Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Thursday July 26 2018, @11:15AM   Printer-friendly
from the I'd-rather-be-trolling-for-fish dept.

Bloomberg is covering a report from the Institute for the Future (IFTF) on an attempt to describe the phenomenon of state-sponsored trolling from a qualitative and quantitative standpoint. While partially conflating trolling with astroturfing in the body of the report, the IFTF defines online trolling as deliberately targeting an individual for "hate" and harassment. Since it is only occasionally possible to attribute the attacks, the IFTF's aim with the report is to empower individuals, researchers, and policy makers to spot the phenomenon in the wild and at least attempt to combat it.

The report itself is entitled, State-Sponsored Trolling: How Governments Are Deploying Disinformation as Part of Broader Digital Harassment Campaigns (warning for PDF)

Ed: How accurate does the report appear to be and are the suggested countermeasures harmful or helpful or both?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Thursday July 26 2018, @06:51PM

    by DeathMonkey (1380) on Thursday July 26 2018, @06:51PM (#713304) Journal

    So the only two presidents to ever ban a reporter were Conservatives. I thought you said those were the pro-free-speech people?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Informative=1, Touché=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4