Kudos to Galloway for making such a bold statement in the face of constant MSM propaganda...
Claims of Russian interference in US election ‘dead & buried’ – George Galloway
RT : 31 Oct, 2017
Allegations of Russia exploiting internet giants to meddle with the 2016 US election are “dead and buried,” says former MP George Galloway. His comments follow a report by Google stating there is no evidence RT violated YouTube terms and conditions.
On Tuesday, Google published the findings of a probe into the potential of RT using the world’s biggest video platform for political purposes. It stated the investigation failed to find any substantive proof that the news channel manipulated videos or otherwise violated YouTube policies.
The US technology giant is due to testify, alongside Facebook and Twitter, before the US Senate Judiciary Committee’s panel on Crime and Terrorism on Wednesday over Russia’s alleged use of the media platforms to influence the US election.
The Google report found that two accounts linked to the Internet Research Agency, a Russian-based NGO, spent a total of £4,700 on the search and display ads.
Unsure whether “to laugh or cry” over the meagre sum, Galloway said: “They [internet giants] are all doing this, ironically, to please another state – not Russia, but the US.
“It is an attempt to be on their knees as they go before the Congress later today,” Galloway said.
He added the whole situation is “demeaning and degrading to the companies and the people who fell for the earlier propaganda.”
Back in October, Google-operated YouTube yanked RT from its premium program amid concerns over the network’s use of the service.
‘Russian election posts’ 0.74% & 0.004% of content – Twitter & Facebook reveal size of ‘campaign’
Although Google admitted it found no evidence of wrongdoing just a month later, it failed to give RT the privileged status it had held since 2010.
Galloway said, in light of the new findings, YouTube it should “reinstate RT as a matter of urgency” if the platform has “any sense of decency.”
He called for the creation of more social media platforms to rival Facebook and Twitter that cannot be “so easily beholden to any government,” be it the US or Russia.
Selected Comments:
# Yes, the charges were bogus. However, what about interference in our elections by AIPAC and the Israel Lobby? Why don't we see an investigation here? Well, can you guess? Who is going to do the investigating when just about all of Washington takes their orders from Tel Aviv?
# the USA interfering in elections and governments of other countries. Not going to have an investigation over that because they'd have to admit that they've been interfering in elections and other countries for a long time.
# Pretty disgusting. "Sanctions" are meant to be punitive measures to force change rather than using physical force. This bill is simply designed to take out an economic competitor and allow room for America to build its energy exports. I don't agree with sanctions but for those who do how could this be seen as anything other than an American attempt to destroy any competition purely for that reason.
# Must be crazy making sanction on the premise of alleged intervention of their election. While US do it to other nations on a regular bases. Even to some extent if they don't get what they want regime change and make war the final resort. How is that for interference.
= = =
RT Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan commented on Twitter’s decision, saying it was “highly regrettable” and could serve as a precursor to retaliatory measures towards US media.
“I never thought that Twitter is under the control of the US security services – it seemed like a conspiracy theory. But now Twitter appears to have admitted it,” Simonyan told RIA Novosti news agency. “This is highly regrettable. It is particularly regrettable that now US media operating in Russia will feel the tender response of the Russian authorities.”
Simonyan earlier posted the social network’s own pitch for an RT advertising campaign ahead of last year’s election, in which Twitter said that the news site would provide an “unbiased point view of the US Elections with an edge.”
“Hope Jack Dorsey [Twitter CEO] won’t forget to tell Congress how Twitter pitched RT to spend big $$s on US election ad campaign,” tweeted Simonyan.
RT turned down Twitter’s advertising pitch, which proposed potentially investing millions of dollars. In fact, it spent only $274,100 on all US Twitter ads in 2016 – not just during the election campaign – and has further cut the ad budget on the site this year.
Despite boasting of conducting an investigation and “retrospective work” concerning the 2016 election, at no point, either in public or in private, has Twitter explained how RT’s work constituted election interference or made its audience feel “unsafe.”
While the DNI report it references places RT alongside “quasi-government trolls” and other nefarious agents, there are fundamental differences. There is nothing secretive about RT’s source of funding and certainly nothing underhand about its agenda to provide an alternative view to the mainstream Western news coverage.
To claim that it “interfered” in the election is to equate exposing its US audience to different perspectives on news stories to a form of illegal meddling. At best, this represents an insult to Twitter’s own audience – who the network believes should be protected from challenging views – and at worst, an endorsement of corporate censorship.
Claims of Russian interference in US election ‘dead & buried’ – George Galloway
RT : 31 Oct, 2017
Allegations of Russia exploiting internet giants to meddle with the 2016 US election are “dead and buried,” says former MP George Galloway. His comments follow a report by Google stating there is no evidence RT violated YouTube terms and conditions.
On Tuesday, Google published the findings of a probe into the potential of RT using the world’s biggest video platform for political purposes. It stated the investigation failed to find any substantive proof that the news channel manipulated videos or otherwise violated YouTube policies.
The US technology giant is due to testify, alongside Facebook and Twitter, before the US Senate Judiciary Committee’s panel on Crime and Terrorism on Wednesday over Russia’s alleged use of the media platforms to influence the US election.
The Google report found that two accounts linked to the Internet Research Agency, a Russian-based NGO, spent a total of £4,700 on the search and display ads.
Unsure whether “to laugh or cry” over the meagre sum, Galloway said: “They [internet giants] are all doing this, ironically, to please another state – not Russia, but the US.
“It is an attempt to be on their knees as they go before the Congress later today,” Galloway said.
He added the whole situation is “demeaning and degrading to the companies and the people who fell for the earlier propaganda.”
Back in October, Google-operated YouTube yanked RT from its premium program amid concerns over the network’s use of the service.
‘Russian election posts’ 0.74% & 0.004% of content – Twitter & Facebook reveal size of ‘campaign’
Although Google admitted it found no evidence of wrongdoing just a month later, it failed to give RT the privileged status it had held since 2010.
Galloway said, in light of the new findings, YouTube it should “reinstate RT as a matter of urgency” if the platform has “any sense of decency.”
He called for the creation of more social media platforms to rival Facebook and Twitter that cannot be “so easily beholden to any government,” be it the US or Russia.
Selected Comments:
# Yes, the charges were bogus. However, what about interference in our elections by AIPAC and the Israel Lobby? Why don't we see an investigation here? Well, can you guess? Who is going to do the investigating when just about all of Washington takes their orders from Tel Aviv?
# the USA interfering in elections and governments of other countries. Not going to have an investigation over that because they'd have to admit that they've been interfering in elections and other countries for a long time.
# Pretty disgusting. "Sanctions" are meant to be punitive measures to force change rather than using physical force. This bill is simply designed to take out an economic competitor and allow room for America to build its energy exports. I don't agree with sanctions but for those who do how could this be seen as anything other than an American attempt to destroy any competition purely for that reason.
# Must be crazy making sanction on the premise of alleged intervention of their election. While US do it to other nations on a regular bases. Even to some extent if they don't get what they want regime change and make war the final resort. How is that for interference.
= = =
RT Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan commented on Twitter’s decision, saying it was “highly regrettable” and could serve as a precursor to retaliatory measures towards US media.
“I never thought that Twitter is under the control of the US security services – it seemed like a conspiracy theory. But now Twitter appears to have admitted it,” Simonyan told RIA Novosti news agency. “This is highly regrettable. It is particularly regrettable that now US media operating in Russia will feel the tender response of the Russian authorities.”
Simonyan earlier posted the social network’s own pitch for an RT advertising campaign ahead of last year’s election, in which Twitter said that the news site would provide an “unbiased point view of the US Elections with an edge.”
“Hope Jack Dorsey [Twitter CEO] won’t forget to tell Congress how Twitter pitched RT to spend big $$s on US election ad campaign,” tweeted Simonyan.
RT turned down Twitter’s advertising pitch, which proposed potentially investing millions of dollars. In fact, it spent only $274,100 on all US Twitter ads in 2016 – not just during the election campaign – and has further cut the ad budget on the site this year.
Despite boasting of conducting an investigation and “retrospective work” concerning the 2016 election, at no point, either in public or in private, has Twitter explained how RT’s work constituted election interference or made its audience feel “unsafe.”
While the DNI report it references places RT alongside “quasi-government trolls” and other nefarious agents, there are fundamental differences. There is nothing secretive about RT’s source of funding and certainly nothing underhand about its agenda to provide an alternative view to the mainstream Western news coverage.
To claim that it “interfered” in the election is to equate exposing its US audience to different perspectives on news stories to a form of illegal meddling. At best, this represents an insult to Twitter’s own audience – who the network believes should be protected from challenging views – and at worst, an endorsement of corporate censorship.
No comments:
Post a Comment