I believe the U.S. intelligence agencies, that the Russians meddled in our presidential campaign last year, and think it deserves further examination. Unfortunately, any discussion of this subject gets mixed into a discussion about potential involvement by the Trump campaign. Whether anybody from the campaign colluded is a separate issue from the Russian meddling. Forget collusion and stay focused on Russia trying to mold public perception!
Separately, the Federal Communications Council (FCC) was proceeding to shut down net neutrality. Part of that process is to solicit feedback from the citizenry. Apparently, there were two million fake responses. Literally thousands of dead people apparently sent emails from the grave. It's not funny.
I can understand what Russia gains from the U.S. electing a Russia-friendly president, but I don't see what the Russians gain from a regulatory agency transferring control of the internet to cable companies and other internet service providers. This makes it possible that someone besides Russia is trying to mold public perception.
You may argue that molding public's perception of what they need is done everyday by the advertising industry, and you would be correct, but this is different. Somebody was trying to mold public policy at the FCC. Who and why?
Some may argue that non-Fox news is all fake news, but is public opinion becoming fake-public opinion? If public opinion is polluted, why should politicians pay any attention to it?
If Proctor & Gamble can tell you the best soap, what is wrong with the Russians telling you who would be the best president. What is wrong with a mystery manipulator encouraging you to surrender control of the internet? The mystery is the problem. As Justice Brandeis said a century ago "sunlight is the best disinfectant."
Keep digging . . .
Separately, the Federal Communications Council (FCC) was proceeding to shut down net neutrality. Part of that process is to solicit feedback from the citizenry. Apparently, there were two million fake responses. Literally thousands of dead people apparently sent emails from the grave. It's not funny.
I can understand what Russia gains from the U.S. electing a Russia-friendly president, but I don't see what the Russians gain from a regulatory agency transferring control of the internet to cable companies and other internet service providers. This makes it possible that someone besides Russia is trying to mold public perception.
You may argue that molding public's perception of what they need is done everyday by the advertising industry, and you would be correct, but this is different. Somebody was trying to mold public policy at the FCC. Who and why?
Some may argue that non-Fox news is all fake news, but is public opinion becoming fake-public opinion? If public opinion is polluted, why should politicians pay any attention to it?
If Proctor & Gamble can tell you the best soap, what is wrong with the Russians telling you who would be the best president. What is wrong with a mystery manipulator encouraging you to surrender control of the internet? The mystery is the problem. As Justice Brandeis said a century ago "sunlight is the best disinfectant."
Keep digging . . .
