False and misleading posts about the Ukraine conflict continue to go viral on major social media platforms, as Russia’s invasion of the country extends beyond 500 days.

      • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It it me or have we seen a huge influx of Russian apologists on this community in the last few days? I’m not sure if they’re tankies or the right as horseshoe is in full effect right now but it’s a bit concerning how they’re coming out the woodwork all of a sudden. I guess they could just be Russian troll farms following the audience to a new space?

        • MercuryUprising@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Almost guaranteed to be trolls, paid or of the useful idiot variety. I’ve seen them for the last week or so, as Lemmy got big enough to be on their radar now.

          Here’s a rundown on how paid trolls operate. They have quotas of thousands of posts per day each:
          https://www.businessinsider.com/russian-troll-slayer-went-undercover-at-a-troll-factory-2019-3?IR=T

          You may have noticed some familiar names in the article. It’s also worth mentioning that China’s 50 cent army is estimated at making 400 million+ posts per year, and that Harvard estimate was from something like 2016. Common sense solution, if it smells like a rat, treat it like a rat until proven otherwise.

          • paciencia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            please stop using this stupid and derogatory term. There are many kinds of leftists that try to make a nuanced analysis of past socialist experiments. While I consider myself a leftist who takes kindly to socialist countries past trials and tribulations, I for one can’t fathom why so many marxists choose to support a reactionary regime that frequently flirts with fascism. Still, the word “tankie” is just a strawman that liberals use to shame leftists that dare to conduct real analysis of socialist history. It has lost all meaning and nowadays stands as the liberal version of “woke”.

            • Lols [they/them]@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago
              • im not a liberal
              • im clearly not using ‘tankie’ to shame leftists that dare to conduct real analyses of socialist history, im clearly using it to shame leftists who choose to support a reactionary regime that frequently flirts with fascism
              • it has plenty of meaning, thats why you felt the need to talk about not understanding many Marxists’ support of a reactionary regime that frequently flirts with fascism
              • no
              • paciencia@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                okay we might agree with most stuff but c’mon u know that silly libs always use that term to shut up discourse on marxist’s perspectives. we might be in the know but it’s confusing to most people

        • ghariksforge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          1 year ago

          Those of us who don’t live in the western world take a different view of world events. It does not make us trolls.

      • ghariksforge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        1 year ago

        For example, when the NordStream exploded, we were told that Russia did it. It was considered disinformation by the western authorities to question this. It turned out a year later it was a group of Ukrainians.

    • Gorbachof@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lol, it’s adorable how many people think NATO has any control over global news networks. It kind of flattering that you think the west is that much more powerful than the rest of the world

    • towerful@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Pretty sure it talks about misinformation, which is not factually accurate information.
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misinformation

      So, nobody decides.
      It’s not factually accurate, so it’s misinformation.
      It’s like asking “when something is covered in water, who decides that it is wet?”. The majority of the time, the item is going to be wet.

      Disinformation is deliberate misinformation.
      Proving something is misinformation is likely trivial compared to proving a malicious or deliberate intent behind presenting the misinformation (thus making it disinformation).
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disinformation
      But disinformation is just pointing the finger at someone over misinformation.
      Clearing up misinformation will hamper any disinformation campaign.

      • ghariksforge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        I believe in objective reality. I don’t believe in giving someone the authority to decide what objective reality is.

        • prole@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          So you don’t believe in science? Peer-reviewed studies? It’s only valid if you make the hypotheses, and do the experiments yourself?

          • ghariksforge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            How much of what you follow on the news follows the scientific process?

            I do believe in science. But I also believe that humans will lie and distort the truth when it suits their purpose.

            • prole@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              So you do believe in giving someone the authority to “decide” (or really just tell you) what objective reality is. But, what, only when the thing they tell you comports with your previous understanding of that reality?

              • ghariksforge@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Let me put this in simpler language you’ll understand: I don’t think it is a good idea to empower the government, or some corporation to be the arbiter of what the truth is. Because they will inevitably abuse this power.

                It does not mean I reject the concept of objective reality, or our ability to learn it.

                  • ghariksforge@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Do you want a Trump appointed judge to decide if what you are saying is misinformation?

                    Replace Trump with the crazy person from your country.