The Internet and Freedom

For John, BLUF:  When I first cmer scross the Internet the watchword was "Informstion Wants to be free."  Todaay the industry leaders, and their academic supporters, are dvocztes for "Information needs to be curated."  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Elon Musk’s vision for the internet is dangerous nonsense

Here is the sub-headline:

Musk now faces no limit on how much of Twitter’s stock he can buy. He’ll buy as much as he needs to gain total control

From The Guardian (UK), Professor Robert Reich, 12 April 2022, 06.31 EDT.

Here is the lede plus three:

The Russian people know little about Putin’s war on Ukraine because Putin has blocked their access to the truth, substituting propaganda and lies.

Years ago, pundits assumed the internet would open a new era of democracy, giving everyone access to the truth.  But dictators like Putin and demagogues like Trump have demonstrated how naive that assumption was.

At least the US responded to Trump’s lies.  Trump had 88 million Twitter followers before Twitter took him off its platform – just two days after the attack on the Capitol, which he provoked, in part, with his tweets. (Trump’s social media accounts were also suspended on Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, Snapchat, Twitch and TikTok.)

These moves were necessary to protect American democracy.  But Elon Musk – the richest man in the world, with 80 million Twitter followers – wasn’t pleased.  Musk tweeted that US tech companies shouldn’t be acting “as the de facto arbiter of free speech”.

Reviewing the fourth pargraph, Mr Musk is correct. "US tech companies shouldn’t be acting 'as the de facto arbiter of free speech.'"  Isn't that how dictatorships work?  As Citizens, we get to decide who is telling the truth.  For example, every four years, when we vote for President.  We don't need tech compnies telling us how to vote.

This is from Mr Ed Driscoll, blogging at the InstaPundit:

ROBERT REICH IN THE GRAUNIAD:  Elon Musk’s vision for the internet is dangerous nonsense. “Musk has long advocated a libertarian vision of an ‘uncontrolled’ internet.  That’s also the dream of every dictator, strongman and demagogue.”

Because if there is one thing that Iran, CCP China, North Korea, and Putin’s wartime Russia are all famous for, it’s the sweet, unfettered, free flow of information.

Sadly, Professor Reich sounds like a member of the elite who is now affraid that the masses are about to turn out the politicians he favors.

In his book Guns, Germs and Steel, author Jared Diamond says that early on in writing language the way of writing was complicated and restricted to a small group of scribes and was a system for keeping the mjority down.  However, when writing came back with Guttenburg's printing press it turned into a tool for democracy for the maasses.  People like Professor Reich and their Lordships in high tech want to go back to the scribe mode, to control the masses.  As a member of the masses I oppose and resent this way of doing business.

And this assault on the Internet, and on free speech, will impact how I vote.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Providing Opportunities

For John, BLUF:  The thing that caught my eye is "California is driving on fumes—living off the residual investments and innovations of past generations."  While any of the 50 States could fall into that trap, I think it is especially true of California.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

To Continue Thriving, California Needs New Politicians

Here is the sub-headline:

California is driving on fumes and living off the residual investments and innovations of past generations.  Is it any wonder so many Californians are heading to Texas or Arizona?

From Reason, by Mr Steven Greenhut, 1 January 2021.

Here is the key paragraph:

California officials love to boast that the state is the world's fifth-largest economy—and point to Silicon Valley as evidence that we're still on the cutting edge of entrepreneurial activity.  But California is driving on fumes—living off the residual investments and innovations of past generations.  These lawmakers take credit for something they seem intent on destroying.

The idea of living off the past applies to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as well as to California.  I wonder about the impact of the major Pandemic Driven Economic Disruption of 2020.  How many businesses will move themselves out of state or encourage their workers to work from home, in out of state locations.  It would seem that if the work force is mostly working at home, they could be almost anywhere, although close enough to drop by the office once in a while.

The past Route 128 Miracle was a major boost to Massachusetts.  However, that was then (1980s) and this is now,  We need not just jobs, but we need a better housing situation, where people are not crowded into ethnic neighborhoods that results in the residents not being able to build their personal wealth. We need land where homes can be built and the residents of crowded neighborhoods can move.  That means we need to improve the transportation infrastructure, although, with telecommuting, perhaps not on a one-for-one basis.  To reduce the population density in Boston and its environs we need to change zoning laws and provide capital for developers.

Not everyone will wish to make the transition to the hinterlands.  For some it will be too foreign.  For others it will be a long wished for opportunity.  For both groups of Massachusetts residents it will mean an improvement in quality of life—a Win-Win.

The result will be changed demographics, but not necessarily by moving the values of Boston out to Middlesex, Worcester and Franklin Counties.  It might mean that certain political and social values in Boston will become denser, while other values will move and be more compatible with the areas to which they move.  In any event, a larger number of people should prosper.  That is to the benefit of us all.

Let us not be like California!

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Concern For Social Media

For John, BLUF:  California House of Representative Member Devin Nunes is concerned about Big Tech and its throttling of the Internet, thus stiffling free speech.  Remember when the Internet was going to enhance free speech and political discourse?.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Social-ist Media

Here is the sub-headline:

Biden’s digital lackeys threaten to turn out the lights on our republic.

From American Mind, Rep Devin Nunes, 16 October 2020.

Here is the lede plus three:

Socialist regimes typically don’t excel at good government or economic stewardship, but they do tend to be experts at one thing—propaganda. Under regimes like the Soviet Union and countless other socialist monstrosities, citizens may not have been able to buy bread without waiting an entire day in line, but they could easily access a galaxy of reports via virtually any medium—print, TV, radio, billboards, schoolbooks, etc.—informing them of the glories of socialism in general and their own leaders in particular.

Americans do not have to wait in line to buy bread yet, but make no mistake: In America today, the socialist propaganda network is already in place.

The mainstream media has proven that Americans can no longer rely on them for unbiased news. Having always leaned left, reporters abandoned all pretense of objectivity following President Trump’s election, turning their outlets into unabashed organs of the anti-Trump movement and every associated leftwing cause. This was amply demonstrated by the years-long Russia collusion hoax, in which every mainstream outlet scrapped journalistic norms on sourcing, anonymity, fact-checking, and other longstanding practices in order to advance the false narrative that Trump colluded with Russians to hack the 2016 election.

Increasingly, however, Americans are no longer accessing news reports through physical newspapers and magazines but through social media. In theory, social media is a democratizing force—people no longer need to own a media company or write for the New York Times in order to reach a potential audience of millions. But it’s now clear that the tech giants who control the digital infrastructure are not providing a neutral platform for all points of view. Instead, they have weaponized their platforms to help the Democrats.

Yes, this is from a month ago, but it is still relevant.

I think the signal that we are in real trouble will be when blog sites, such as this one, start to be shut down.  Then EMail will be checked and censored.  At that point we will be in serious trouble.  On the other hand, it may never come to that.  The Government, and Big Tech will, individually or collectively, realize that they are killing the Goose that laid the Golden Egg.  That is if they are long term thinkers.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Streisand Effect

For John, BLUF:  Sometimes the knee jerk reaction is not the best in a sticky situation.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

MIT:  Twitter Ban ‘Nearly Doubled’ The Visibility Of Hunter Biden Laptop Story

From Wired, by Ms Emily Zanotti, 19 October 2020.

Here is the lede plus three:

Twitter’s crackdown on a controversial New York Post story that “purported to show new emails from Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, about his business dealings while Joe Biden was the vice president in the Obama administration,” “nearly doubled” the story’s visibility and triggered the so-called “Streisand Effect,” amplifying the Post’s claims, according to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a high-profile media intelligence firm.

“When Twitter banned, and then unbanned, links to a questionably sourced New York Post article about Joe Biden’s son Hunter, its stated intention was to prevent people from spreading harmful false material as America heads into the final stretch of the election campaign,” MIT’s Technology Review reported Monday.  “But thanks to the cycle of misinformation—and claims from conservatives that social-media platforms are deliberately censoring their views—Twitter managed to do the opposite of what it intended.”

In fact, Twitter’s efforts triggered a massive spike in interest in the story.  “According to Zignal Labs, a media intelligence firm, shares of the Post article ‘nearly doubled’ after Twitter started suppressing it,” MIT noted.

The incident was a real-time example of what Zignal Lab’s calls the “Streisand Effect” — a “social phenomenon that occurs when an attempt to hide, remove or censor information has the unintended consequence of further publicizing that information, often via the Internet,” according to Wikipedia.  The name comes from singer Barbra Streisand’s efforts, in 2003, to suppress a photo of her Malibu, California, residence over security concerns.

That is the good news.  And why we have to fight every attempt to "control" the World Wide Web.

As to the issue of if The New York Post was spreading false information, evidence indicates that this Hunter Biden EMail trove is being verified as true from more than one source.

For those who think they are not getting the full sweep of information when they do on-line searchs, consideration might be given to replacing the "Google" Search Engine with an alterntive, such as "DuckDuckGo" or "Bing" (a Microsoft alterntive).  And, there are others.

It may be interesting to follow the Senate Hearings on Twitter's intervention in the Election Campaign.  Don't expect much from the House of Representatives.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Comparing Health Care Systems

For John, BLUF:  It is still early days in the Coronavirus Pandemic and no hard and fast conclusions should be drawn.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

In response to Worldometer Confirmed Cases and Deaths by Country, Territory, or Conveyance, which shows:

NATION	Cases per 1 Mil	Deaths per 1 Mil
US	315	5
Sweden	304	10

Someone on the Internet wrote:

Maybe Bernie’s right—Sweden is always doing better than us.

For my Brother Lance, that is sarcasm on the part of the writer.

Regards  —  Cliff

Blog Page Views By Nation

For John, BLUF:  Who is doing what out there on the Internet?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

My Page Views for the period indicated

Nov 25, 2019 9:00 PM – Dec 2, 2019 8:00 PM

Here are my Blog Statistics for the period indicated.

SERIAL	NATION	PAGE VIEWS
1	Ukraine	733
2	Russia	216
3	United States	207
4	Italy	83
5	France	11
6	Germany	10
7	Unknown Region	8
8	Indonesia	7
9	South Korea	7
10	Thailand	7

It is interesting that the number of page views from Ukraine is over three times as many as from Russia.  Ukraine vs Russia?  I find this interesting.

Regards  —  Cliff

Crime or Slime?

For John, BLUF:  FBI Director Comey gave Mrs Clinton a pass on her "home brew" EMail server.  Is WikiLeaks the Karma response?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

"The problem is Mueller is straying away from his mandate to find crime and he is now looking for political sin."

From Althouse, by Law Professor Ann Althouse, 30 December 2018.

Here is the lede plus one:

"Building buildings in Moscow, using stolen material from Assange.  These are not crimes.  He has no authority to be a roving commissioner to find political sins.  So far, I don’t see any evidence of crimes except for ones that he helped to facilitate by getting people to lie in front of his own investigators."

Said Alan Dershowitz to Sean Hannity, quoted (with video) at Mediaite.

Professor Dershowitz makes sense.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Self-Censorship

For John, BLUF:  It is a real thing.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Is it true that there’s no freedom of speech in France?

This is the title of a blog post at ¡No-Pasaran!, 30 August 2018.  It is from this blog post:

How I got censored in France

Here is the lede plus one:

As I write this, I was supposed to be talking about Putin’s Russia on the French station Radio Courtoisie.

That came about a few months ago, when I was contacted by a charming French journalist who had heard me speak on that subject at a conference in England.

The prospect of talking for 90 minutes in French was daunting because my command of that tongue could only charitably be described as uncertain.  But I agreed to do it, especially since the musical interludes were to be provided by the sublime pianist Penelope Blackie (aka Mrs Boot).

When we met in Paris, my interviewer said she was envious of Britain, where it was still possible to express conservative views in all media.

The left, she said, had such tight control of the papers, broadcast media and publishing that many conservative books published by les Anglo-Saxons would never see the light of day in France.

Then here is the denouement of the story:

Late last night, my interviewer sent me an e-mail specifying the broadcast slots, and I was about to forward it to all and sundry in France.  But then, seconds later, another e-mail arrived:

“I’ve just had a phone call from the Radio Courtoisie director and editor-in-chief Madame Dominique Paoli.  She has decided to cancel the broadcast because it ‘contains violent libellous accusations against Putin that could draw the ire of the Russian embassy’.”

Links:
Madame Dominique Paoli.

Now this isn’t the first time I’ve been censored, but never for that reason.

For ‘violent’ though my accusations against Putin might have been, they certainly weren’t libellous – for the simple reason that they were all true.

We are seeing the leading edge of this kind of thing on the Internet, in China, being aided and abetted by Google.

Regards  —  Cliff

Silicon Valley More Helpful than the Kremlin?

For John, BLUF:  If you don't read widely and distrust everyone you just don't understand how serious the situation is.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

New Movie Claims Google Handed the Popular Vote to Hillary Clinton in 2016

From PJ Media, by Reporter Tyler O'Neil, 23 September 2018.

Here is the lede plus two:

When Donald Trump surprised the world by winning the 2016 election, liberals clung to the idea that his victory was illegitimate because Hillary Clinton won the popular vote.  According to a psychologist who supported Clinton in 2016, however, Google's bias in Clinton's favor may remove even that symbolic victory from her.

Almost all of Clinton's popular vote margin could be attributed to Google bias, making her win "negligible." Dr. Robert Epstein, a psychologist who earned his Ph.D. at Harvard, actually reported this finding last year, but he explains how it works in the upcoming film "The Creepy Line."

Epstein made a stir in 2015 by reporting in Politico that Google could "rig" the 2016 election.  This story discussed the results of his study, which was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).  That study found that "biased search ranking can easily shift the voting preferences of undecided voters from 20% or more — up to 80% in some demographic groups."

Wait, the folks we should be investigating is "Google?

I wonder what they think of the Electoral College?  Does the Electoral College, at least today, help negate this "Google" advantage?

The thing that is really worrying to me is the work Google is doing with the People's Republic of China, to censor and manipulate the Internet.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Watch What You Say in France

For John, BLUF:  Is this very "Soviet-like" or is it just very "European-like"?  Over there they don't make a fetish of free speech, the way we do in the AngloSphere.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Marine Le Pen furious after being ordered to undergo psychiatric tests

Here is the sub-headline:

Marine Le Pen, the leader of the French far right has been left shocked and furious after a court ordered her to be examined by a psychiatrist to determine if she "is capable of understanding remarks and answering questions".

From The Local/AFP, by Reporter Ben McPartland, 20 September 2018.

Here is the lede plus four:

Le Pen, who is head of the former National Front party - now National Rally (Rassemblement National) revealed on Twitter her shock and anger at being ordered to undertake a psychiatric assessment.

The unusual summoning is in relation to Le Pen having tweeted out gruesome propaganda images from terror group Isis that showed the bodies of people having been executed by the so-called Islamic State.

In March Le Pen was charged with circulating "violent messages that incite terrorism or pornography or seriously harm human dignity" and that can be viewed by a minor.

And as part of their investigation it appears magistrates in Nanterre near Paris have ordered Le Pen to visit a psychiatrist for an expert assessment.

"I thought I had been through it all: well, no! For denouncing the horrors of Daesh (Isis) by tweets the "justice system" has referred me for a psychiatric assessment. How far will they go?!" she said on Thursday.

The really scary part is that with the World Wide Web it is possible for European nations to impose their totalitarian rules on the rest of us.

Hat tip to the Drudge Report.

Regards  —  Cliff

Sending Prophets

For John, BLUF:  The sociologists and political scientists has have gone off the path and are lost.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Salena Zito fires back at attacks on her journalism

From The Washington Times, by Mr Larry O'Connor, 2 September 2018.

Here is the lede:

If the measure of a political journalist is the vehemence, vitriol, and histrionics from partisans unhappy with the unassailable facts revealed by your work, then Salena Zito has got to be at the top of her game right now.

It isn't like someone isn't trying to warn the Democrats.

For this cause also the wisdom of God said: I will send to them prophets and apostles; and some of them they will kill and persecute.

Luke 11:49

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Connecticut Senator Mentally Adrift

For John, BLUF:  Freedom of speech means the Government can't shut you down.  It is not a promise of private companies publishing whatever you produce.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Or what?  You’re a governmental official and there is a thing called the First Amendment.

So that is the Tweet from Ben Shapiro.

Here is the original Tweet, from Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT):

Infowars is the tip of a giant iceberg of hate and lies that uses sites like Facebook and YouTube to tear our nation apart.  These companies must do more than take down one website.  The survival of our democracy depends on it.

So, yes, the First Amendment is about the Government.  So Facebook or some other Internet organization can dump Mr Alex Jones and his InfoWars any time it wants.

However, for Congress to mandate it would be to violently violate the First Amendment.

The other thing is, for a member of a party that uses terms like Hitler and Nazi to describe the leaders of the other major political party to then talk about "hate and lies" and tearing "our nation apart" is the height of hypocrisy.

Shame Senator Murphy, Shame!

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

John F Kerry on Election Hacking

For John, BLUF:  This was on National TV.  An adult thing to say.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Kerry:  ‘We Have Got to Get Away From This Constant Effort to Destroy a Presidency’

From The Washington Free Beacon, by Mr Andrew Kugle, 22 July 2018.

Here is the lede plus three:

Former secretary of state John Kerry said on Sunday that the country has to move away from the constant efforts to "destroy" the presidency, no matter who the president is.

"We have got to get away from this constant effort to destroy a presidency, whoever's it is.  It is tearing our country apart, and I think it is very, very dangerous for our democracy," Kerry said on CBS's "Face the Nation."

Kerry was talking about the potential threat that cyber attacks pose to the country and the growing problem of politicizing these threats.

"This is an ongoing challenge to our country.  It is not a Democrat or Republican problem.  It has been building for a long period of time under President Bush.  Prior to that, ever since we have had an internet there have been escalating series of cyber attacks against corporations and against government entities," Kerry said.  "And so this is a problem for all of us as Americans and we have got to depoliticize it."

He has a point.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Geek View of Friday's Indictment of 12 Russians

For John, BLUF:  Kind of interesting, in a Geeky sort of way.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

WHAT MUELLER’S LATEST INDICTMENT REVEALS ABOUT RUSSIAN AND U.S. SPYCRAFT

From The Intercept, by Mr Micah Lee, 18 July 2018.

Here is the lede plus five:

ON FRIDAY, Special Counsel Robert Mueller, as part of his investigation into interference with the 2016 presidential election, charged 12 Russian military intelligence officers with conducting “large-scale cyber operations to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election.”  The indictment contains a surprising amount of technical information about alleged Russian cyberattacks against a range of U.S. political targets, including the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the Democratic National Committee, members of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, the Illinois (probably) State Board of Elections, and an American election vendor, apparently VR Systems, and its government customers.

Regards  —  Cliff

Don't Block Me, Bro

For John, BLUF:  I think this is petty harassment.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Judge Rules Trump Violates First Amendment by Blocking Critics on Twitter

From PJ Media, by Ms Bridget Johnson, 23 May 2018.

Here is the lede:

A federal judge ruled today that President Trump cannot block his critics on Twitter because his feed is a "public forum" protected by the First Amendment.

OK then, does this mean the White House (and by extension, Congress Critters) must open and read every EMail and Snail Mail communication?  I would think so.

But, the supplemental question is, if one receives a form letter, especially one not germaine to the issue raised, is that prima facia evidence that the original recipient didn't open and read the communication, in essence blocking the communication?

Lawyers?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The Truth?

For John, BLUF:  Why would there be "secret science at the Federal EPA?  Our money, our information.  It should be available to all.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

All the Lies Fit to Print: The NYTimes supports EPA secret science

Here is the sub-headline:

The New York Times editorialized against EPA chief Scott Pruitt’s move to end secret science at the EPA. Here’s the line-by-line takedown of the Times‘ lies.

A Fisking from the Blog Site Junk Science, by Mr Steve Milloy, 3 April 2018.

The freedom offered by a wild west internet is a boon to Democracy.  It helps to expose those who are trying to manage what the Citizens get to know.

Although, their Lordships at The Old Gray Lady see to think "You can't handle the truth."

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Giving Away Your Secrets

For John, BLUF:  I suspect the to many Democrats on Capital Hill computers and the internet are just magic and they need magicians to operate their systems.  Anyone will do.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

44 Dems, Including Wasserman Schultz, Exempted Pakistani IT Aides From Background Checks

This is via Hot Mike, by Ms Liz Sheld, 2 April 2018.

The original article was in The Daily Caller, by Reporter Luke Rosiak, 1 April 2018.  Unfortunately, it wasn't an April Fools Day Joke.

Here are two key paragraphs:

Every one of the 44 House Democrats who hired Pakistan-born IT aides who later allegedly made “unauthorized access” to congressional data appears to have chosen to exempt them from background checks, according to congressional documents.

All of them appear to have waived background checks on Imran Awan and his family members, even though the family of server administrators could collectively read all the emails and files of 1 in 5 House Democrats, and despite background checks being recommended for such positions, according to an inspector general’s report. The House security policy requires offices to fill out a form attesting that they’ve initiated background checks, but it also includes a loophole allowing them to simply say that another member vouched for them.

And you wonder why they don't seem hot on illegal immigration?  They don't care.  It is all one great big party and since we are a land of immigration, what could possibly go wrong?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Phone Privacy

For John, BLUF:  I know, you think the Gov't already has all this info and are just looking for a legit way to disclose it.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Justice Dept. Revives Push to Mandate a Way to Unlock Phones

From The Old Gray Lady, by Mr Charlie Savage, 24 March 2018.

Here is the lede plus two:

Federal law enforcement officials are renewing a push for a legal mandate that tech companies build tools into smartphones and other devices that would allow access to encrypted data in criminal investigations.

F.B.I. and Justice Department officials have been quietly meeting with security researchers who have been working on approaches to provide such “extraordinary access” to encrypted devices, according to people familiar with the talks.

Based on that research, Justice Department officials are convinced that mechanisms allowing access to the data can be engineered without intolerably weakening the devices’ security against hacking.

Well, except for what has been happening with Russiagate, where it seems the FBI and the larger DOJ have acted in ways unethical to violate the Fourth Amendment Rights of US Citizens.

Why would we think this technology wouldn't be abused?  Because Mr James Comey promised?  Please.

Regards  —  Cliff

Google Crushes

For John, BLUF:  Freedoms and Princciples surrendered for convenience as still lost.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Google defeats lawsuit claiming YouTube censors conservatives

From Reuters, by Mr Jonathan Stempel, 27 March 2018.

The three key paragraphs:

In a decision late Monday, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh said a nonprofit run by conservative radio talk show host Dennis Prager failed to show that YouTube infringed its free speech rights by placing age restrictions on its content.

The plaintiff, Prager University, said YouTube’s “animus” toward its “political identity and viewpoint” led it to curb access to videos, including through its “Restricted Mode” setting, on such topics as abortion, gun rights, Islam and terrorism, despite its stated promise of neutrality.

But the judge said Google and YouTube, both units of Mountain View, California-based Alphabet Inc (GOOGL.O), did not qualify as “state actors” subject to the First Amendment by creating a “public forum” for speech.

The only solution is the economic one.  Deny them profits by seeking alternative solutions where feasible.

UPDATE:  But, who am I to talk?  This is a Google platform I blog on and I use G-Mail for my License Commission business.  But, first things first.  I have to delete Facebook, where I have faced attempts at bullying.  I would have thought the ever thoughtful Progressives would eschew such activity.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Poor Al Franken

For John, BLUF:  I wonder if the Democrats are as ignorant of the Internet as the Reporter suggests.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

How an Alt-Right Bot Network Took Down Al Franken"

This article has a strange pedigree, being attributed to Newsweek and Reporter Nina Burleigh, on 19 February 2018, but coming from Yahoo News, out of the UK.

Here is the lede:

White nationalist provocateurs, a pair of fake news sites, an army of Twitter bots and other cyber tricks helped derail Democratic Senator Al Franken last year, new research shows.

I always thought that Senator Al Franken was small potatoes in the search for evil.  Not that I didn't think he was a jerk, but I wasn't convinced he was one to be run out of the US Senate, especially consider fellow members who knowing young ladies would not get in an elevator with alone.

That said, the article has the paranoid approach of someone convinced that the Republicans (and the Russians) are ten feet tall when it comes to the Internet.

Like targeted Facebook ads that Russian troll farms used in the 2016 election, Twitter bots have been around for years and were originally created for sales purposes.  But since the 2016 election, arguably lost due to the right's superior utilization of darker online strategies, the left is not known to have created or mobilized its own fake cyber army to amplify its viewpoint.

"Agreed we need one," Democratic digital media strategist Jess McIntosh, who worked on Franken's campaign and for Hillary Clinton's bid for president, said in an email to Newsweek.  "But it's harder to use these tactics when you can't rely on either lies OR hate to do it."

This makes me think that Ms Nina Burleigh sounds a little unhinged.  Ms Clinton lost because she did a bad job of campaigning.  The idea that she lost due to "the right's superior utilization of darker online strategies" is paranoid.  Who are this evil little men?

Then there is the denial of the left having its own fake cyber army.  Between the FBI (and people from other Intelligence Communities, there was more than enough "Left" skullduggery.  If this whole Steele Dossier imbroglio blows back on the Democrats it will be pretty ugly.

It is time to stop putting out this kind of fantasy and own up to doing a bad job of politics.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff