Move Over, Jayson Blair: Meet Hamilton 68, the New King of Media Fraud (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    SaintForLife

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Oct 5, 2019
    Messages
    7,313
    Reaction score
    3,404
    Location
    Madisonville
    Offline
    The Twitter Files reveal that one of the most common news sources of the Trump era was a scam, making ordinary American political conversations look like Russian spywork

    Screenshot_20230128_173110_Substack Reader.jpg


    Former FBI counterintelligence agent and “disinformation” expert Clint Watts, the spokesman for Hamilton

    Ambitious media frauds Stephen Glass and Jayson Blair crippled the reputations of the New Republic and New York Times, respectively, by slipping years of invented news stories into their pages. Thanks to the Twitter Files, we can welcome a new member to their infamous club: Hamilton 68.

    If one goes by volume alone, this oft-cited neoliberal think-tank that spawned hundreds of fraudulent headlines and TV news segments may go down as the single greatest case of media fabulism in American history. Virtually every major news organization in America is implicated, including NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times and the Washington Post. Mother Jones alone did at least 14 stories pegged to the group’s “research.” Even fact-checking sites like Politifact and Snopes cited Hamilton 68 as a source.

    Hamilton 68 was and is a computerized “dashboard” designed to be used by reporters and academics to measure “Russian disinformation.” It was the brainchild of former FBI agent (and current MSNBC “disinformation expert”) Clint Watts, and backed by the German Marshall Fund and the Alliance for Securing Democracy, a bipartisan think-tank. The latter’s advisory panel includes former acting CIA chief Michael Morell, former Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul, former Hillary for America chair John Podesta, and onetime Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol.



    The Twitter Files expose Hamilton 68 as a sham:

    The secret ingredient in Hamilton 68’s analytic method was a list of 644 accounts supposedly linked “to Russian influence activities online.” It was hidden from the public, but Twitter was in a unique position to recreate Hamilton’s sample by analyzing its Application Program Interface (API) requests, which is how they first “reverse-engineered” Hamilton’s list in late 2017. The company was concerned enough about the proliferation of news stories linked to Hamilton 68 that it also ordered a forensic analysis. Note the second page below lists many of the different types of shadow-banning techniques that existed at Twitter even in 2017, buttressing the “Twitter’s Secret Blacklist” thread by Bari Weiss last month. Here you see categories ranging from “Trends Blacklist” to “Search Blacklist” to “NSFW High Precision.” Twitter was checking to see how many of Hamilton’s accounts were spammy, phony, or bot-like. Note that out of 644 accounts, just 36 were registered in Russia, and many of those were associated with RT.

    Examining further, Twitter execs were shocked. The accounts Hamilton 68 claimed were linked to “Russian influence activities online” were not only overwhelmingly English-language (86%), but mostly “legitimate people,” largely in the U.S., Canada, and Britain. Grasping right away that Twitter might be implicated in a moral outrage, they wrote that these account-holders “need to know they’ve been unilaterally labeled Russian stooges without evidence or recourse.”

    Other comments in internal company emails:

    “These accounts are neither strongly Russian nor strongly bots.”

    “No evidence to support the statement that the dashboard is a finger on the pulse of Russian information ops.”

    “Hardly evidence of a massive influence campaign.”

    Declared Trust and Safety chief Yoel Roth: “I think we need to just call this out on the bullshirt it is.”

    The two founders of Hamilton 68, the blue-and-red team of former counselor to Marco Rubio Jamie Fly and Hillary for America Foreign Policy Advisor Laura Rosenberger, told Politico they couldn’t reveal the names This was not faulty science. It was a scam. Instead of tracking how “Russia” influenced American attitudes, Hamilton 68 simply collected a handful of mostly real, mostly American accounts, and described their organic conversations as Russian scheming. As Roth put it, “Virtually any conclusion drawn from [the dashboard] will take conversations in conservative circles on Twitter and accuse them of being Russian.”

     
    I'm rewriting history by posting tweets that show Twitter employees saying Hamilton 68 was BS?
    What you present is skewed, because your sources skew the facts. So, yes, in a way you’re supporting the rewriting of history. It’s been pointed out.
     

    Read that thread from Matthew Sheffield regarding how mainstream journalists do their job vs the likes of Taibbi and Greenwald. Whereas there may be some bias in MSM reporting (the topic they choose for example), the mainstream media largely operate in good faith and apply journalistic standards. On the contrary, like Taibbi, he is cherry picking. Musk is selectively releasing information to Taibbi to spin a certain narrative. As MT has already given an example.

    And if you think there is team play in the MSM, read the headlines from a few days ago when the economic data was released. Many had "biden averted a recession" when it can easily be "biden lead a successful economy that is emerging from a worldwide pandemic". And have you seen any stories of the inflation lately????
    You actually believe what you said in the bolded part? Why don't you check out the exhaustive article in this thread and see if you still think what you described about.

    I'm not saying MT didn't give me an example, but can you point it out to me? It doesn't ring a bell, but I probably did see it previously.
     
    Recently an internal Twitter email was released which showed that Musk had personally demanded that a journalist he didn’t like be removed from Twitter. He had previously lied and said he had not done that and pretended the journalist was removed for a rules violation.

    I didn’t save it, because I don’t care that much about it, but it just illustrates that what you are reading about “the Twitter files” is a carefully curated narrative of what Musk wants you to see, and nothing else. And no responsible journalist would be a part of it, because of that very fact.
     
    Recently an internal Twitter email was released which showed that Musk had personally demanded that a journalist he didn’t like be removed from Twitter. He had previously lied and said he had not done that and pretended the journalist was removed for a rules violation.

    I didn’t save it, because I don’t care that much about it, but it just illustrates that what you are reading about “the Twitter files” is a carefully curated narrative of what Musk wants you to see, and nothing else. And no responsible journalist would be a part of it, because of that very fact.
    Its totally fair to criticize Musk for doing that, but the part you are leaving out is the Twitter Files exposed the government pressuring Twitter to censor or ban accounts which is against the 1st ammendment
     
    Its totally fair to criticize Musk for doing that, but the part you are leaving out is the Twitter Files exposed the government pressuring Twitter to censor or ban accounts which is against the 1st ammendment
    Except it didn’t. The Biden campaign - he wasn’t president - asked for nude pictures of Hunter to be removed. There were other false tweets that were reported, same as anyone else can ask to have false info removed. The Trump campaign did the same thing, but we don’t have examples of that, because either Musk isn’t releasing those or Taibbi isn’t reporting them.

    The Trump government - we are talking about the 2020 campaign, right? - also asked Twitter to remove medical disinformation. There were no threats or anything to supply any “pressure”. In fact, Twitter only acted on about 40% of the requests. And the government just did what any Twitter user can do - report a tweet that is false and call it to Twitter‘s attention.

    So like the fair reporting I posted, you can have a conversation about whether the government should use the reporting features like anyone else can use or not. But to say there were threats made or pressure applied just isn’t honest. No threats and no pressure have been shown.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom