the US election, and two years after the breach took place, Facebook’s lawyers wrote to Wylie, who left Cambridge Analytica in 2014, and told him the data had been illicitly obtained and that “GSR was not authorised to share or sell it”. They said it must be deleted immediately.

“I already had. But literally all I had to do was tick a box and sign it and send it back, and that was it,” says Wylie. “Facebook made zero effort to get the data back.”

There were multiple copies of it. It had been emailed in unencrypted files.

Cambridge Analytica rejected all allegations the Observer put to them.

Facebook commented on the data:

Facebook denies that the data transfer was a breach. In addition, a spokesperson said: “Protecting people’s information is at the heart of everything we do, and we require the same from people who operate apps on Facebook. If these reports are true, it’s a serious abuse of our rules. Both Aleksandr Kogan as well as the SCL Group and Cambridge Analytica certified to us that they destroyed the data in question.”

The aforementioned Dr Kogan is still employed by Cambridge University as a senior research associate, but he also has a position in Russia:

what his fellow academics didn’t know until Kogan revealed it in emails to the Observer (although Cambridge University says that Kogan told the head of the psychology department), is that he is also an associate professor at St Petersburg University. Further research revealed that he’s received grants from the Russian government to research “Stress, health and psychological wellbeing in social networks”. The opportunity came about on a trip to the city to visit friends and family, he said.

Social media data have turned into a powerful tool to be exploited. I have had several conversations over the past few years with Facebook users, none of whom minds who has access to their personal details: family members, friends, likes, dislikes and interests. To know that this information has been mined under the aegis of academic research then used for other purposes boggles the mind.

On March 15, 2018 a Google employee posted on 4chan about social media bots, which someone helpfully tweeted.

This is the image of the message:

We knew there were bots, but it is interesting to read more on how they work.

The original 4chan thread is here (don’t click 4chan links unless you are prepared for hard core language and sentiment). Google Anon came back on another thread to say more, including this:

!!2wzZpinn91R (ID: fRrhwWd0) 03/15/18(Thu)11:37:40 No.164044578

Quick summary:

Google is using twitter bots to push narratives to persuade the government.

Google accused conservatives of being bots so they could ban them, even though they knew they aren’t bots. The strategy was to blame others for using your own technique.

Google is also using these fabricated twitter numbers are financial reporting, which effects stocks and advertising revenue.

Google also broke anti-trust laws by only allowing “google voice” to be the only free SMS to validate accounts.

On a third thread, someone — probably not Google Anon — posted this about a huge AI (Artificial Intelligence) project called HORUS (emphases mine):

(ID: jT5XRhYq) 03/15/18(Thu)16:18:59 No.164065749

HORUS (SourceForge project name AI-HORUS) is a system for knowledge acquisition, hypothesis generation, inference and learning. It is designed to be a highly interactive, multi-user, internet-based environment that will be accessible to a diverse community of users (public-access or membership basis) for search, comparison, and evaluation of many media types. Users will collaboratively build and develop the content of the knowledge bases therein, creating resources that can be employed by both human users and “artificially intelligent” agents for conducting expert-level searches, evaluations, comparisons, data mining, content extraction and summarization on a variety of media. Such media will include documents, articles and other text-based objects but also non-text media as well including images, audio and video. An important and in fact the central component of HORUS is a complex structure of functions and databases known as the Syntopicon which has aspects of its data structure and functionality in common with semantic networks, topic maps, dictionaries, thesauruses, and encyclopedias but which is quite novel in its approach to accumulating information from users and external automatic-access sources and in its mechanisms of both storing and operating upon the information collected or generated internally.

It sounds scary. Think of the sinister possibilities that could arise from this.

I hope this goes the way of the Tower of Babel.

The Gateway Pundit has been looking into the ‘students’ from the February 14, 2018 Florida school shooting who have been appearing on US and UK television shows this week. More below.

First, I wrote about the school shooting the other day and am far from alone in my thinking:

Yet, all we are getting is the anti-gun narrative:

How the media are rolling out this narrative by using these students is chilling.

On Monday, February 19, The Gateway Pundit‘s Kristinn Taylor took a look at the students, CBS News and, in the UK, ITV’s Good Morning Britain. Taylor’s article, ‘Photos => Student School Massacre Survivors and CBS Reporter Party Like Rock Stars’, is a must-read.

Excerpts follow, emphases mine.

Remember, 17 people — students and faculty — died, yet:

The photos featuring CBS reporter Gisela Perez and the students were posted by CBS This Morning staffer Caroline West and student activist Cameron Kasky. The photos come off as if they were promo stills for Glee: The High School Massacre.

Notice Gisela Perez’s expression below. Weird and puzzling.

Is that a ‘Get Trump’ look?

Look at them giggling below:

That image came from either 4chan or 8chan. It reads:

The world is a stage. She, and everyone else, is an actor and a Drama major. This was the same day of the rally. You can tell she’s just totally broken up about 17 of her peers being ‘brutally murdered’.

That ‘she’ is the girl in the middle. She looks a bit like the women shown below, but, if so, then, she is older than 18:

Nonetheless, point taken:

The ‘students’ had a good weekend and one of the group managed to hear from at least one celebrity, The Gateway Pundit says:

In just a few days they have become celebrated heroes of the anti-Trump resistance and are acting and being feted like rock stars. In fact rock stars (or a pop star in this case) are reaching out to them, “I just want to thank @justinbieber for being so kind to our movement since last night. He and I had some trouble because my third grade girlfriend was much more interested in him than she was in me, but he and I have gotten over that. We have each other. #NeverAgain”

The same student:

activist Kasky mentions the students have “practiced” in a reply to someone concerned they will be taken advantage of by President Trump, “We’re not afraid of people trying to exploit us. We’ve practiced. We know their slimy tactics. Thankfully, most news networks we’ve worked with are interested in telling the right stories. I am eternally grateful for that. Keep an eye out. Thank you”

Late Sunday night — early Monday morning UK time — other students appeared on the ITV show, Good Morning Britain:

The Gateway Pundit article points out:

The bug on the screen says the interview was ‘live’ indicating it was way past midnight in Florida. Who is booking these kids for round the clock interviews as if this is the closing weeks of a presidential campaign? Again, this is just days out from a massacre and these kids are being prepped, paraded and partied with–leaving them no time to grieve.

Grieve? Just think of the doors opening for a media career! Maybe acting, too! The possibilities are endless.

The same lad who heard from Justin Bieber got a tweet from Jim Carrey later. He replied:

Thank you. I promise we will bring eternal sunshine to the minds of millions sending their kids to school in the morning.

My word. Who fed him that line?

That same day, journalist Lucian Wintrich wrote a piece for The Gateway Pundit and focussed on the lad in the group whose father is a retired FBI agent. His article is also a must-read — ‘EXPOSED: School Shooting Survivor Turned Activist David Hogg’s Father in FBI, Appears To Have Been Coached On Anti-Trump Lines [VIDEO]’.

Emphases are in the original from this point:

David Hogg has been astonishingly articulate and highly skilled at propagating a new anti-Conservative/anti-Trump narrative behind the recent school shooting. Few have seen this type of rapid media play before, and when they have it has come from well-trained political operatives and MSM commentators.

Immediately, these students-turned-activists threw up some red flags.

In what was initially as an incredibly odd move for a high school student, Hogg’s vehemently defended the FBI and placed the blame squarely on the President’s shoulders…. before admitting that his father was in the FBI.

“I think it’s disgusting, personally. My father’s a retired FBI agent and the FBI are some of the hardest working individuals I have ever seen in my life,” proclaimed David Hogg to CNN.

“It’s wrong that the president is blaming them for this.”

According to this lad, President Donald Trump is to blame because he is in charge of the FBI.

Lucian Wintrich is on fire over this (emphases in purple mine):

Anyone who has been following the news could tell you that many in the FBI have been working against the president from the start, with the most notable case involving collusion between the FBI, Obama Administration, and the Clinton campaign’s to push the false ‘verification’ of the junk Steele Dossier. It has also been widely reported that the FBI received tips well in advance of the Flordia school shooting and decided, for whatever reason, not to act.

The fault for this tragedy lies squarely on the shoulder’s of the FBI, who could have prevented this back in January.

Adding to the credibility of Hogg, in a recently uncovered early cut from one of his interviews it appears he was heavily coached on lines and is merely reciting a script. Frequently seen in the footage mouthing the lines he should be reciting. Hogg becomes flustered multiple times, is seen apologizing, and asking for re-takes.

Wintrich posted the video, which you can see here.

Wintrich concludes with an essential point, which he put in bold type:

Why would the child of an FBI agent be used as a pawn for anti-Trump rhetoric and anti-gun legislation? Because the FBI is only looking to curb YOUR Constitutional rights and INCREASE their power. We’ve seen similar moves by them many times over. This is just another disgusting example of it.

Yes, indeed.

Watch. This is going to blow up spectacularly.

What I want to know is if the kids were paid and, if so, how much.

More soon on other real dangers causing mass shootings, especially those involving young perpetrators. Again, it’s not guns.

Brendan Dilley is a Congressional candidate in Arizona and YourVoice™ America Co-host.

He receives intelligence messages from a source he keeps anonymous. Dilley’s Twitter account has many positive messages about life. His Periscopes have the intel data.

Someone on 8chan watches the videos then summarises the content. I’ve read this intel several times over the past few days and found it interesting enough to share.

The source page is here. Excerpts follow, emphases mine.

First, the introduction:

Brendan Dilley has an Intel Source that has been proven to be accurate several times over the last month or so. The source is not Q, but acknowledges that Q is legit. This source in the past only claims to be a government contractor, but was allowed by his bosses to leak this intel out. For example, here is one of the latest accurate predictions:

Brenden Dilley Intel Source 1/17

https:// twitter.com/Hublife/status/954010498449600512

We’ve got media indictments coming. There’s a large quantity of media involved with some very dark or disgusting things – corruption, willfully sharing fake news in exchange for money, (or) other far more deviant and disgusting things. This is the reason they fight so feverishly against the president

1/18 – Happening – Newsweek got raided

I will begin posting Synopses of the upcoming Periscopes on this thread…

The messages are quite long, so I recommend readers also go to 8chan and read them in full.

On January 18, the anonymous intel source discussed the NSA supercomputer Hammer, which has all sorts of data. This post concerns the Benghazi attack of September 11, 2012:

Obama will hang for his sins, this is way beyond this FISA Stuff
Where was Obama during Benghazi, NSA has the answer.”
“The HAMMER RAW INTEL has Obama and certain several others in a certain place”
“HAMMER pings all cells and mapped who was present and their location and more”
“HAMMER is a supercomputer”
Why are non-administration personnel present in top secret meetings is also part of the extra intel”
“Binney is a hero”
“William Binney creator of NSA Super Computers”
“During Benghazi, Hillary was at her Satanic Ritual, oops! They don’t allow cell phones at that event! With Many Celebs”
“Obama was elsewhere (not allowed to state’ where it is as it’s part of __ (I’m not authorized to say)”
They are screwed, Trump has the Intel

According to testimony given to the Senate Armed Services Committee in 2013 (see here and here),  neither Obama nor Hillary was present. In 2012, I recall reading that Obama either went to bed because he had a campaign commitment the next day in Las Vegas or the engagement was that evening and he had to fly out. Unfortunately, I cannot find the link.

The intel source then commented on Andrew McCabe, the former deputy director of the FBI, who announced his retirement in January:

“McCabe en route to his GITMO tour” …

The source predicted more media busts:

2 more HUGE MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR news organizations are on the hit list as far as being raided – that’s coming – just like Newsweek was today
Dilley – “For what?”
State secrets illegally being passed to non-state entities through these organizations
“2 of biggest – One is a paper, one is a news show

January 19‘s drop concerned Obama’s White House. This is particularly shocking:

https:// twitter.com/Hublife/status/954372550447980547
Brenden Dilley Intel Source 1/19
Brendan claims he has more information he will drop in the future (not able to release at this time) that is WAY worse than the “memos”
But was able to release the following:
In previous administration, Over 100+ meetings involving unauthorized non-administration personnel discussing Top Secret/Classified Intel – Soros, Gates, Buffet, Rockefeller, Tony Podesta, The Chinese Military” (Citizens and Military Foreign Nationals)
Topics of discussion
Insider Trading
Top Secret Information
Advising the Cabal’s Money Men to move their assets etc so they would never lose
The Top Tier billionaires dictated policy to ensure that always made and never lost
Look at the bailout cash… Who got it?
Cabal told Obama what to do and as it was about to get done, Obama would e-mail them from an unsecured server and they would clean up “money-wise”
Obama traded secrets just like Hillary
BLM were taking instructions directly from Obama and his unsecured e-mail account
He had an unsecured account and was trading state secrets to the most wealthy people in order to profit himself

The January 22 drop covers Q, Robert Mueller, George Soros, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-California) and more. Excerpts follow:

Q is not a single person but an organization
According to Dilley, his Intel Source gives it to him straight and doesn’t attempt to convey information via cryptic messages …
Mueller will be getting a free pass as he WILL receive a Presidential Pardon
Mueller is doing what he’s doing to avoid his own prison time. He will always be remembered as “disgraced” no matter how many people he puts in prison
Adam Schiff is a traitor, answers to foreign actors
Soros doesn’t end up with a prison sentence – he’s being taken out (“catch a bullet”)
Alex Soros is useless without Soros money. Everything WILL be confiscated.
No text messages lost. Deep State trying to leverage a lie to discredit the memo. Basically they say no evidence and if DOJ offer it up, Deep State say it’s lies and “texts are lost”. 3 NSA programs have the texts and they cannot be deleted, all Hillary’s emails are intact.
All Deep State e-mails and messages are stored in _ program and cannot be deleted, the raw intel cannot be tampered with.
Source is authorized to “release” FROM THE TOP
Trump is in control… the Intelligence Apparatus is in control
The main problem to solve – How do you redpill the country, thus avoiding too much Civil Unrest?

The January 23 drop recaps what Q wrote around that time. Here are a few things Q did not write about:

https:// twitter.com/annvandersteel/status/955914720543956993
Brenden Dilley Intel Source 1/23
There has been a couple of traitors within the Trump Cabinet and he now knows who they “were”.
They were leveraged unfortunately from things that had happened to them in the past. Please do NOT guess or speculate. Their names will not be disclosed.
They were helping Deep State by quarterbacking stuff against the President
Deep State had insurance policies by leveraging information from their wiretaps
While Trump had been diligently building his group, Deep State has been corrupting his cabinet because they had the intel as to “who were going where”
Wiretaps helped them get ahead to a degree

Reaffirmaton of General Flynn being a great patriot.
General Flynn and Admiral Rogers both playing a part to protect this country.
Also thank Bill Binney who developed the technology needed to bust these guys …
All this data can be dropped now because of yesterday’s Q Posts and the revelation of “Secret Society”
Not easy to discuss but we are slowly preparing Americans for these drops.
You will never know the full scope of this and “you don’t need to”
Confirmed TruPundit story about FBI texts regarding physically harming the President.
FBI is TOAST and major housecleaning will occur similar to what happened with the CIA. FBI may not be able to survive this.
Christopher Wray threatening to “walk out” on FBI/Sessions is FAKE NEWS. Disinfo is necessary.
Some “Trusted” journalists that patriots listen to are DELIBERATELY fed disinfo to keep scent off the main trail. Refrain from roasting these journalists – this being done on purpose.
The Intel Source has actually given Dilley “Fake News”, but he can “sense” it’s fake and refused to report it on his Periscope.
95% is legit, but 5% Dilley can TELL. Dilley calls him on his BULL.
TruPundit (Thomas Paine) is LEGIT. He was a former FBI “spook” and even HE is getting shocked by what he’s finding out.
Trey Gowdy is playing his role. Mueller’s investigation is legit and he’s trying to be honest.
Get away from Paradigm on who is “Good vs Bad”… find out who can get leveraged.
None of this is a current threat. It’s being released now BECAUSE it’s past tense. So relax.
McCabe is in a “Black Site in the lower 48th” “singing” (Somewhere in the Continental U.S.)
Black Site = a place that exists that’s not supposed to exist.
He’s no longer in GITMO but he’s not getting the Witness Protection Treatment
He did not enjoy his GITMO visit, which is why he’s Singing and no longer there.
He’s BAD NEWS.
We are starting to let words out that is preparing the public: TREASON, Secret Society
Memo will confirm what most red-pilled people already knew.

I wrote about the ‘secret society’ a few days ago.

On January 25, Brendan Dilley tweeted about military tribunals, which could well mean capital punishment:

12 have been sat for 39 days.
Obama former cabinet beginning to lawyer up.
McCabe singing. One of the names he gave up is now the informant that is being referred to.
19 charges. 3 are involved in criminal enterprise and sponsor of terrorism. BHO
2:09 AM – 25 Jan 2018

Giant RICO case incoming for rest
Tribunals for top perpetrators
POTUS authorized huge red pill for public
Flynn sitting on dark evidence
2:18 AM – 25 Jan 2018

A drop later on January 25 has more about the military tribunal — and Julian Assange:

“12 have been sat for 39 days.”
Meaning – 12 members of the military tribunal have been sat for 39 days reviewing the information
They have not just been twiddling their thumbs
These are NOT jurors!
Why 12? 12 members are required on the panel in order to entertain the DEATH PENALTY
Normally, that number is 9
Dilley claims he’s known that since day 1 (we’re on day 39) …
More “lawyering up” for the “cabinet members”
A lot of them don’t know what’s coming
They now have a new “source” from the FBI.
The reason why they have this new source is because of McCabe’s singing which gave them this guy that basically was a “keyhole” to everything
McCabe delivered him.
This “guy” has everything.
Obama pissed himself when McCabe delivered this “guy”
There are approximately 19 charges for Obama alone 3 of which involve “criminal enterprise sponsors of terrorism”
Assange photos and videos of him at the Ecuadorian embassy pre-recorded. He’s no longer there.
Expect Pictures and videos of Assange coming out because they need them to keep looking over there
Nobody is getting pardoned except for (maybe) Mueller
Flynn won’t even need to get pardoned
Thomas Paine FISA memo drop today confirmed
Not a drop… Dilley Opinion – “Christopher Wray is a SAVAGE. Wait till the OIG Report comes out.”

Someone posted a timeline to corroborate the above information about the military tribunals:

Connect the dots.
Dec. 16th DJT leaves for Camp David for overnight stay.
Dec. 17th Atl airport power outage.
Dec. 17th DJT leaves CD at night heading to WH.
Dec. 19th Amtrak derailment.
Jan. 25th “12 have been sat for 39 days.”
39 days before Jan. 25th is Dec. 17th.

To paint the picture.

BHO was detained in Atl at the airport and transported to Camp David where DJT was waiting for him with a military tribunal. The Clowns derailed a train in retaliation.

Yesterday he retained legal council after he found out who is the key witness that was provided by McCabe.

The January 27 drop is particularly interesting, featuring George Soros, Hillary’s campaign supremo John ‘Skippy’ Podesta (now writing for the Washington Post) and sharp words from Dilley’s intel source to those reusing intel content without attribution on social media:

… Another Soros may have been taken, not Georgy.
George Soros believes that he could beat Trump.
George Soros WILL be taken out but it won’t be U.S. Military, nor even a U.S. Citizen.
It will happen from another country’s military who is “absolutely fed up”
Don’t assume that if Intel gives the “last name” of a person, you automatically figure out the individual.
You’re given small pieces of information deliberately because they don’t want to give out the whole farm. People get overzealous to try to solve and assume the intel is regarding particular individual. Instead of taking the “raw intel” the way it is, and staying open, people want to “play investigator” and “piece it all together”.
“You get going down these paths, it’s not good.”
“You go down a rabbit hole that’s not accurate, and then when the truth comes out, you get disappointed.”
I thought I heard “this”. You didn’t. You heard something, interpreted “this”, ran with it, and now you’re here.
Podesta didn’t write that article that came out the other day. Robby Mook wrote it, Hillary helped.
Skippy was in ill health at the time. He is not doing so well health-wise
The intelligence community is annoyed because some of you guys aren’t normally watching Dilley scopes and only in there to watch for Intel, write things down, then publish it on YouTube as if it were your own. You start to build your own brands around it.
The Intelligence Community know you who you are and they don’t like it.
It’s not a good look whether you’re doing it to Q or Dilley’s Intel Source or other sources.
“Annoyed” is not even the right word.
They don’t like it because you guys SCREW IT UP and you change things, add thing, and you start being “conspiritorial” instead of just taking the information.
With the Intel, people are trying to play “Clue” instead of just watching what’s happening (and) having some faith, they start stealing information and pretending that someone told it to them. They’re capitalizing on it. Good Luck!
If you’re taking that information and you’re rebranding it and putting it out as your own, good luck, it’s not going to end well for you.
They know where you live and they know where you put your money. They have everything. You’re not anonymous at any point ever when you’re on the Internet.

