@absicht_MAUERzuBAUEN said in #3:
> No, but seriously. Here a specially crazy part:
>
> Aha! So they were deleted! And then you tell me we have a fair discussion!
>
> And so it continues. Basically, this article sais Russia did this... And they were banned, and then Russia did xyelse, and got banned.
> They were trying to justify the deleting of all other opinions and the truth. Oder?
You need to work on your reading comprehension. Either that or you're disingenuously taking the quote out of context. Here's the proper context of the quote translated into English:
> From March 2 to 4, there were tens of thousands of tweets with these hashtags. A concerted action, say the researchers in their analysis on the website of the think tank Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD). A few days later, only about a quarter of the 80,000 tweets are still available. Several of the accounts that spread the pro-Russian messages were deleted or blocked.
>
> In the West, however, this action was hardly noticed, because it happened mainly in other Twitter spheres, as Miller elaborates on Twitter. With the data forensic methods, it was examined which accounts provided for the distribution, these were clustered for an analysis according to different categories. Miller identifies a total of eight different groups. And most of them would be aimed at audiences in Asia and Africa.
>
> Many of the Twitter accounts were therefore newly created and had few followers. Among them, however, were also long-standing accounts. This and the high density of retweets, i.e. mere redirects without their own comments, suggest that this is a mixture of bots, i.e. purely machine-acting accounts, and "bought" Twitter accounts. It has long been known that real users can be bought for social networks in hundreds or even thousands of packages, especially in Asia.
>
> An analysis by the Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) of the Atlantic Council think tank comes to very similar conclusions. This study also identified a concerted action lasting a few days, which was virtually the initial spark for pro-Russian propaganda on Twitter.
>
> According to a further study published by Miller and colleagues in the meantime, India is one of the main locations of these groups, but there are also users who address Pakistani and other communities with the languages Urdu and Farsi.
>
> In Africa, according to Miller, nigeria, Kenya and South Africa accounted for most of the postings, partly in combination with another purely commercial network phenomenon: spam. For example, one of the most shared links with a #IstandwithRussia hashtag led to the website of a used car dealer.
In summary: Russia (according to this data forensic analysis) bought a fake grass roots movement on Twitter to rile people in Asia and Africa up against "the west". This happened after the unlawful (according to international law) Russian invasion of Ukraine had already commenced. Twitter deleted a good three quarters of those astroturfing tweets, some for being spam (e.g. attempts to sell used cars).
And in your mind this shows that the west is not having "a fair discussion" and "deleting [...] all other opinions and the truth"?
Seriously?
Did you simply stop reading after the first paragraph of the quote? Or are you deliberately quote mining in order to support your ridiculous claim?
> No, but seriously. Here a specially crazy part:
>
> Aha! So they were deleted! And then you tell me we have a fair discussion!
>
> And so it continues. Basically, this article sais Russia did this... And they were banned, and then Russia did xyelse, and got banned.
> They were trying to justify the deleting of all other opinions and the truth. Oder?
You need to work on your reading comprehension. Either that or you're disingenuously taking the quote out of context. Here's the proper context of the quote translated into English:
> From March 2 to 4, there were tens of thousands of tweets with these hashtags. A concerted action, say the researchers in their analysis on the website of the think tank Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD). A few days later, only about a quarter of the 80,000 tweets are still available. Several of the accounts that spread the pro-Russian messages were deleted or blocked.
>
> In the West, however, this action was hardly noticed, because it happened mainly in other Twitter spheres, as Miller elaborates on Twitter. With the data forensic methods, it was examined which accounts provided for the distribution, these were clustered for an analysis according to different categories. Miller identifies a total of eight different groups. And most of them would be aimed at audiences in Asia and Africa.
>
> Many of the Twitter accounts were therefore newly created and had few followers. Among them, however, were also long-standing accounts. This and the high density of retweets, i.e. mere redirects without their own comments, suggest that this is a mixture of bots, i.e. purely machine-acting accounts, and "bought" Twitter accounts. It has long been known that real users can be bought for social networks in hundreds or even thousands of packages, especially in Asia.
>
> An analysis by the Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) of the Atlantic Council think tank comes to very similar conclusions. This study also identified a concerted action lasting a few days, which was virtually the initial spark for pro-Russian propaganda on Twitter.
>
> According to a further study published by Miller and colleagues in the meantime, India is one of the main locations of these groups, but there are also users who address Pakistani and other communities with the languages Urdu and Farsi.
>
> In Africa, according to Miller, nigeria, Kenya and South Africa accounted for most of the postings, partly in combination with another purely commercial network phenomenon: spam. For example, one of the most shared links with a #IstandwithRussia hashtag led to the website of a used car dealer.
In summary: Russia (according to this data forensic analysis) bought a fake grass roots movement on Twitter to rile people in Asia and Africa up against "the west". This happened after the unlawful (according to international law) Russian invasion of Ukraine had already commenced. Twitter deleted a good three quarters of those astroturfing tweets, some for being spam (e.g. attempts to sell used cars).
And in your mind this shows that the west is not having "a fair discussion" and "deleting [...] all other opinions and the truth"?
Seriously?
Did you simply stop reading after the first paragraph of the quote? Or are you deliberately quote mining in order to support your ridiculous claim?
