youtube.com
Only about 0.74% of 2016 election related Tweets have any connection to any Russian actors according to internal Twitter review. Similarly Facebook finds that only 0.004% of any 2016 election related posts had any connection to any Russian actors. (Actors as in influencers to be clear not as in drama actors)
This video is from Russia Today, take that as you may.
Other urls found in this thread:
judiciary.senate.gov
twitter.com
More direct info available here
judiciary.senate.gov
From the source listed
Notice the wording here "Our Efforts to Disrupt this Activity Had Significant Impact" stated as if it was an issue to begin with despite how small of a portion both the tweets and impressions are of the total election traffic on the site.
Nobody intrested?
Alrighty, have a nice day then.
Bump
Would love to see the other side's bot numbers.
When I was checking to make sure I wasn't accidentally sliding anything I saw someone with a no reply thread say that Hillary's tweets got more retweets by Russian bots than Trump's tweets. It might be somewhere in since that's where I got the link from in the first place. I'll check through really quick then go anythingbutgoogle search it if I can't find anything about it there.
that's still almost 1% of the tweets, and if they get big enough the number of them doesn't matter, it's the fact if how prominent they are
>Russia Today
try reddit, no one on Sup Forums gives a shit because no one on Sup Forums was stupid enough to believe the LE RUSSIANS CONTROL EVERYTHING narrative because it's frankly embarrassing for the sake of the US in the first place
Go smell some tulips
Fake and gay. The media told me Russians brainwashed rural and suburban Americans.
Percentages are easy to grab normies attention.
Here we go, from page ten of the PDF so start reading the "engagment secotion for this bit in particular"
>
We first reviewed the accounts’ engagement with Tweets from @HillaryClinton and
@realDonaldTrump. Our data showed that, during the relevant time period, a total of 1,625
@HillaryClinton Tweets were Retweeted approximately 8.3 million times. Of those Retweets,
32,254—or 0.39%—were from Russian-linked automated accounts. Tweets from
@HillaryClinton received approximately 18 million likes during this period; 111,326—or
0.62%—were from Russian-linked automated accounts. The volume of engagements with
@realDonaldTrump Tweets from Russian-linked automated accounts was higher, but still
relatively small. The 851 Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account during this period were
Retweeted more than 11 million times; 416,632—or 3.66%—of those Retweets were from
Russian-linked, automated accounts. Those Tweets received approximately 27 million likes
across our platform; 480,346—or 1.8%—of those likes came from Russian-linked automated
accounts.
>
To be clear, the numbers being reported on actually encapsulate both bots involved in tweeting things from both Hillary and Trump, but the numbers are pretty fucking close between the two of them with only a modest "Trump-Bump" to steal a NYT term ;^)
Go drink some tea.
Ehh, the information in there is interesting and relevant to people who actually follow politics. Even if you never thought that the Russian conspiracy had any weight (if you ask me it really didn't) then all of this could be saved/committed to memory for use in debate later.
They still reached like 130 million americans.
This is just a diversion tactic. .7% of the trillions of posts made about the election is still a lot of posts. Do these numbers also reflect reposts / shares?
fair enough, i wasn't trying to be dismissive with the "try reddit" remark, i genuinely meant try seeing how their cognitive dissonance might deal with it.
>Russiatoday
Yea, but here's the thing, even if these tweets did reach a lot of Americans, they were vastly outweighed by the other Tweets and such going around.
See Basically the Tweets only accounted for 0.33% of the engagement, meaning that the vast majority of the content that people were seeing, liking, and retweeting was coming from non-Russian sources. That being said the chance that any of it swayed any one individual more than any of the material floating around is rather slim.
And to be frank, so what if it did influence some people? The only shit that I personally think was a problem was the "text to vote" shit (which was hilarious but besides the point) which actively took people out of the process. Other than kind of shit that I have no issue with foreign actors trying to engage with our political processes. I never saw why it was a problem and nobody had ever explained it to me in a way that made any kind of rational sense.
Also, why the fuck do we care that it's specifically Russia? Why do we not give a fuck about any of the other countries trying to "interfere"? How many tweets and impressions came from the UK? Shouldn't they be told to fuck off too if we're telling Russia to fuck off, or does is their fuckery somehow legitimate?
Ehh, it is what it is.
Frankly I've been thinking of writing up a script at some point to just filter out all posts that mention reddit or leddit or any permutation of the two, since I find that any post mention the site isn't worth my time. Yours included.
Seriously? Why the fuck do people care about reddit? I get that sometimes people from reddit come over here and act like newfags, but that can be said about literally any site? The most relevant fucking thing about the site is that people bait people here about it all the time and as far as I can tell it's all just pointless shitposting.
/rant
Look at my dude, that's where they get most of the information from anyway.
Alright, worth one more bump before I fuck off in case anyone is still intrested.
I'll admit that it's not to much to discuss, unless you wanted to get into the initiatives and such and their methods, but it's still interesting stuff.
Russian Narrative btfo yet again. Can't wait for CNN to run this oh wait
WHO FUCKING CARES HOW MANY TWEETS WERE TIED TO RUSSIA??!?!!?!?!?
I'm fucking sick of the MSM making excuses for Hillary's loss. So what if some Russian retards said "Hillary is a big, fat, stupid, doody head." That's clearly not why she lost the election.
And here's another one for you cunts. Much of the stuff her critics were saying about her was FUCKING TRUE!!
That's the thing, even though the proportions by all means are completley insignificant the MSM and all the different government organizations that have been wasting their time on this are doubling down on it and saying that no matter how small it is it's still inexcusable.
They've invested too much to stop now, if they admit that it was literally nothing then in their minds they'll look even worse than they do now. At the very least only a moderate majority of the US thinks their liars, if they admit it then everyone will KNOW they're liars.
They'll just keep on going until either people star buying into it en masse or until their lies run them straight into the ground and then down another six feet.
Unfortunately the former will happen before the latter if they're allowed to run their stories completley unchecked, so it's up to people like us to make sure that the truth is out there and to make sure that there's an alternitive source that's willing to give light to the context behind the numbers instead of brushing all context aside like it's nothing.
I mean, I wish we could drop it too, but Hamburger Hill won't take itself...