Direct Quote from Intel:
“Sadly, people see a surname, add who they wish it to be, then spout it elsewhere and devalue the intel. Seen some shocking copy/paste style jobs and for the record, Skippy is in ill health at the moment.”
Skippy was in a military medical facility till Monday, just left. Waiting to hear where he is right now. His brother is in the lower 48 in Military Custody.”
GITMO journeys are to get the intel, they are not yet permanent residents. Again, for the record, we have never said they were there permanently. We said they had visits, some for much longer than others. There are so many moving parts on this that it changes not by day or week but by the minute.”
MSM is the disinformation campaign to rock patriots.”
“Example, POTUS just had to clarify he never wanted to sack Mueller. I think he has said it about 40 times+. Yet media runs a hack piece and he has to say it again.”
“David Duke Disavow stuff – Same Way. They are just a smear campaign to slow the Trump Train.”
“Podesta Op-Ed (Hillary really) is the same crap as is Obama. They wanna push a narrative that they’re untouchable and they get the low-educated CNN and Company to fall for it. Same with this John Kerry shit that’s weeks old info, yet is churned out. They’re trying to muddy the waters and put blood in the water. Disinformation is a tactic – both sides. However, our side is done to protect assets. Their side is to cause carnage.”
Old news being passed as current.
We’re livid with people “repacking the Intel as theirs” and adding lies and misinformation to it. It distorts the facts.

I will have more from Brendan Dilley’s intel source tomorrow.

Recently, the following graphic has been trending about how the American media empire fits underneath powerful global socio-political organisations:

Click on the Swiss Propaganda Research link included in Assange’s tweet to see the full image.

Highlights

We think that Big Media are trustworthy. Big Media get told what narratives to push. Anything that goes against the grain of globalism — e.g. anti-globalist President Donald Trump — must be hammered.

Look at the fifth column from the right. For those who think that Disney has our interests at heart, think again. Marvel, a subsidiary, is in that column. Notice how the characters and narratives in comic books have changed over the past few years? That’s why.

Eric Schmidt

Equally important is the social media column on the far right.

Eric Schmidt, although recently resigned from Google’s parent company, Alphabet …

… hit a trifecta by participating in Bilderberg, the CFR and the Trilateral Commission.

Schmidt’s announcement makes it look as if he is going to pretty much leave the organisation, however, ZeroHedge tells us more (emphases in the original):

He will become a technical adviser to Google parent Alphabet, while continuing to serve on the board …

The question is – is Schmidt getting ready for 2020?

The rest of the article is damning. Please read it.

Two more excerpts follow.

The first tells us more about Schmidt:

On the Wikipedia link you can read more about Mr. Schmidt, one of the richest person on earth, an advocate of net neutrality, a corporate manager and owner of a lot, a collector of modern art, etc. And you can read about his heavy involvement with Hillary Clinton’s recent campaign and the Obama administration and about Schmidt’s involvement with Pentagon, too.

Eric Emerson Schmidt’s name is associated with the world’s largest and most systematic data collecting search engine, Google, that millions upon millions use. School children, teachers, parents, media people, politicians and you and I all daily “google” what we need to know.

While we do that, Google tracks everything about us and if you are searching for a thing to buy, say a camera, be sure that camera ads will shortly after turn up on your screen. And they know everything we are interested in through our “googling” including political interests and hobbies.

He also travelled to North Korea in 2013, no doubt with the blessing of the United States, to plug their government elite into the Web (photo):

The second discusses the implications of Google’s algorithms to de-rank certain online pages to censor unwanted views. The broader context in the ZeroHedge article is that Schmidt wants to wreck aspects of Russian media as seen in a video:

This very powerful corporate leader with a open political orientation has decided – as will be seen 58 seconds into the video – that the Internet and his hugely dominating search engine a) shall cave in to political pressure, b) de-rank at least these two Russian media organizations because c) he knows they are “propaganda outlets” (it isn’t discussed at all or compared with US or other countries’ media) and d) in the name of political correctness it is OK to limit the freedom of opinion-formation.

That said, Schmidt’s strategy applies to everyday users as well (purple highlight mine):

Mr Schmidt, you are blatantly and clearly interfering in the rights of millions, if not billions, to know. To seek information. To shape their opinions.

With your few words you abuse your almost unlimited digital, political, economic and ‘defence’ power – much much worse than if you had sexually abused just one woman for which older men today are fired or choose to resign.

This has to be stated irrespective of whether we like or dislike Russia and its media. That is not the issue here. This has to be fought against because it is slippery slope, Mr Schmidt.

You ought to stand up and use your powers with principles and vision: To protect the Internet against every and each reduction of freedom. Freedom for all, also the fake news-makers however we define them. Yes, there is another solution for that problem and it is not your paternalism.

It just cannot be for you to decide what is good for others and collect data about us all which is only good for you.

How many of us still use Google? Too many. Why not try Duck Duck Go and Start Page first?

Question media’s motives

The media overview and a tranche of it should make us question their motives, via both traditional and online means.

Regular readers know that I have covered several exposés from James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas about the media and Democrat activists.

Their last one was about the Washington Post, in November 2017.

Their new one is all about Twitter.

On January 17, 2018, Twitter was among the big social media companies appearing before the United States Senate:

In practice, ‘extremist propaganda’ often refers to messages and news supporting President Donald Trump.

It also includes the president himself:

More detail follows.

James O’Keefe asks Twitter’s founder Jack Dorsey a question:

Here are a few more teasers about Twitter (language alert), handy to forward to friends and family who don’t have time to watch the longer videos:

Twitter dislikes patriots:

Okay, O’Keefe meant ‘rogue’, but note that Twitter is not questioning the video content:

Twitter users complained. In return, the company manipulated the trending hashtag results:

Twitter cannot look at everything, but, rest assured, they have a few hundred people looking at obscene images. Do they keep those images? Where do the images go next? Hmm. Sounds potentially nefarious, but, then, people should not be sending that type of stuff in the first place.

Without further ado, Project Veritas issued the first video (8:16 minutes) on January 10. It is an interview with Clay Haynes, senior network security engineer, who discusses helping the DOJ with any potential enquiries regarding Trump (written summary):

The second video (15:14 minutes), issued on January 11, features policy manager Olinda Hassan discussing censorship of ‘sh*tty people’. Pranay Singh, direct messaging engineer, explains how they do it. Mihai Florea, a software engineer, admits that half of Twitter employees want to delete Trump’s account for good; the other half want to keep it. Mo Norai, a former content review agent, says that Twitter is between 90% to 99% anti-Trump (written summary):

The third and final video (9:37 minutes) was posted on January 15. It features Pranay Singh, direct messaging engineer, discussing obscene images and messages (written summary):

One thing that has struck viewers of these videos is the number of foreigners in them, pervasive throughout Silicon Valley. They might be easier to work with where matters of censorship are concerned. Still, one cannot help but take exception to someone whose homeland is not the United States referring to Twitter users representing half the American population as ‘sh*tty people’.

By the way, O’Keefe’s new book, American Pravda, discusses the four Project Veritas media exposés. His publisher, Macmillan, has a summary which says, in part:

The book not only contests the false narratives frequently put forth by corporate media, it documents the consequences of telling the truth in a world that does not necessarily want to hear it. O’Keefe’s enemies attack with lawsuits, smear campaigns, political prosecutions, and false charges in an effort to shut down Project Veritas. For O’Keefe, every one of these attacks is a sign of success.

American Pravda puts the myths and misconceptions surrounding O’Keefe’s activities to rest and will make you rethink every word you hear and read in the so-called mainstream press.

O’Keefe recently told Alex Jones that he always needs new undercover journalists but warned that it is hard, potentially dangerous, work that most people would not be able to do:

American Pravda also has examples of social media users buoying support for President Trump during the 2016 election. He devotes a whole chapter to the contributors at The_Donald, known as ‘weaponised autists’ (link from The_Donald has a three-page excerpt). A lot of them came from 4chan, which is where the term originated.

If you haven’t read or heard much about this story, it’s not surprising. Alternatively, perhaps you heard or read something about it that is inaccurate, with omissions.

Twitter’s platform is great. Twitter’s censorship is not.

© Churchmouse and Churchmouse Campanologist, 2009-2018. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Churchmouse and Churchmouse Campanologist with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? If you wish to borrow, 1) please use the link from the post, 2) give credit to Churchmouse and Churchmouse Campanologist, 3) copy only selected paragraphs from the post — not all of it.
PLAGIARISERS will be named and shamed.
First case: June 2-3, 2011 — resolved

Creative Commons License
Churchmouse Campanologist by Churchmouse is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at https://churchmousec.wordpress.com/.

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,165 other followers

Archive

Calendar of posts

July 2018
S M T W T F S
« Jun    
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

http://martinscriblerus.com/

Bloglisting.net - The internets fastest growing blog directory
Powered by WebRing.
This site is a member of WebRing.
To browse visit Here.

Blog Stats

  • 1,327,846 hits
Advertisements