Feckless WaPo Prints Disinfo About “Russian Trolls”

This is classic propaganda

Over the last several days, Kremlin propagandists, far-left tankies and controlled opposition have used this article as a “gotcha” to push the false narrative that Russia “had little influence on 2016 voters.”

The Washington Post should retract this propaganda immediately.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/09/russian-trolls-twitter-had-little-influence-2016-voters/

The issue with the story is that the study is extremely limited in scope and utterly fails to understand or address how Russian influence actually works.

The only thing the study measures is direct influence from identified Internet Research Agency (IRA) accounts and extrapolates “influence” from that. This is meaningless. Russian influence in the 2016 election was not primarily from IRA “Russian trolls” it was from compromised Americans.

The subhead is a pure lie:

“A study finds minimal impact from Russian influence operations on Twitter in the Trump-Clinton presidential race.”

This may as well have been written by the Kremlin. It conflates a tiny part of Russian influence with all Russian influence. This is disinformation. It should be retracted.

The study takes every opportunity to minimize and deflect from the psyops being run by Americans like Mike Flynn on behalf of the Russians.

How Mike Flynn Stole the 2016 Election - in Two Minutes

The study is not an unbiased look at foreign influence, it’s disinformation designed to minimize it.

“Only 1% of users accounted for 70% of exposures” is a tell. The “1%” were Americans who were compromised and working to overturn the election. These were people like Kremlin puppet Donald Trump’s social media director Justin McConney aka “Microchip,” neo-Nazi Russian assets like Jack Posobiec, Mike Cernovich, Baked Alaska, and Mike Flynn Jr., and amoral Republicans who were perfectly happy to knowingly parrot Russian talking points.

“Russian influence campaigns was eclipsed by content from domestic news media” fails to understand the level of influence the Russians had — and have — on the press. For example, the Washington Post.

And this conclusion makes very clear what the purpose of the study is:

“The results have implications for understanding the limits of election interference campaigns on social media.”

No they fucking don’t.

The only thing the data actually says is that there was a huge ramp in IRA accounts tweeting disinformation leading up to the election. It says nothing about how that disinformation was used.

Also, how does a study purporting to report on “Russian Trolls” not include “Guccifer” who was identified as a Russian cutout, or Wikileaks run by Kremlin asset Julian Assange? Just those two accounts launched and fed Pizzagate which was being promoted by Kremlin propagandists like Mike Flynn’s employee Tracy Diaz.

Tracy “Beanz” Diaz: The Creation of a Russian Propagandist

The study examined a tiny part of Russian influence, failed to show how that influence was spread, and then completely misinterpreted the data in their conclusions which were then spread to the readers of the Post.

If the Washington Post needs to see how Russian influence works, they need only look at how the false story they printed is being weaponized by Kremlin propagandists.

Matt Taibbi @mtaibbi

How interesting that this is coming out now. Will the Washington Post address the countless stories they wrote hyping Russian influence on the 2016 race? The Pulitzer they won for such coverage?

craig newmark @craignewmark

The Cybersecurity 202: Russian trolls on Twitter had little influence on 2016 voters Via @timstarks @aaronjschaffer https://t.co/ks8ynwATRx

Mike Rothschild (no relation) @rothschildmd

This is also true of the growth of QAnon - homegrown influencers were much more important to spreading Q and its related conspiracy theories than any known foreign-based effort. It doesn't mean they had *no* impact - just a minor one.

Olivier Knox @OKnox

new study finds Russian trolls on Twitter had little influence on voters in Trump’s 2016 election victory. @timstarks @aaronjschaffer https://t.co/e0ldbKdQnG

Breitbart News @BreitbartNews

According to a recent study, Russian disinformation and misinformation campaigns on social media had little influence on voters during the 2016 election.

trib.alDemocrat Narrative Falls Apart: Study Finds Russian Trolls Had Little Influence on 2016 VotersAccording to a recent study, Russian disinformation and misinformation campaigns on social media had little influence on voters during the 2016 election. Discussing Russia’s alleged influence on the election, a longtime leftist narrative, one of the report’s authors said, “My personal sense coming o…

TheBlaze @theblaze

Washington Post admits years later that Russian trolls 'had no measurable impact in changing minds or influencing voter behavior'

dlvr.itWashington Post admits years later that Russian trolls ‘had no measurable impact in changing minds or influencing voter behavior’The Washington Post, whose journalists were awarded for peddling the discredited “Russia Hoax” narrative, has admitted that so-called Russian trolls “had no measurable impact in changing minds or influencing voter behavior” ahead of the 2016 presidential election.What prompted the Post to call into…

The Washington Post is following the New York Times down the pathway of deflecting and minimizing Russian influence by printing articles which allow propagandists to validate their lies.

DEBUNK: New York Times

Mainstream media has an enormous blind spot when it comes to Russian influence. The reason? Russian influence.

Flynn and Russia: The Enormous Blind Spot in the Press

#ArrestMikeFlynn