Well, Obama still has time to add to his record totals.
There are and have been various board participants who have been more than happy to preach the Gospel According to Putin. Whether they’re professional trolls or just enthusiastic believers is both unprovable and not particularly relevant. We welcome folks of all political persuasions here, if only for the target practice.
I dunno. It was just one cliche after another.
He didn’t actually say “Play it again, Sam”. Not everybody knows that.
I do, since I know most everything. And have seen it.
Really, is a common bit of trivia the best you can do? That’s Round One level.
'Fraid so. Boor of little brain.
I’ve only heard of it used to mean those people who repost comments from before. Which would make sense if he’s posting like the election isn’t yet over.
People who consider Samantha Bee a legit news source shouldn’t be taken seriously.
Your self-importance seems to be the only thing here that is weapon-grade. Do you really believe this message board is a Russian counter-intelligence target, equivalent to the American elections? Damn, I’ve use too many -s.
Compared to what these days? FoxNews? CNN? Breitbart? Facebook? The Daily Show and its spinoffs (and particularly Last Week Tonight at the moment) do more rigorous journalism than pretty much any self-proclaimed news source. It’s a sad state of affairs when the comedy shows provide the best news and news shows are the biggest jokes.
From the article linked in the OP -
*Russian Online Troll Tells Samantha Bee Why She Prefers Donald Trump
“Trump seems nicer because he is not saying the things about Russia that Hillary Clinton is saying.”
11/01/2016 11:01 am ET | Updated Nov 01, 2016*
Hahahaha. Samantha Bee? Seriously? Samantha Bee is a comedian. She tells jokes. Some of them are more eleaborate than others. Some of her jokes are actually funny, but deep down she’s just another Hillary worshiping entertainer who can’t be held responsible for what she says. It’s just a joke, your honor. Part of the Bee shtick. Everyone knows I’m a comedian. Some of my jokes aren’t funny but they’re still just jokes.
Samantha Bee is a paid troll who was trying to trying to influence the U.S. election.
Fortunately, Bee doesn’t have much influence. Or credibility.
You could have just written “confirmation bias” and conveyed the same mount of information.
Of course you meant “amount” of information, but your typo still works.
Okay.
There you go.
I mean, have you seen Last Week Tonight? Despite the overlay of Oliver’s increasingly annoying comic tangents, there is solid, thoroughly-researched investigative journalism going on there. I’m sorry if your confirmation bias makes it look like everyone else but you suffers from confirmation bias, but it can’t be helped.
Look, if you believe the shitty and blatantly biased spinoffs of a shitty and blatantly biased comedy show brings the same resources to journalism as do entire news organizations, that’s your problem. But you should leave off lecturing anybody about confirmation bias until you grow up.
…am I the only one reading this who can almost hear it said in the voice of “Gru” from “Despicable Me”?
Never saw it, but for me whenever I hear any phrase similar to “ancient people with many noble traditions”, I always think of Full Metal Jacket (and append “…and kill them” to the phrase.)
Fine, how about the Washington Post?
From the story linked to above:
Why wouldn’t the SDMB be a target, especially if it is targeted by the equivalent of a drive-by troll? The SDMB shows up all the time on Google searches for me, and could easily pop up on a troll’s radar.
On website rankings conducted by Ranking.com, the SDMB comes in at #800 (out of the hundreds of millions of websites on the internet).
For comparison, the NY Times website comes in at #107, the LA Times comes in at #174, the Houston Chronicle comes in at #301, and the Chicago Tribune comes in at #558. The four cities served by these newspapers make up the four largest cities in the U.S. For additional comparison, my local metropolitan newspaper (the Hartford Courant) comes in much lower than the SDMB, at just #1,436.
I see online posts all the time in response to news stories on various newspaper websites (including those listed here), that look like they were posted by internet trolls. It doesn’t seem beyond the realm of possibility that we could attract some here as well.
This CounterPunch story cites “RT” as its sole source for the so-called “real story” behind the recent Samantha Bee “Full Frontal” piece mentioned in my OP.
RT (originally “Russia Today”) is actually discussed extensively in the same Washington Post article linked to above, which describes it (and Sputnik) as “state-funded Russian information services that mimic the style and tone of independent news organizations yet sometimes include false and misleading stories in their reports.” :dubious:
The Washington Post article referred to above cites another article by fellows at the Foreign Policy Research Institute in Philadelphia and the Center for Cyber and Homeland Security at The George Washington University:
Trolling for Trump: How Russia Is Trying to Destroy Our Democracy
This article goes further, describing *RT *and Sputnik as “Russian propaganda stations” that “broadcast a mix of true information (the vast majority of content), manipulated or skewed stories, and strategically chosen falsehoods.” :dubious: