dagblog - Comments for ""False flags," explained"

looks like someone is trying

artappraiser — Fri, 26 Oct 2018 20:44:40 +0000

looks like someone is trying a new tack, a version of "me too", both sides of the nuts do it:

For the first time: Vanessa Trump details powder experience https://t.co/tFFOkCoU2B
— Jonathan Swan (@jonathanvswan) October 26, 2018

Nothing wrong with reminding us of these scare letters we have forgotten about. Bu the timing of this story is too suspect for my taste.

Krugman lumps them all

rmrd0000 — Fri, 26 Oct 2018 20:42:16 +0000

In reply to Steve Schmidt & Paul Krugman

Krugman lumps them all together.

Steve Schmidt & Paul Krugman

artappraiser — Fri, 26 Oct 2018 20:18:10 +0000

In reply to "False flags," explained

Steve Schmidt & Paul Krugman on Rush Limbaugh:

He has gone full wack job https://t.co/oRXs8oHcJI
— Steve Schmidt (@SteveSchmidtSES) October 26, 2018

Gov. Cuomo talks about Trump

artappraiser — Fri, 26 Oct 2018 17:00:16 +0000

In reply to Trump is subtly feeding it in

Gov. Cuomo talks about Trump's "bomb tweet" (quoted above) on CNN this morn, 2 1/2 min. clip (I find the headline and intro.below inaccurate, in that he doesn't slam him, rather, it's a good big picture reminder analysis, and I say that as no fan of Cuomo):

Gov. Cuomo slams Trump over bomb tweet

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo reacts to President Trump's latest tweet which appears to blame ""Bomb" stuff" for slowing Republican momentum in early voting.

There's breaking about an

artappraiser — Fri, 26 Oct 2018 15:38:21 +0000

In reply to "False flags," explained

There's breaking about an arrest on the bombing investigation, but since it's not developed, I'll not start a new thread yet but plop it here:

also- CNN knows the name of the man arrested in connection with the bombings, but withholding it for now.
— kelly cohen (@politiCOHEN_) October 26, 2018

Trump is subtly feeding it in

artappraiser — Fri, 26 Oct 2018 15:13:14 +0000

In reply to The New York Times has

Trump is subtly feeding it in a tweet this morning:

History is going to wreck you. https://t.co/JpmzYoKpnr
— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) October 26, 2018

The New York Times has

artappraiser — Fri, 26 Oct 2018 14:56:09 +0000

In reply to "False flags," explained

The New York Times has published a piece going over some of the same ground, but also forensically delving into how this particular meme spread so fast:

‘False Flag’ Theory on Pipe Bombs Zooms From Right-Wing Fringe to Mainstream

By Kevin Roos, Oct. 25

[....] As prominent conservatives tiptoed around the conspiracy theory swamps, the right-wing internet dove in headfirst. Users on a pro-Trump Reddit forum called r/the_donald frantically assembled evidence to buttress the unfounded theory that the bombs were a left-wing setup. Conservatives on Facebook and Twitter distilled the theory into memes and talking points that were shared thousands of times. Groups originally formed to promote QAnon, a sprawling pro-Trump conspiracy theory, latched on and turned up the volume even higher [....]

One thing that comes to mind: top down talking points memo writers are being put out of their jobs by those more savvy about the viral highways (and lowways) of social media?

this interesting too, it

artappraiser — Fri, 26 Oct 2018 14:08:13 +0000

In reply to two points of interest she

this interesting too, it appears the banning of Alex Jones at many sites had some research behind it:

So how did the “false flag” idea get big enough online that mainstream right-wing figures are tweeting about it?

Jones and Infowars bear much of the responsibility for this, said Warzel. “I really think that they’ve rewired the way the far right talks,” he told me. “They’ve bullied their way into the normal discourse. This is why you’re saying every far-right commentator suggesting that [the mailing of bombs to Democratic figures] is a hoax ... or a false flag.”

The research bears this out. In 2017, University of Washington professor Kate Starbird found that social media — and websites like Infowars and others — have been powerful vectors for conspiracy theories, and specifically for terms like “false flag” that appeal to people of many political backgrounds.

When she noticed that after both the Boston Marathon bombing and a mass shooting at a community college in Oregon, social media traffic showed a big rise in “false flag” tweets (like arguments that the Navy SEALS were behind the bombing), Starbird started researching how conspiracy theorists talk to one another, and the websites and social media platforms they use.

In her paper on the “Alternative Media Ecosystem,” she not only showed how popular conspiracy theory websites really are but argued that conspiracy theories — like “false flags” — don’t operate on a liberal-versus-conservative axis; they focus more on “anti-globalism,” a space “where U.S. Alt-Right sites look similar to U.S. Alt-Left sites.”

two points of interest she

artappraiser — Fri, 26 Oct 2018 14:00:52 +0000

In reply to "False flags," explained

two points of interest she dug up for this article:

Conspiracy theories like “false flags” appeal to people along the political spectrum. According to a survey conducted in 2014 and reported by the Washington Post, Republicans and Democrats responded equally when asked if they agreed with four statements like, “Much of our lives are being controlled by plots hatched in secret places.”

And in the current political environment, it seems that conspiracy theories are going mainstream. Ideas that used to remain confined to pamphlets or small networks leap from the dark corners of the internet into lines in speeches and tweets from the president himself, who has long trumpeted conspiracy theories.

and

Traditionally, a false flag would be staged by the government, but to Jones, an avid Trump supporter, the pool of suspects who have faked attacks has widened. A “false flag” can mean simply “someone staged this incident to make someone else look bad” — and that’s the very argument some on the far right are making about the mail bombing attempts this week.

“The language has shifted, like how ‘fake news’ has lost its meaning,” said Charlie Warzel, a senior technology writer for BuzzFeed News who has written extensively about conspiracy theories on the internet. “It used to mean misinformation and an organized group of people putting something forward — now, it just means something you don’t agree with.”

A similar thing has happened to “false flag,” he said: “‘False flag’ has lost the ‘government’ meaning, and now it just means ‘you’re being duped.’ It’s a stand-in for ‘something smells fishy.’”