have any of you done a reddit search for the link?
Its been posted fucking everywhere. over 70 times in the last 24 hours!
I honestly can't remember ever searching for a single article that has been posted over 70 times like that.
It's received thousands of upvotes, some more than even the post on /r/conspiracy, just because only 6 people have voted one way or the other on the /r/politics one doesn't make it censorship
But what do I know, I'm just one of those guys who keeps getting called a shill, and I doubt this article is going to help alleviate that and turn me back into a real boy again.
You must now be aware that putting something in the spamfilter still renders the post viable, while affecting the ability of the story to be voted on from the new queue.
You must also not be aware that each subreddit has approached the censorship differently. For example, worldnews likes to allow two articles out of the spamfilter. Then they remove the one that gets more upvotes, leaving the other topic to fall into obscurity.
/r/technology mods actually use automod wiki settings to cull any unapproved words or topics, and this article was something that they continually removed.
The goal here is to keep the story from /r/all at all costs and if you're not aware of how the spamfitler works or how mods operate in the defaults then you would be well suited to keep your hostile tone to yourself.
I wasn't aware it had been filtered. It was on my front page via several subs. So whatever steps the mods have taken, they havn't been successful. This post has still been seen by thousands of eyes.
edit: I'm not really very aware of how the spamfiltering/modding systems work on reddit. I've been interested in the posts and the comments. I don't rely on reddit or any other single source for my news/information
no my point still stands, it is still all over the place, even tho i didnt know the /r/politics one was filtered. And I still get called a shill just for making points, eve if not for this one.
Aren't you doing the same thing to TheAdamMorrison that the article is talking about? You're either just mad and rambling or you actually are trying to destroy his reputation. Is mine next after making this comment?
I'm not attacking anyone. I'm stating an absolute truth that can be verified thru searching. I am talking about a form of me being harassed thru this constant labeling and name calling simply because I often take a skeptical position and play devil's advocate.
I'm sorry if that's pushing a line I'll stop referencing it directly, but I think the mods can look at the history and see that I am a reasoned and polite commenter despite the names I get called. Banning me would be way out of line.
If relaying the fact that I get called a shill (which is a violation of rule 10) is a violation of a rule then I'll stop.
If it is however I suggest that you clarify it in the sidebar because it doesn't appear to be that way. I though I could speak freely about things people have said so long as I was talking about things that you can look up in my history.
This all stems from an article about shills. All I can think about when I read the article and see the discussions of it is how many times I get called a shill simply for the views I hold and my ability to argue them. So I felt it wasn't out of place for me to reference it. Again if someone who is a mod and who's account isn't 2 months old would like to clarify I will gladly oblige. My only aim is reasonable discourse.
What often can happen to this sub is organic, often from getting exposure from the front page or at the very most stems from a post on /r/conspiratard . Not quite the organized attacks that those slides are referencing. And perpetrated by individuals not intelligence and security agencies like the article is discussing. But that, I'd imagine, is precisely where we differ.
Theyre getting taken down at a fever pitch. All over the front page this morning. None of those posts are up anymore. I thought my history teacher was making this shit up.
I read /r/all every day, for the past couple years. Several times a day. I am also a professional data analyst, to interject a bit at least to my skills to noticing irregularities. All of the Snowden leaks have been near the top of Reddit very quickly. This one is getting "old" in internet time, and it never came close to the top. If Reddit was my job, I would be spinning off time to devote to figuring out why that irregularity occurred. Part of it may be due to Greenwald running his own site recently, maybe people don't know about it. But all it takes is one link to get upvoted, and if you search you find tons of submitted links.
The last Firstlook article (pertaining to the use of drones and using cell phone data to assassinate people) went pretty high on the front page, so i dont think the fact that this source is new plays into the lack of traction.
That's interesting. We have that same anomaly here in /r/conspiracy regarding cliché posts and images. You seem to attribute it to linking it to other websites, but I suspect that they run a form of up- and downvote script. Sometimes, there's a discrepancy between comment- and post upvotes.
It's not surprising. If Reddit gets millions of visitors per day, controlling it would be their top priority. Check top posts on /r/conspiracy this last year and it's all Snowden images. It could be because of the short attention span of people and mobile use, but I think there's more to it.
It's on a few but it doesn't have the traction it deserves. And yes, it really does deserve close scrutiny because of the fucking sinister nature of it. Apart from being spied on, the Five Eyes want to change perceptions about topics being discussed freely on the internet amongst like minded people. It shows that there is a need to change discussions because it is out of control of an editor that is part of their agenda.
A link about Obamas ACA was quickly up voted to the top which claims no one is facing problems and it's all made up by Republicans and the GOP which seems to be the vast majority of blame on /r/politics.
That bit about manipulating online discussions might be a bit esoteric for the general public to digest.
What's more blatantly evil is the stuff about manufacturing false flags, in their words, spreading lies about people to destroy them, including sending e-mails to your friends and family and altering your Facebook page.
Title-text: Saying 'what kind of an idiot doesn't know about the Yellowstone supervolcano' is so much more boring than telling someone about the Yellowstone supervolcano for the first time.
If you read the article carefully, Glenn admits he has no proof, that this is just conjecture. You just have to read nearly to the end before he tells you that.
I'm not saying it isn't true. I'm just saying he tells you at the end of the story he has no proof.
After joining reddit in support of Dr. Ron Paul during the 2012 presidential election, it was obvious this site was full of astroturfing sockpuppets. You can even see it happen on local news sites. Quite a shame, really.
Yeah the not being on Drudge is odd. Matt usually has this type of info front and center. I think the government got to him after Janet Napo said something about Drudge.
Why does it seem eerie? This is a news aggregation site owned by a member of the wealthy elite. Isn't it terribly naive to think they wouldn't censor information that indicates they don't play fair?
I'm not an idealist, I know what reddit inc is up to.
I just like calling them on it, hoping they squirm.
Remember that digg fell because of artificial manipulation, reddit inc knows that and this is why they try to put up the facade of free flowing information. Countering that narrative with threads like this is the only hope for keeping this place in check.
Call me crazy, but I kind of understand why it's being removed. It does break the rules of the default news subs because it's an analysis piece by Glenn Greenwald. It's technically not news. Get a news organization other than Greenwald to do a story on this piece and I think they'll allow it. But I doubt that will actually happen because of how the media is these days.
That's probably because it is an editorial, not an actual news piece. Glenn admits as much at the bottom of the story:
*We submitted numerous questions to GCHQ, including: (1) Does GCHQ in fact engage in “false flag operations” where material is posted to the Internet and falsely attributed to someone else?; (2) Does GCHQ engage in efforts to influence or manipulate political discourse online?; and (3) Does GCHQ’s mandate include targeting common criminals (such as boiler room operators), or only foreign threats?
As usual, they ignored those questions and opted instead to send their vague and nonresponsive boilerplate*
my thinking on that is that GCHQ is a service provider, they prob don't originate operations, just support other groups doing them.
theres a serious size and resource difference between US and UK TLA orgs, in the UK resources are tight, here in the US there are multitudes of ex veterans who need jobs when they leave the military, they go to work for the TLAs and still want to be 'GI Joes' in their new office jobs, so active operations are going to be in vogue, anything to make their new office jobs more exciting and relevant for funding.
just witness how the DHS/FBI/ATF/DEA all think they are paramilitary 'Team Americas' and need all those AR15s and millions of rounds of ammo, they are building a domestic security army of sorts
One of the many pressing stories that remains to be told from the Snowden archive is how western intelligence agencies are attempting to manipulate and control online discourse with extreme tactics of deception and reputation-destruction. It’s time to tell a chunk of that story, complete with the relevant documents.
So it comes from the trove of documents that Snowden leaked.
Some questions for you...
Why are former NSA and security analysts verifying the documents?
Why has the UK and the US said themselves the documents are real and are pursuing prosecution of Snowden and Greenwald including intimidation and deleting hard drives, stealing laptops from Greenwald's home and breaking into Jacob Appelbaums apartment in Berlin?
Why has no one from anywhere claimed that the documents are fake?
The only way this Is fake is if everyone concerned is involved and pushing the narrative.
domestically for US citizens/residents, the concern is the NSA being nosey bastards in our domestic lives, the blanket monitoring of everything everybody does in the US, what they do (snooping) to foreigners is not really of much concern to anybody here in the US.
people outside the US should be concerned about the NSA, but whatever they say and do is relative to their domestic govts, its their problem, their local solution.
two separate problems, each relative to domestic and foreign, but both exclusive.
Its OUR 4th amendment rights in the US being violated, thats the concern of people in the US.
that really didn't address what i posted at all. But thank you for explaining to me that people in the US are concerned that the NSA is infringing on our 4th amendment rights, I had no idea.
man this is the last time i post in r/conspiracy. I even came up with my own conspiracy to share but you all have your own agenda.
Rule 10 - Posts that attack the sub, users or mods will be removed. Accusing another of being a troll or shill is considered an attack. Repeat offenders are subject to a ban.
63 comments
87 ZapPowerz 2014-02-25
Doesn't this blatant censorship completely validate the story? Why yes, yes it does.
-21 [deleted] 2014-02-25
[deleted]
10 amranu1 2014-02-25
The story came out 24 hours ago, the latest stories on r/all are at most 4 hours old.
This hardly invalidates that there were obvious attempts at censorship over the course of the last day, as documented all over this subreddit.
-34 TheAdamMorrison 2014-02-25
have any of you done a reddit search for the link?
Its been posted fucking everywhere. over 70 times in the last 24 hours!
I honestly can't remember ever searching for a single article that has been posted over 70 times like that.
It's received thousands of upvotes, some more than even the post on /r/conspiracy, just because only 6 people have voted one way or the other on the /r/politics one doesn't make it censorship
But what do I know, I'm just one of those guys who keeps getting called a shill, and I doubt this article is going to help alleviate that and turn me back into a real boy again.
42 AssuredlyAThrowAway 2014-02-25
You must now be aware that putting something in the spamfilter still renders the post viable, while affecting the ability of the story to be voted on from the new queue.
You must also not be aware that each subreddit has approached the censorship differently. For example, worldnews likes to allow two articles out of the spamfilter. Then they remove the one that gets more upvotes, leaving the other topic to fall into obscurity.
/r/technology mods actually use automod wiki settings to cull any unapproved words or topics, and this article was something that they continually removed.
The goal here is to keep the story from /r/all at all costs and if you're not aware of how the spamfitler works or how mods operate in the defaults then you would be well suited to keep your hostile tone to yourself.
6 facereplacer2 2014-02-25
I'd give you gold if reddit wasn't being such a cuntmummy right now.
-19 TheAdamMorrison 2014-02-25
I wasn't aware it had been filtered. It was on my front page via several subs. So whatever steps the mods have taken, they havn't been successful. This post has still been seen by thousands of eyes.
edit: I'm not really very aware of how the spamfiltering/modding systems work on reddit. I've been interested in the posts and the comments. I don't rely on reddit or any other single source for my news/information
16 ZapPowerz 2014-02-25
Well now you must feel kind of silly huh?
-7 [deleted] 2014-02-25
[deleted]
1 ZapPowerz 2014-02-25
This is all I have to say:
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2014-02-25/reddit-censors-big-story-about-government-manipulation-and-disruption-interne
-12 TheAdamMorrison 2014-02-25
no my point still stands, it is still all over the place, even tho i didnt know the /r/politics one was filtered. And I still get called a shill just for making points, eve if not for this one.
3 [deleted] 2014-02-25
[deleted]
-4 vector257 2014-02-25
Aren't you doing the same thing to TheAdamMorrison that the article is talking about? You're either just mad and rambling or you actually are trying to destroy his reputation. Is mine next after making this comment?
-5 TheAdamMorrison 2014-02-25
I'm not attacking anyone. I'm stating an absolute truth that can be verified thru searching. I am talking about a form of me being harassed thru this constant labeling and name calling simply because I often take a skeptical position and play devil's advocate.
I'm sorry if that's pushing a line I'll stop referencing it directly, but I think the mods can look at the history and see that I am a reasoned and polite commenter despite the names I get called. Banning me would be way out of line.
3 [deleted] 2014-02-25
[deleted]
-4 TheAdamMorrison 2014-02-25
what rule am I meant to be violating?
tell me and i'll stop it.
If relaying the fact that I get called a shill (which is a violation of rule 10) is a violation of a rule then I'll stop.
If it is however I suggest that you clarify it in the sidebar because it doesn't appear to be that way. I though I could speak freely about things people have said so long as I was talking about things that you can look up in my history.
This all stems from an article about shills. All I can think about when I read the article and see the discussions of it is how many times I get called a shill simply for the views I hold and my ability to argue them. So I felt it wasn't out of place for me to reference it. Again if someone who is a mod and who's account isn't 2 months old would like to clarify I will gladly oblige. My only aim is reasonable discourse.
2 [deleted] 2014-02-25
[deleted]
0 TheAdamMorrison 2014-02-25
What often can happen to this sub is organic, often from getting exposure from the front page or at the very most stems from a post on /r/conspiratard . Not quite the organized attacks that those slides are referencing. And perpetrated by individuals not intelligence and security agencies like the article is discussing. But that, I'd imagine, is precisely where we differ.
11 aircraftcarryur 2014-02-25
Theyre getting taken down at a fever pitch. All over the front page this morning. None of those posts are up anymore. I thought my history teacher was making this shit up.
3 Ferrofluid 2014-02-25
it could never happen here in the US, not in our freedom lovin, constitutional protected conglomer'n'ation.
just ancient history from a land far far away...
1 imnotdrunkipromise 2014-02-25
And now the song is in my head, well done! :)
29 rickscarf 2014-02-25
I read /r/all every day, for the past couple years. Several times a day. I am also a professional data analyst, to interject a bit at least to my skills to noticing irregularities. All of the Snowden leaks have been near the top of Reddit very quickly. This one is getting "old" in internet time, and it never came close to the top. If Reddit was my job, I would be spinning off time to devote to figuring out why that irregularity occurred. Part of it may be due to Greenwald running his own site recently, maybe people don't know about it. But all it takes is one link to get upvoted, and if you search you find tons of submitted links.
11 sushisection 2014-02-25
The last Firstlook article (pertaining to the use of drones and using cell phone data to assassinate people) went pretty high on the front page, so i dont think the fact that this source is new plays into the lack of traction.
6 Hatchetman4NWO 2014-02-25
That's interesting. We have that same anomaly here in /r/conspiracy regarding cliché posts and images. You seem to attribute it to linking it to other websites, but I suspect that they run a form of up- and downvote script. Sometimes, there's a discrepancy between comment- and post upvotes.
It's not surprising. If Reddit gets millions of visitors per day, controlling it would be their top priority. Check top posts on /r/conspiracy this last year and it's all Snowden images. It could be because of the short attention span of people and mobile use, but I think there's more to it.
17 [deleted] 2014-02-25
It's on a few but it doesn't have the traction it deserves. And yes, it really does deserve close scrutiny because of the fucking sinister nature of it. Apart from being spied on, the Five Eyes want to change perceptions about topics being discussed freely on the internet amongst like minded people. It shows that there is a need to change discussions because it is out of control of an editor that is part of their agenda.
A link about Obamas ACA was quickly up voted to the top which claims no one is facing problems and it's all made up by Republicans and the GOP which seems to be the vast majority of blame on /r/politics.
9 IAmNotHariSeldon 2014-02-25
That bit about manipulating online discussions might be a bit esoteric for the general public to digest.
What's more blatantly evil is the stuff about manufacturing false flags, in their words, spreading lies about people to destroy them, including sending e-mails to your friends and family and altering your Facebook page.
15 [deleted] 2014-02-25
honest question:
the last few years we saw reddit change into the infected mess it is today.
do we really need an article by GG to know that ?
to tell people who don't want to hear that we knew all along ?
we knew, especially this sub was the litmus test for the rest of serious reddit.
23 [deleted] 2014-02-25
Do you need an article to confirm this? No. But others do. Not everyone wakes up at the same time.
12 tatonkanator 2014-02-25
10,000
6 xkcd_transcriber 2014-02-25
Image
Title: Ten Thousand
Title-text: Saying 'what kind of an idiot doesn't know about the Yellowstone supervolcano' is so much more boring than telling someone about the Yellowstone supervolcano for the first time.
