Är Flashback forum utsatta för yttre påverkansoperationer?

Over the past four years, industry, government and civil society have worked to build our collective response to influence operations (IO), which we define as “coordinated efforts to manipulate or corrupt public debate for a strategic goal.”

Since 2017, our security teams at Facebook have identified and removed over 150 covert influence operations for violating our policy against Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior (CIB). These operations targeted public debate across both established and emerging social media platforms, as well as local blogs and major newspapers and magazines. They were foreign and domestic, run by governments, commercial entities, politicians, and conspiracy and fringe political groups.

However, when a threat actor conceals their identity through deceptive b ehavior , the public will lack sufficient signals to judge who they are, how trustworthy their content is, or what their motivation might be. Platforms like Facebook have unique visibility into such behavior when it takes place on our services, and are best suited to uncover and remove these surreptitious, often highly adversarial campaigns. This is why from 2017 through mid-2021, we have taken down and publicly reported on over 150 covert influence operations that violated our policy against Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior (“CIB”). They originated from over 50 countries worldwide and targeted both foreign and domestic public debate.

Since we published our first IO white paper in 2017, threat actors have continued to evolve
their techniques. Here are some of the key trends and tactics we’ve observed:

1. A shift from “wholesale” to “retail” IO : Threat actors pivot from widespread, noisy deceptive campaigns to smaller, more targeted operations.
2. Blurring of the lines between authentic public debate and manipulation : Both foreign and domestic campaigns attempt to mimic authentic voices and co-opt real people into amplifying their operations.

3. Perception Hacking : Threat actors seek to capitalize on the public’s fear of IO to create the false perception of widespread manipulation of electoral systems, even if there is no evidence.

4. IO as a service: Commercial actors offer their services to run influence operations both domestically and internationally, providing deniability to their customers and making IO available to a wider range of threat actors.

5. Increased operational security: Sophisticated I O actors have significantly improved their ability at hiding their identity, using technical obfuscation and witting and unwitting proxies.

6. Platform diversification: To evade detection and diversify risks, o perations target multiple platforms (including smaller services) and the media, and rely on their own websites to carry on the campaign even when other parts of that campaign are shut down by any one company.

CIB is any coordinated network of accounts, Pages and Groups on our platforms that centrally relies on fake accounts to mislead Facebook and people using our services about who is behind the operation and what they are doing.

Russia continues to be the largest producer of disinformation on social media, with the country being the source of the most fake and misleading Facebook accounts, according to a new report.

A report from Facebook published Wednesday revealed that the social media giant has uncovered disinformation campaigns in more than 50 countries since 2017 and that Russia is the top source of "coordinated inauthentic behavior," with 27 of the fake networks identified.

Most of the shills don't really believe in what they are saying nor do they really care but what they do care about is their $15-$25 per hour job. It's a tough economy and they need the money. They don't want to lose their jobs so they hold the con the entire time even though they know its all bullshit.

Note: I am posting a tldr at the bottom of each of the 25 rules of disinformation.

Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it — especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

tldr; Keep your mouth shut. Loose lips sink ships. Don't let the people find out what we are doing to them or else they will march on us and remove us from power.

2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the “How dare you!” gambit.

tldr; As soon as the truth surfaces, become annoyed and give them your "How dare you!" face. How dare you speak against "American Hero" John McCain. How dare you speak against Zionism? Whatever it is, avoid talking about the truth and attack the truth teller.

3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such “arguable rumors”. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a “wild rumor” which can have no basis in fact.

tldr; Quickly dismiss all facts that are harmful to the deep state "rumors".

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

tldr; You can't find truth head on. You have to find some weaker element of the arguement and attack that. For example, if someone says, "Soros funded Antifa on the rainy day of August 12." It was raining on August 12 so they will attack the truth agent for "lying" about the weather and avoid talking about the real truth of Soros funding Antifa. Note: The Truth telller may have innocently mistaken the weather patterns but the shills will attack him for it claiming he intentionally tried to mislead the public. The idea is to sway the readers from the Soros/Antifa connection onto the weather.

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as “kooks”, “right-wing”, “liberal”, “left-wing”, “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”, “radicals”, “militia”, “racists”, “religious fanatics”, “sexual deviates”, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

tldr; Shills basically attack the truth teller in hopes that it will deter the public in supporting that person lest they be called names as well. This is a classic bullying tactic.

6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning — simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.

tldr; This means that shills occasionally make wild accusations against truth tellers but when the truth teller confronts them, they simply don't reply because they don't have an argument to back up their claims.

7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

tlrd; Shills gaslight and manipulate the truth teller to get off the topic of the truth. (Anything to NOT talk about the truth I guess since the truth decimates the deep state and their shills).

8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough “jargon” and “minutiae” to illustrate you are “one who knows”, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

tldr; Shills will simply pretend to be people who they are not to win the argument. They will say, "I know because I am a scientist!". "I know because I studied political science!" "I know because I live there, I worked there, I taught there, ect..." It's all a bunch of bullshit though. They will say anything to win an argument and cover for the deep state.

9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

tldr; Shills are taught to ignore any evidence no matter how good the evidence is. If we show them a video of Soros eating a baby, they will call it fake. If we show them Soros himself in the Antifa crowds, they will say he just happened to be walking by on that same street (pure coincidence). They will say anything to cover for the deep state no matter how stupid it sounds.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

tldr; Shills will call anything outside of breaking news "old news" as if we are supposed to forgive and forget the older crimes against humanity (ie Clinton Foundation).