18 April 2018

'Digital frontier is hierarchical', content creators don't have the power - @bkampmark

Social networks and websites built upon user-generated content are becoming increasingly hostile to users, as governments and indeed website owners take greater and greater interest in what is appropriate content.

The trend is particularly visible on the Google-owned video-hosting website YouTube, where political dissidents, gurus and amateur journalists have seen their content demonetized. Content creators subjected to this can no longer make money from advertisements with their videos.

Channels like Representative Press and even some of the very earliest and most successful YouTube channels like The Amazing Atheist have complained of demonetization. The former moved some content to BitChute as one possible alternative to the video-hosting giant.

Demonetization drew great attention among many in the aftermath of the shooting at the YouTube headquarters by Nasim Najafi Aghdam on April 3, 2018. Nasim had been one of the users affected by YouTube demonetization, claiming it was because the company showed preferential treatment for big business rather than individuals and activists, whom it has turned against.

Reacting to the shooting in an article for Countercurrents, RMIT University lecturer Dr Binoy Kampmark warned "the digital frontier, far from flat in its egalitarian access, is vertical, hierarchical in its hold.  Power only devolved to the mass community of users in an artificial sense, giving that charming impression that the plebs controlled the production and creation of content."

Similarly, in Twitter's "purge", users have complained of sudden and unexpected requests for account verification or simply having their entire profile deleted from the site without warning or provocation. Some of the users had spent years building their following. According to those complaining, they were targeted for their conservative views. But the fact the company is allowed to target anyone so arbitrarily is bad news for people on either side of the political spectrum.

The trend being observed suggests that the future of many social networks is bleak for political dissidents of all camps. The paranoid US government and its close partnership with Google play a key role in making that outcome certain. After going after Facebook, Twitter and Google in Senate hearings for not actively combating alleged Russian influence on the US 2016 election, US lawmakers can be expected to pressure social networks in a desire to punish people who don't agree with them, e.g. who don't hate Russia enough or just aren't very loyal to the US regime. Targets for sanctions could be picked without regard for their political camp or geographic location, only for their disloyalty to America.

Although US lawmakers may ultimately shelter themselves from dissident voices by bullying social networks to sanction content, such an approach turns a blind eye to the way social networks rely on their uninhibited international scope and freedom of speech to maintain their appeal to creators.

15 April 2018

Hard line needed on fake "celeb left": @kevindooleyirl since 2016

Strong rejection of establishment figures, academics and journalists professing to be the political "left" is required if leftist opposition to the state's imperialist propaganda is to be consistent, a blogger has argued since 2016.

It may be that Kevin Dooley's views deserved more attention when his blog began in 2016, and should be brought to readers now more than ever in the wake of a recent renewed stampede of lies and military aggression by Western countries against a Middle Eastern state - this time Syria.

Worse than the missiles launched by the aggressors on Syria, the toxic warheads of lies and dubious emotional propaganda have rained on the populations of Great Britain and the United States in particular as they did in the Iraq War in 2003. Like deadly toxins, such lies by our regimes can have severe repercussions and ultimately lead to deaths on the streets of the US and UK, as terror attacks have shown us.

It seems quite urgent that we hold anyone to account who acts as the apologist of American international terror and thuggery, no matter how enlightened they seem.


Dooley's analysis from 2016 seems to resemble comparable denunciations by so-called "conspiracy theorists" (particularly those who question the US regime's narrative of 9/11) that reject many leftist writers as "gatekeepers". Noam Chomsky's name surfaces in both types of analyses.

Dooley lists the following untrustworthy elements as part of the establishment "Celebrity Left" loyal to the Washington regime, although many others clearly exist:

Tim Wise
Noam Chomsky
Terrell J. Starr
Hussam Ayloush
Jeremy Scahill
Keith Olbermann
Jon Schwartz
Naomi Klein
Glenn Greenwald
Sam Kriss
David Simon
Max Blumenthal
Ben Norton
Rania Khalek

A common sign of such figures is their defense of the regime war criminal Hillary Clinton. Several such figures have changed their views on US military adventures throughout the world, fearing they would be discredited otherwise. But they, as state apologists, are no doubt ready to offer their support to the US regime again in other theaters of its falsely "humanitarian" aggression.


Fake publications that can be considered agents of the imperialist regime are The Intercept and Jacobin. It is notable that The Intercept is syndicated through US military propaganda newsletters, indicating business dealings with the aggressor's military.

Website: https://kevindooleyirl.wordpress.com/

Follow Kevin Dooley on Twitter at @kevindooleyirl

22 March 2018

Will the mainstream media be deleted on Twitter tomorrow?

After March 23, Twitter could go through a kind of update to detect and suspend users with bot-like behavior. The move is designed to counter "Russian bots".


The problem is, many non-Russian users and even newspapers sharing news about the evils of Russian bots behave like Russian bots and will also get deleted if any serious action comes out of this.

They are guilty of the same behavior they accuse Russian botnets of, and new algorithms won't be able to tell the difference between them and the Russians.

If your app or service includes features which allow users to perform simultaneous actions across multiple accounts, you should make changes to bring it into compliance with this policy by March 23, 2018. Failure to comply with these rules could result in enforcement action, up to and including the suspension of associated applications and accounts. 
 Automation and the use of multiple accounts

See below examples of suspicious Twitter bot accounts sharing a BBC article about Russian bots. Their behavior makes them Russian bots, according to the article they are spamming, where it is written that "Networks of bots can be identified if multiple profiles tweet the same content almost simultaneously".


Automated content shared by anti-Russia campaign accounts and media is often about Russian bots and how to spot them, but is being shared using automation tools and fake identities. Accounts campaigning against Russian bots have therefore been behaving exactly like the alleged Russian bots by sharing the same content repeatedly, over and over, through multiple fake handles on Twitter. In fact, bots and "duplicative or substantially similar content" seem to be a favorite tactic of all political campaign groups and media organizations.

Twitter algorithms may hunt and delete the mainstream media for spam as well as Russian media


Twitter handles too much information to check if every bot account is Russian before deleting it. Twitter engineers will write algorithms to delete suspicious accounts automatically. Many of the deleted accounts may belong to the mainstream media.

Syndication by mainstream newspapers and television violates Twitter rules


Syndication is the widespread online business practice of pushing the same content through as many as hundreds of additional local publications, and is also common of television stations. It is a common practice of the mainstream media, and results in duplicated content across social media. A clear violation of the new rules at Twitter.

While Russian publications like RT and Sputnik do share very similar content, and both they and Iran's Press TV often agree, they are only copying the behavior of Western propaganda organizations. Organizations like the BBC and Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp are much worse in that they repeat the same articles verbatim across a huge empire of publications and share exactly the same videos across their accounts (they all tend to have associated Twitter accounts). This is especially true when an article relates to local events and gets reprinted across a spectrum of local and national publications. The use of bots is also obvious through a brief look at the wave of sharing that always occurs without fail by numerous accounts when these publications post anything.

If algorithms are to be used to hunt this media practice down and ban accounts, many mainstream newspapers in the US and Britain will witness their Twitter accounts being suspended or suddenly deleted as possible Russian bots.

The price of hypocrisy and censorship


Twitter resents the political pressure put on it by the US and UK to thwart foreign media. It seems to be gearing up for indiscriminate censorship that will hit both sides by targeting all "suspicious" behavior, i.e. all attempts by campaigners and publications to punch above their real weight using social media.

The campaign against Russian bots is the result of pressure by myopic, frustrated journalists who don’t understand that their own media are engaged in the same behavior as the Russian media and will also be banned. It is reminiscent of how AlterNet suffered losses in revenue after Google took steps against the "fake news" AlterNet itself was calling for action against. AlterNet had called for action against fake news without realizing its own alternate views would be detected as fake news.

20 March 2018

UK assassins gassed themselves accidentally in Salisbury (analysis)

The bizarre "chemical attack" in Salisbury, England, blamed on Russia by the UK, seems like a chapter intended for Syria rather than Britain. Because it is.




Had the chemical attack not been reported in Salisbury, it would have been reported in Syria a few days later. It may yet happen in Syria too.


Clear signs are being ignored by UK politicians in their patriotic dash to blame the Russian "enemy". The signs show the British government accidentally released the nerve agent in its own territory prematurely, while hoping to commit an atrocity using it in Syria.

Nerve gas was being transported by the UK spies themselves


The nerve agent was being transported by so-called "targeted" UK spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter. The Russian former double agent's daughter Yulia, likely as involved with UK intelligence agencies as her father, seems to have been carrying the nerve agent in her suitcase at the time of the apparent "attack". That much is already confirmed by, basically, all the media.

The nerve agent actually seems to have been destined for Eastern Ghouta, Syria, which would inevitably require spies (or expendable mules) to deliver it in a rather risky operation. We know the UK was trafficking weapons from Salisbury to Eastern Ghouta, Syria, to support Syrian rebels.

"Salisbury, England" inscribed on smuggled weapons in Eastern Ghouta


Recent video footage of captured munitions in Eastern Ghouta shows that some of the munitions' origin was Salisbury, England.* Such a finding offers strong grounds to suspect at least some link between the events in Salisbury and the events in Eastern Ghouta, Syria, where Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is routinely accused of using poison gas by the British and American governments. The British and American governments are in turn accused of staging false flag attacks as they seek excuses to launch airstrikes on Syria, making it likely that this was their plan once again.

There is already a history of bungled attempts to move chemical weapons into Syria and give them to rebels to frame Assad, and this just looks like one more example of it. In 2013, the big year the US first threatened to attack and overthrow Assad for supposedly using chemical weapons, anti-Assad rebels backed by the West were arrested in Turkey with chemical weapons.

There is no motive for Britain or Russia to carry out a military grade nerve gas attack in Salisbury, and Sergei Skripal and his daughter were not important enough to be targeted by either country, but they were expendable enough to be used as mules. The only reason this chemical "attack" would occur is by mistake, as it fits neither country's agenda.

* Porton Down, location of the UK's own chemical weapons labs, is also just a few miles away from the site of this accident

US envoy's speech about Salisbury sounded like redraft of a speech about Ghouta


The current diplomatic crisis, which serves neither Russian nor UK interests, can't have been premeditated by the UK. It does not serve the US and NATO foreign policy aims, which are heavily focused on chemical attacks and escalating violence in Syria rather than in Britain. Nothing demonstrated this clearer than when US diplomat Nikki Haley tried to conflate the events in England with the events in Syria and advocate increased US violence in Syria while talking about Salisbury.

Haley talked about Syria and Assad around ten times in the course of a few minutes in front of the UN Security Council after being asked to talk about Salisbury, as she fumbled papers that apparently focus on Syria.

The plan was for this chemical attack to happen in Syria. The US had its script so well-prepared to talk about it happening in Syria that it didn't even bother to rewrite it much.

It is a distinct possibility that, in their desperation to avoid mockery by Russia for accidentally gassing themselves while trying to frame Assad, the British government suddenly decided to start assailing Russia with allegations, hoping for a spectacle that might hide their incompetence.

Of course, we don't know for certain what happened in Salisbury. Almost no-one you talk to in Britain believes Putin really did a chemical attack in Britain. It is just too ridiculous to believe, so it makes sense to offer a more rational alternative version of events.

24 February 2018

"#GhoutaGenocide", other #fakenews hashtags being pushed now by #Trump regime

The hashtags "#GhoutaIsBleeding", "#GhoutaGenocide", and other fake news hashtags are being auto-suggested by Twitter. These aim to reinforce the American regime's floundering military invasion of the small Arab country of Syria with propaganda. The clearest goal of such English-language hashtags targeting an Arab country is about making invasion seem justified among Americans, British and other Western consumers.

Background: Due to past experiences, US rulers are afraid their people are weary of the endless war and sanctions that blazed through the Middle East, killing more than a million people over a roughly 20-year period and attracting terrorists to attack Americans. To counter this perception, fake news is created by the US military, seeking domestic support for its massacres and meddling.

The US pretends to condemn atrocities while committing them. In this case, the atrocity in Ghouta consists of Syria's sane, proportionate measures to restore rule of law and neutralise gunmen in Ghouta - the same gunmen who are only present there in a violent bid to seize control of the capital city Damascus.

No ceasefire is desired by the US as its only goal is to change the course of the war, aiming to reverse 7 years of military defeat and disgrace.

Conclusion: Small Syria has struggled with a campaign of American propaganda and bloodthirsty calls for its invasion and annihilation by the top bullies since 2011. Despite this, the country's military and resistance groups gained the upper hand over the invasion's front groups and have come face to face with the American soldiers illegally invading their territory. Syria has warned the powerful American regime that its invasion will be resisted forcefully, and has survived brutal airstrikes and cruise missile attacks by the Americans as they fail to conquer territory. The desperate renewed fake news offensive and use of hashtags to justify once again the failing 7 year old war against Syria is a symptom of the disgrace and approaching defeat of Trump's clumsy invasion forces.

16 February 2018

Mont Order Questions and Google Searches Answered by L'Ordre (@LOrdreNet)


14/02/2018, 20:45

The following are emailed questions and Google searches by internet users trying to find out more about the Mont Order group. Now you get the answers from L'Ordre (using the handle @LOrdreNet on Twitter), a close friend of the Mont Order group. The following answers were jotted down here in the United Kingdom on Wednesday evening, aiming to satisfy your curiosity about the Mont Order once and for all.

Google: "mont order"

The Mont Order has a couple of different meanings. The first is the older one, referring to an alleged group from the dawn of time that supposedly knew the future. Conspiracy theorists have posted quite a few bits of sensational information about that group. I don't know anything more about it than they do, but it is interesting. The second meaning of the Mont Order's name is the group I've been active in since a small cooperative publishing effort I tried in 2013. So the digital group is maybe only 5 years old and quite small. It convened for the first time via online video conference in February 2015, that's 3 years ago. Since that time it has expanded quite a lot on social media and has strong relationship to a number of alternate media websites where we hope to influence world opinion. It is done out of hope. I hope we can create effective contributions to the dissident sphere in the US, UK and other Western countries and have a constructive impact on popular opinion, particularly skepticism with regard to the state and its narratives. One of the best descriptions of the Mont Order would be that it is a product and information sharing society. As creators, we share our products. As readers and analysts, we share information.

Google: "mont order society"

Yes, sometimes the Mont Order is referred to as the Mont Order society. Of course, that isn't some kind of longer official name of the group. It is a good description, though. As I said, we are a product and information sharing society. We are like a "society" or "association", but I view it all more as a list of contacts. I hope we can all be closely aligned, but in practice that is not always the case. I do believe that whatever collective sharing of stories does occur through the shared accounts, whether on Twitter or elsewhere, has a definite positive impacts on our collective reach, influence and credibility. Such activity has only grown so far, although I am pessimistic about the long-term prospects of an association being gathered and run on social media. You might say it is the norm now for societies to digitize themselves and become online forums, but I think something more enduring is needed. For the foreseeable future, our "society" will continue to survive by dispersing its influence through several independent media outlets, despite growing pressure on such outlets by hostile governments and corporations seeking dominance in the information space. I hope we and our friends win on this information front, but history often has other plans than what we desire. I am constantly thinking about other fronts that can be used to meet the needs of dissidents but it is far too early to talk about them and no-one else is yet talking about them, either.

Google: "mont order secret society"



Sure, some online work-spaces of the Mont Order are locked down for members only. The group itself is clearly not secret, so the description of "secret society" would seem to be inaccurate, unless there is another group using our name that does not reveal itself.

"Learn"

You can learn all you need to about the Mont Order by using the subscription links available and reading information pages held at the Mont unofficial information site lordre.net and sympathetic websites. Also just search using Google to see if your query has already been answered.

"I subscribe to the Facebook group and read the articles as they are published. Would like to understand more about Mont Order and it's (sic) people"

There is really not much more to show. We do have work-spaces for members only, but you would need to be a member to see them. The subject matter of the Mont Order is obscure for most people. The only significant barrier to learning about us is not knowing we exist in the first place. Once you break that barrier, you can pretty easily find everything you want to find.

"I’m someone whose (sic) very intrigued by your work! And i would like to learn more if you would grant me the opportunity"

To really learn more, the best way would be to just join the Order. A Mont Order online course at openlearning.com even exists for this purpose. Following the whole process would not only allow you to really learn who we are and what we do, but also allow you to influence us and help decide the course of our actions. We are very open to anyone who can demonstrate a keen ability to decipher world events, with particular interest in politics and technology. But to be accepted as a member, you really need to have some product or privilege you want to share with us. That is really what glues the group together. If you have a book or a blog that aligns with ours, that is absolutely what we are looking for.

7 February 2018

#Book review: The Amant Chronicles (#scifi by @brunnabendmj)


The Amant Chronicles, authored 2017 by M. J. Brunnabend, comprises an enthralling science fiction tale adapted well to the needs of die-hard fans of the genre. The book even stands out as being among the very best independently authored works of its genre.

Among the characters, Amant Ducet is an alien-human hybrid, whose adventure takes place centuries in the future. Human girl Jennifer Winston's abduction creates the background for a story filled with thrills, featuring interstellar intrigue, spies, and conflict. Action and mystery await.

Enchanting romance is also added to this high-velocity space opera story. Strong female characters dominate the plot, and mystery drives readers on desperate to know what happens next.


Independent publisher Maquis Books - now named Harry's Bookshelf - placed The Amant Chronicles on its shelves in January, describing the book as "magic" on 27 January.

Clubof.info's score: ★★★★★★★★☆ 9/10

Delivered by Email

Featured

Clubofinfo World Commentaries

Follow by Email

Mont Experts

Follow by Email

Follow Me on Twitter