Comic Explanation
Stats: This comic has been referenced 636 time(s), representing 5.7734% of referenced xkcds.
Questions/Problems | Website | StopReplying
5 dehehn 2014-02-25
Well that's the first time I've ever heard of that. I feel very meta all of the sudden.
9 knomz 2014-02-25
You should see some of the responses to this article. People still don't think it is going on even after reading the article.
10 IAmNotHariSeldon 2014-02-25
I actually couldn't find any decent shilling last night, they might be reworking their tactics, they might have been thrown off balance.
Of course the usual "who cares, you're an idiot if you think is news"comments never stop.
7 knomz 2014-02-25
Yeah they are going to have to change their tactics somewhat with this information being released.
4 IAmNotHariSeldon 2014-02-25
Which is good news no matter which way you slice it. Anything that makes their job harder. They can slow down this story but they can't stop it.
3 Ferrofluid 2014-02-25
that suggests there is central control over the shills and their activities, not assorted groups with different agendas.
2 IAmNotHariSeldon 2014-02-25
There's absolutely gonna be competing, different groups of shills, with different agendas. I didn't mean to suggest otherwise.
I wasn't on the lookout for it, but there was probably some fantastic Oscar-worthy shilling adding fuel to this fire, and for that I am thankful.
4 Ferrofluid 2014-02-25
in the real world there would be many groups, but a lull suggests central control, or somebody sent out memos at least.
3 IAmNotHariSeldon 2014-02-25
There was a big lull, suggesting that most of the shilling is originating at one source with one agenda.
Yeah.
edit: It seemed like a lull, it seemed like a strange atmosphere.. I have no evidence.
2 Ferrofluid 2014-02-25
Stratfor would be one.
2 Ferrofluid 2014-02-25
damn, could have been a fun evening, had to watch a couple of movies before they go back.
3 paypig 2014-02-25
If you read the article carefully, Glenn admits he has no proof, that this is just conjecture. You just have to read nearly to the end before he tells you that.
I'm not saying it isn't true. I'm just saying he tells you at the end of the story he has no proof.
3 facereplacer2 2014-02-25
r/conspiracy: front page of the internet for me.
"All the world's a stage"
And it's all being recorded in front of a live studio audience. When do we walk out on this play?
3 cheeseburgie 2014-02-25
You're right. Let's just delete the posts and stop talking about it.
8 verminform 2014-02-25
After joining reddit in support of Dr. Ron Paul during the 2012 presidential election, it was obvious this site was full of astroturfing sockpuppets. You can even see it happen on local news sites. Quite a shame, really.
5 Ambiguously_Ironic 2014-02-25
Definitely pretty blatant.
2 LimitedHangouts 2014-02-25
here you go
108 up, 17 downvotes
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1yydqc/reddit_censors_big_story_about_government/
4 Fuckyousantorum 2014-02-25
or the BBC news or Drudge etc
3 gizadog 2014-02-25
Yeah the not being on Drudge is odd. Matt usually has this type of info front and center. I think the government got to him after Janet Napo said something about Drudge.
3 streetyouth 2014-02-25
The unaware can't become aware, obviously.
3 [deleted] 2014-02-25
The question is, what are 'we' going to do about it? Reddit admins need to be called on their bullshit.
0 thc1967 2014-02-25
Why does it seem eerie? This is a news aggregation site owned by a member of the wealthy elite. Isn't it terribly naive to think they wouldn't censor information that indicates they don't play fair?
22 AssuredlyAThrowAway 2014-02-25
I'm not an idealist, I know what reddit inc is up to.
I just like calling them on it, hoping they squirm.
Remember that digg fell because of artificial manipulation, reddit inc knows that and this is why they try to put up the facade of free flowing information. Countering that narrative with threads like this is the only hope for keeping this place in check.
3 amazingGOB 2014-02-25
there's a difference between you seeing behind the veil and pulling it back for everyone to see.
0 TheWebCoder 2014-02-25
It was on /r/worldnews or /r/news last night, can't remember which. Scrubbed?
