Leaked document reveals how Cambridge Analytica used Duck Dynasty and Politico to sway Facebook...

[DonViejo]

Leaked document reveals how Cambridge Analytica used Duck Dynasty and Politico to sway Facebook users to Trump

TRAVIS GETTYS
23 MAR 2018 AT 13:41 ET

A leaked document shows how Cambridge Analytica targeted certain types of social media users during the 2016 presidential campaign after harvesting personal data from Facebook.

A former employee shared a 27-page internal document produced by officials who worked most closely on President Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, and it serves as a blueprint for the strategy Cambridge Analytica used on a variety of social media platforms, reported The Guardian.

The firm owned by Trump megadonor Robert Mercer used intensive survey research, data modeling and algorithms to target 10,000 different ads to thinly sliced audiences in the months before the election.

Those ads were viewed billions of times, according to the document, and suggests Cambridge Analytica was able to monitor in real time how effective the messages were on different types of voters — providing a feedback loop that allowed their algorithms to be constantly updated and improved.

more
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/leaked-document-reveals-cambridge-analytica-used-duck-dynasty-politico-sway-facebook-users-trump/

[mr_lebowski]

1. Aren't there strong laws on the books about foreign entities engaging in propaganda/psyops

against the American people enacted in the 40's or 50's or something, back when people were much more realistic and commonly 'aware' that this sort of a thing is a real threat to our country?

Like, it's nice and all to think every American citizen is so well-read and smart and immovable in their 'opinions' that nobody is actually going to be 'affected' by propaganda. But the reality is, if that shit didn't WORK, there'd be no such thing as 'advertisement', and firms like CA wouldn't even exist. Nor would the CIA and NSA have hundreds of million$-worth of psyops programs they use to influence behavior in other countries.

THAT SHIT WORKS when done correctly, on a scary % of people. That's why those laws were created back then.

Nowadays everyone likes to imagine they're so savvy and smart ... which makes them SITTING DUCKS.

[Hortensis]

2. POLITICO won't be sorry they betrayed us, but

they should be very sorry we found out.

...one of the most effective ads pushed by Cambridge Analytica was a sponsored post created by Politico that looked like a news report but was labeled as a “paid advertisement by Donald J. Trump for President.”

The interactive graphic, called “10 inconvenient truths about the Clinton Foundation,” appeared on the site for several weeks when internet users from certain swing states visited Politico, whose sponsored content team produced the ad.

Cambridge Analytica boasted the ad achieved an average engagement time of four minutes, and Kaiser told The Guardian it was “the most successful thing we pushed out.”

Betrayal of every principle.

Politico is permanently off my list.

[Tatiana]

4. Many here have disliked Politico since it first appeared on the scene.

I also had a strong can't-put-my-finger-on-it distrust for that organization.

When MSNBC started having their columnists on as regulars so quickly after they opened up shop, I thought something is weird here. Usually you have to prove your legitimacy and viability as a news organization before they invite you on mainstream news channels (unless you're Faux Noise).

[Hortensis]

5. Umhm. Regarding that latter, same for Axios, the Koch

investment. Overnight it was being quoted everywhere. It's being careful because people don't trust it, but I will never let down my guard with that thing.

AP's another that blatantly betrayed our trust similar to Politico. The AP whose new releases are published by every medium across the nation and are on hundreds of millions of computer screens every day. Their black "postcard" notice disseminating its huge lie about (guess what?) the Clinton Foundation was distributed in the middle of Facebook screens, as well as everywhere else. And left up for most of 2 weeks, or 2 weeks, even though the lie was called out by experts the first day.

The NY Times, sadly...

The best defense is to be sufficiently informed for alarms to ring when things just don't sound right.

[Lee-Lee]

3. As I posted yesterday thats the same stuff companies do to you constantly on social media

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210395253


It’s not just CA. The only think CA did that differs them is illegally/unethically harvesting some of the data they use. But in reality there is enough data out there that loads of companies do this.

If you use Facebook or Twitter it’s done to you every time you log in.

[pnwmom]

6. I'm actually more worried about what Google did -- and is doing -- than what Politico did.

According to this article, Politico wrote the content of an article that was clearly labeled as paid for by Trump.

But this is what Google did -- and is still doing.

Cambridge Analytica also pushed pro-Trump and anti-Clinton search results through Google’s main facility by implementing paid “persuasion search advertising.”

For example, the company made sure voters would see “Hillary Voted for the Iraq War – Donald Trump opposed it” when they searched for Trump’s position on the war.

Yesterday, when I was trying to learn more about Rosenstein's presser, the first item in the Google News results (every time) was a piece of fake news calling for him to be fired.

[Lee-Lee]

7. Thats how Google Ads work

Companies buy ads to show when you search certain terms. And they end up in bidding wars to see who gets that top result.

Did you ever wonder why when you google a company a paid ad for that company shows up even when they are the #1 search result? Like when you Google search Verizon while their website is the top real result there is also an paid ad that looks just like the real search result there that takes you to Verizon’s website also. Why would Verizon pay for that? Because they know if they don’t have the top bid for that then another competitor will and they will come first.

You can go put an ad right now that pops up a link to DU whenever someone searches “MAke America Great Again” and as long as you have the top bid it will be the first thing people see.

[pnwmom]

8. It wasn't labeled as a Google Ad. How would people know?

This was the title of the first result in Google News, not labeled as an ad:

In the interest of justice, President must replace Rosenstein; Mueller must stand down until new Deputy AG named

And it was put out by some site called Artvoice. It's still the 3rd result in a search right now.

[Lee-Lee]

10. They all are. Its a tiny box by the result

It will say “sponsered result” or just “ad”.

Go do some searches and you will see. Now many people mindlessly click on whatever is first- that’s why the ads work- but it’s there.

[pnwmom]

11. Then this one isn't a Google Ad. And it didn't belong as the first result,

or in 3rd place, as it is now.

[LeftInTX]

13. Here is what PNWMom is talking about:

https://artvoice.com/2018/03/22/interest-justice-president-must-replace-rosenstein-mueller-must-stand-new-deputy-ag-named/

I think she might be talking about Google's algorithm.

[pnwmom]

14. Either their algorithm, or someone paying them to put items like that first.

But it's not a mainstream news piece, so it doesn't belong there.

[Tatiana]

12. I am also troubled by what Google is doing. They've been flying under the radar.

Legislation is clearly needed to regulate these tech industries. Starting with forcing search engines to label websites that appear based on specific search terms as "search position paid for by _________________________."

We do it with print and television political advertising. Digital should be no different.

[poboy2]

9. Target rich environment -nt

[hatrack]

15. Duck Dynasty? Jesus Christ . . . . . . .

.