How fake news brings people together in pursuit of profit

Craig Silverman and Jane Lytvynenko, writing for Buzzfeed, on how a liberal troll and some Macedonian spammers both ended up profiting from spreading fake news:

There is perhaps no better expression of the current economics of internet content than an American liberal troll and spammers from the Balkans and Caucasus making money from completely fake online news aimed at American conservatives. The troll says he’s exposing ignorance, while the spammers are stealing any content that drives traffic and ad impressions. Regardless of motivation, the clicks and dollars are the same — and they reinforce the reality that misinformation about American politics is now an international business opportunity.

BuzzFeed News analyzed 11 hoaxes published by The Resistance that received the highest engagement on Facebook in the past two weeks and found they were copied and reposted by 48 different websites. Of those sites, 16 were confirmed using domain registration records as being run from Macedonia, 4 originated in Georgia, 2 are from Kosovo, and 1 is Bulgarian. The remaining 20 sites whose provenance is unconfirmed use similar WordPress themes to those run from Macedonia, and often post their content in the same pro-Trump Facebook groups used by Macedonians to spread their content. BuzzFeed News emailed 19 owners of the sites but did not receive any response.

How Late Night hosts are handling Trump

This week on Gen Pop, we chat with Mark Harris from New York magazine on how Trump presents a lot of opportunities and a lot of risks for late night hosts. Be sure to check out Mark’s article on the subject over at Vulture.

How to radicalize your Facebook feed

Ryan Broderick did an experiment for Buzzfeed where he created a fake account for the purposes of getting only right wing news. While his conclusions aren’t super revelatory, it is notable how quickly things in his feed devolve from official RNC posts to fake news and neo-nazi memes. I’m curious what the results would be for a left-wing version of this test.

For their part, Facebook has denounced Broderick’s research.

A Facebook spokesperson said: “This isn’t an experiment; it’s a stunt.” pic.twitter.com/jqkTKX3mVz

— Ryan Broderick (@broderick) March 8, 2017

Other publications have done similar research. For instance, The Wall Street Journal has a “Blue Feed Red Feed” feature that allows you to see posts from different across the political spectrum.

Also worth checking out: Broderick and his colleague, Katie Notopolous, created a glossary of far-right and memes that will be helpful to anyone trying to understand this world.

Why Megan Phelps-Roper left the Westboro Baptist Church

In this TED Talk, Megan Phelps-Roper shares the moving story of how she saw the light via Twitter and left the abusive ways of the Westboro Baptist Church. She concludes with suggestions on how it’s possible to persuade even the most closed off mind.

Her story is one of hope — hope that we can find mutual understanding in an increasingly polarized world. It is something we need today.

Twitter Thread of the Day: Anand Giridharadas on Kansas hate crime

I spend a lot of time on Twitter and I see tons of amazing dialogue and reflections. Twitter Thread of the Day is a feature on my blog where I’ll try to share one thread that was particularly interesting, smart, moving, or impactful for me. Go here to read previous editions.

Today’s TTOTD comes from Anand Giridharadas, who writes about the shooting of Srinivas Kuchibhotla and Alok Madasani in Kansas. The attack seems like a clear example of a hate crime, fueled by the current political climate that’s awash in anti-immigrant sentiment. Giridharadas explains how this happened.

[Note: If you’re ever featured here and don’t want to be, feel free to get in touch with me via email at davechen(AT)davechen(DOT)net]

I am shocked by the murder of Srinivas Kuchibhotla in Kansas, and want to share some things I learned reporting on a similar crime in Texas.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

Like the Kansas attacker, Mark Stroman of Dallas thought he was targeting Middle Easterners, and thought he was protecting America.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

President Trump’s administration has quickly leapt to say his talk and actions have nothing to do with this crime. https://t.co/EceiTIditJ

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

I would like to explain why the president is dead wrong on this one. He has everything to do with this, and I can explain.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

What I learned reporting on the Stroman spree, which occurred right after 9/11, is how such an act is dependent on circles of enablement.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

Frankly, Stroman wasn’t intellectually sophisticated enough to channel his anger in this direction on his own. He needed help.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

When I reviewed his letters, prison writings and blog posts, what amazed me was how he had stolen so much language from his social betters.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

It mattered greatly what politicians and pundits said, because it gave his inchoate drifter emotions a purpose and a narrative.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

He heard talk of “enemy combatants” on the news. He was inspired by that to call himself an “allied combatant.”

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

So many of his phrases were borrowed from Fox News. He was a man without purpose all his life. This borrowed language gave him purpose.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

These stories are so often of drifting lives electrified by a sense of having to save one’s country. That call to save comes from on high.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

Here’s the thing. Stroman had no explicit support in 2001 from the highest levels of U.S. power. But the Kansas killer did. From @POTUS.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

W. Bush explicitly praised Islam and supported Muslims. Trump has explicitly degraded them and called them a problem. People hear that.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

Trump makes the statements and goes back to his chefs and jet. But there are aimless Americans who take the words as a summons to greatness.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

Part of being a leader is understanding how what you say will be used, how it will refract into other lives. That explains Bush’s remarks.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

Based on my reporting on Stroman, I can say that Trump has supplied more permission than Stroman ever received back in 2001.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

Trump not only identifies and exaggerates this threat to America. He also keeps talking down our institutional capacity to respond to it.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

Please understand, Mr. President, that this too gives permission, by dog-whistling to drifters that they might do what the government can’t.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

Stroman was deeply motivated by the idea that the government wasn’t going to be tough after 9/11. So he had to be.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

So when @Potus denigrates our intel services and says he knows more than the generals, out there in America it empowers the hate criminal.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

When he spreads his idea of Americanness-as-whiteness, he and his rich friends can laugh about the brilliant tactic. But people listen.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

And a small fraction of those who listen will arm themselves and go to war. And people will die. And the president should sleep on that.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

.@potus understood one thing well: millions of Americans felt punched down upon for a generation. Some were right.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

But now he answers their feelings not by shielding them or helping, but by diverting blame from those who screwed them to those who didn’t.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

So the answer to those who felt punched down upon is the chance for them now to punch down at others. That isn’t leadership. It’s the WWF.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

U.S. elites did long neglect middle- and working-class folks. The remedy isn’t giving them permission to hate and sometimes kill immigrants.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

In other words, the least vulnerable Americans screwed the middlingly vulnerable, and Trump’s answer is a war against the most vulnerable.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

Goldman guy cost Scranton guy his house and hours, and now brown, Muslim & immigrant communities are attacked. Goldman guy’s in the cabinet.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

Wake up. The only people who are winning from this are the people who caused the problem. We cannot go to war against each other. Stop it.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

Because our president may keep giving this hate-permission, your voice matters. Drown the permission out. Tell people they are welcome.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

Stroman was persuadable. He heard more voices inspiring him to kill than inspiring him to love. Change their calculus. Goodnight. With love.

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) February 25, 2017

Ignoring Trump is impossible

Farhad Manjoo, writing for The New York Times, about his attempt to ignore any news related to President Trump for one week:

On most days, Mr. Trump is 90 percent of the news on my Twitter and Facebook feeds, and probably yours, too. But he’s not 90 percent of what’s important in the world. During my break from Trump news, I found rich coverage veins that aren’t getting social play. ISIS is retreating across Iraq and Syria. Brazil seems on the verge of chaos. A large ice shelf in Antarctica is close to full break. Scientists may have discovered a new continent submerged under the ocean near Australia.

There’s a reason you aren’t seeing these stories splashed across the news. Unlike old-school media, today’s media works according to social feedback loops. Every story that shows any signs of life on Facebook or Twitter is copied endlessly by every outlet, becoming unavoidable.

Trump is inescapable in ways that previous presidents have not been. It is impossible to discuss pop culture or media without considering his influence. We touched a bit on this in the most recent episode of the Gen Pop podcast.

The only thing I disagree with Manjoo about is that this level of Trump news “isn’t sustainable.” It can certainly be sustained if media decisionmakers wish it. But per Manjoo’s concerns above, it’s probably not advisable.

“If it arouses an emotional response in you, double-check it.”

Great article by Deena Shanker at Bloomberg, talking with experts on how to avoid fake news:

“My biggest rule of thumb is if it arouses an emotional response in you, double-check it,” said Brooke Binkowksi, managing editor at Snopes, a website that specializes in debunking popular internet myths from both the left and the right. “They upset you because they’re meant to.”

When a story seems outrageous, such as a five-year-old Syrian refugee shown in handcuffs before deportation, it might not be true—or entirely true. That Syrian girl wasn’t in handcuffs, her father said after he had heard the reports, and they aren’t refugees. The photo shows detained Syrians trying to go on vacation who, despite their visas, were denied entry and had to return home. Binkowski and D.C. Vito, executive director of the Lamp, which teaches media literacy in New York, suggest searching for a second source, especially when a story is incendiary.

Twitter Thread of the Day: Zeynep Tufekci on “Liberal Outrage”

Today’s TTOTD comes from Zeynep Tufecki, a scholar whose work I’ve admired for quite awhile. In the wake of a conservative personality’s book getting canceled and his speaking invitation at CPAC getting rescinded, Tufecki tweeted some trenchant insights about the forces that are really responsible for this. It’s not liberal outrage.

[Note: If you’re ever featured here and don’t want to be, feel free to get in touch with me via email at davechen(AT)davechen(DOT)net]

After careful consideration is not the right word here. Folks, check out”best-sellers. Campus/free speech books do well among conservatives. https://t.co/Q0l8CGDogb

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

According to these hot-cake selling books, it’s as if the entire US higher education system is one corner of Oberlin.. But it works to sell.

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

Suddenly, though, conservatives have no-platformed Milo. So that book is not going to do well. The end of “careful consideration.”

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

So, this is not about “liberal outrage”, because the entire Milo machine depends on liberal outrage, but conservative no-platforming.

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

Milo was in the business of turning liberal outrage into conservative $$$; see his sheepish statement this morning to the threat to model.

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

You can often tell what’s what by what people do when the threat is real. When real business in threatened. How they talk in depositions…

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

If Milo was who he pretended to be, his response to latest would be a wild-eyed statement decrying censorship. Instead, sheepish apology.

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

So the only thing Simon and Schuster “carefully considered” is sales, or lack thereof, from conservative no-platforming of Milo.

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

To repeat: An urgent task is to give coherence to the public sphere via understanding how networked attention works. https://t.co/kB3hiWv3hk

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

Because stuff Milo said had been known—it just caught conservative outrage recently. Liberal outrage=$$$. Conservative outrage=book pulled.

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

Milo story reminds me of a potentially apocryphal but great story about hashish dens, allegedly, during the Ottoman times.

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

But I promise it’s not time for some game theory. ? Just a good rule to understand pretend stuff, and a means to modulate response.

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

So the hashish den residents would argue that this was their nature, and apparently were sometimes even subsidized. But occasionally banned.

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

In one case, either someone upset or a ruler started a fire in the den.. To prove that it *wasn’t* their nature to sit and smoke all day.

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

All but one ran out in panic. One guy sat in the back, waiting for the flames to reach him. People shouted: “what are you doing? Get out!”

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

“Waiting for the flames to get here to light my cigarette”, he is said to have responded, and thus proving to onlookers it *was* who he was.

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

A true Milo—as he projected—would leant into this. He is, after all, a victim of child abuse, as well, and I can see how it could go.

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

So I hope this incident remains a clarifying example of how the attention economy & outrage industry truly works, and where the levers are.

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

In the potentially apocryphal hashish den story, onlookers are said to have decided to permanently subsidize the guy waiting for the flames.

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017

The rest didn’t get to sit around and smoke all day. So if Milo isn’t “Milo!”, I hope we see the game when the next one comes around. /end

— Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) February 20, 2017