-1 [deleted] 2014-02-25
[deleted]
2 [deleted] 2014-02-25
[deleted]
-2 begs_you_to_stay 2014-02-25
Call me crazy, but I kind of understand why it's being removed. It does break the rules of the default news subs because it's an analysis piece by Glenn Greenwald. It's technically not news. Get a news organization other than Greenwald to do a story on this piece and I think they'll allow it. But I doubt that will actually happen because of how the media is these days.
Edit: Hey, look what's at the top of worldnews! There. Just as I said. A news article about an analysis piece.
-2 LimitedHangouts 2014-02-25
wat about this
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1yydqc/reddit_censors_big_story_about_government/
-5 paypig 2014-02-25
That's probably because it is an editorial, not an actual news piece. Glenn admits as much at the bottom of the story:
*We submitted numerous questions to GCHQ, including: (1) Does GCHQ in fact engage in “false flag operations” where material is posted to the Internet and falsely attributed to someone else?; (2) Does GCHQ engage in efforts to influence or manipulate political discourse online?; and (3) Does GCHQ’s mandate include targeting common criminals (such as boiler room operators), or only foreign threats?
As usual, they ignored those questions and opted instead to send their vague and nonresponsive boilerplate*
3 Ferrofluid 2014-02-25
my thinking on that is that GCHQ is a service provider, they prob don't originate operations, just support other groups doing them.
theres a serious size and resource difference between US and UK TLA orgs, in the UK resources are tight, here in the US there are multitudes of ex veterans who need jobs when they leave the military, they go to work for the TLAs and still want to be 'GI Joes' in their new office jobs, so active operations are going to be in vogue, anything to make their new office jobs more exciting and relevant for funding.
just witness how the DHS/FBI/ATF/DEA all think they are paramilitary 'Team Americas' and need all those AR15s and millions of rounds of ammo, they are building a domestic security army of sorts
1 paypig 2014-02-25
GCHQ as service provider is an interesting thought. I hadn't went down that road. I was wondering why so vague and only GCHQ. This makes sense.
-10 [deleted] 2014-02-25
It might be because it's an easily faked powerpoint, no?
13 [deleted] 2014-02-25
No.
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/
So it comes from the trove of documents that Snowden leaked.
Some questions for you...
Why are former NSA and security analysts verifying the documents?
Why has the UK and the US said themselves the documents are real and are pursuing prosecution of Snowden and Greenwald including intimidation and deleting hard drives, stealing laptops from Greenwald's home and breaking into Jacob Appelbaums apartment in Berlin?
Why has no one from anywhere claimed that the documents are fake?
The only way this Is fake is if everyone concerned is involved and pushing the narrative.
-6 forRealsThough 2014-02-25
ORRRR maybe someone is using the internet to manipulate THIS story in an effort to destroy the reputation of the NSA
1 Ferrofluid 2014-02-25
two angles to that aspect of the story.
domestically for US citizens/residents, the concern is the NSA being nosey bastards in our domestic lives, the blanket monitoring of everything everybody does in the US, what they do (snooping) to foreigners is not really of much concern to anybody here in the US.
people outside the US should be concerned about the NSA, but whatever they say and do is relative to their domestic govts, its their problem, their local solution.
two separate problems, each relative to domestic and foreign, but both exclusive.
Its OUR 4th amendment rights in the US being violated, thats the concern of people in the US.
1 forRealsThough 2014-02-25
that really didn't address what i posted at all. But thank you for explaining to me that people in the US are concerned that the NSA is infringing on our 4th amendment rights, I had no idea.
man this is the last time i post in r/conspiracy. I even came up with my own conspiracy to share but you all have your own agenda.
3 Scoled321 2014-02-25
So Greenwald has no credibility? Is that where you are going with this?
1 [deleted] 2014-02-25
[deleted]
1 SovereignMan 2014-02-25
Rule 10 - Posts that attack the sub, users or mods will be removed. Accusing another of being a troll or shill is considered an attack. Repeat offenders are subject to a ban.
4 Ferrofluid 2014-02-25
in the real world there would be many groups, but a lull suggests central control, or somebody sent out memos at least.