<p>We are seeing the first detailed evidence of the tampering that went on during the 2016 campaign for U.S. President. This is a whole new category of "nasty" that allows people without scruples to feed false information into the mix without any transparency. In this article, the NY Times lays out a host of Facebook and Twitter advertising that was purchased (estimated at $100,000 in paid advertising) but sources were never revealed - as you might expect.</p>
<p><strong>Read the article in full here:</strong><br />
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/us/politics/russia-facebook-twitter-… </p>
<p>Here's an excerpt:</p>
<p><em>An investigation by The New York Times, and new research from the cybersecurity firm FireEye, reveals some of the mechanisms by which suspected Russian operators used Twitter and Facebook to spread anti-Clinton messages and promote the hacked material they had leaked. On Wednesday, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/06/technology/facebook-russian-politica… officials</a> disclosed that they had shut down several hundred accounts that they believe were created by a Russian company linked to the Kremlin and used to buy $100,000 in ads pushing divisive issues during and after the American election campaign.</em></p>
Comments