08-08-2024, 04:42 AM
This post was last modified 08-08-2024, 04:50 AM by FlyingClayDisk.
I took a few minutes to read through some of the links associated with your thread, as well as some other collateral links from those links. I have also done a fair amount of research on the subject of internet trolls and their possible conscious use as a strategy of some sort, political or otherwise. The link you posted about Monsanto was of particular interest (for several reasons, but I'll get to those in a moment). At a summary level, I have some observations about the troll phenomenon on the 'interwebz'...
1. Just in general, as a society, we have allowed ourselves to become FAR too dependent on complex electronic devices, computers and other 'smart' technology. More importantly, hand in hand with the above, large segments of society today have allowed themselves to become almost completely dependent on the "Internet" for survival. What I mean by this is, we have allowed the internet and electronics to replace skills and knowledge which are considered fundamental abilities for human survival to the point that many are unable to perform basic functions without the aid of all these devices.
A simple trip to McDonald's will illustrate this in real time. I've had this happen numerous times at McDonald's and numerous other places, so it's not an isolated incident. I walked into a McDonald's recently and ordered (2) cheeseburgers (with no onions) for my dogs. My total was $3.19. I put a $5 bill on the counter, and the clerk quickly punched this into their register. At the same time, I reached in my pocket and realized I had a bunch of change. Among other coins, I had a dime, a nickle and four pennies...$0.19 cents, which I quickly plopped down on the counter. Too late! The clerk had already keyed in my $5.00 bill and was digging $1.81 in change out of the drawer. I didn't want $0.81 cents more in change, I wanted (2) whole dollar bills back (thus my $0.19 contribution). Sorry, no can do! Computer says $1.81 in change, and $1.81 in change is what you're going to get, like it or not. Well, it was time to make a point; I wasn't going to accept $1.81 in change back, so do whatever it takes to fix it. (yes, I can be stubborn sometimes when warranted). Long story short, the clerk ultimately had to call a manager over, and even the manager had to void out the first order, re-ring up the whole sale, and basically start over. Unreal! Rather than just give me two dollars back (after putting the $0.19 cents in the drawer), they had to go through all of that. And the thing which galled me the most was the manager shaking his head the entire time (like I was the real problem). It was complete and absolute dependence on technology to count back change at McDonald's...something store clerks have been doing for over 200 years in their head's is now impossible without their coveted computer telling them what to do. There are a million other examples, but I think you get the point.
2. In concert with #1 above, we as a society have allowed our reality to be defined by the Internet. While the Internet has (on occasion) broadened our collective horizons, it is not a substitute for going outside, touching reality, and seeing for one's self what is true and what is not. This is where the 'Internet Trolls' come into the picture. They prey on a false assumption, and this assumption is that reality can only be gleaned from the 'interwebz'. (Ergo, if it ain't on the internet, it ain't real) Internet content providers love this mindset, and the more of it they can create, the more likely they are to achieve their agenda (profit, political ideology, etc.). And, there's a lot of parts to this, but one of the most important is one people seldom realize. The 'Internet' is different.
Before the creation of the 'web' as we know it today it took considerable effort and expense to reach large quantities of society. Now, with the internet, this same thing can be accomplished with a single press of a key on a keyboard. This is a paradigm shift. But the real world didn't change, only the access to it did. Corporations, and governments, and many others, have realized there is power in this vast access to the masses. It only stands to reason that shortly after this realization certain organizations and entities would use the same technology to influence 'hearts and minds'. This is the objective of organized trolling activity.
If we as a society would collectively 'wake up', get our noses out of our cellular phones (or whatever), and see the real world around us for what it is, rather than depending on some device to tell us how we should perceive the things around us, well, we will be better off for it.
I wanted to circle back to the Monsanto link for a moment as some final commentary on the subject. Full disclosure, I am not a fan of Monsanto at all; they are, in my opinion, an evil corporation who have destroyed many thousands of small farms and agri-businesses and catered to the massive conglomerates gobbling up much of agricultural America. I could probably write a book on all the different forms of evil they perpetuate. But I digress. The link you provided encapsulates many of the exact same things I've addressed in this reply in a single place, and if one looks at it objectively they can see all of these elements at work. The article uses a specific, and at the time (2017) popular, trendy, and somewhat notable example as its justification.
At issue was a 2,000 acre farm in Oregon known as Azure Farms. They are a popular supplier to the vegan non-GMO community which is a vocal one. Although I could point out numerous examples of FAR more evil things Monsanto does, the Azure Farms issues resonates better with a very vocal segment of the online community. This is likely exactly why it was used as an example (mind f*cking people). I just happened to know some things about Azure Farms, and they had been in the news for years before the Monsanto issue came up. In this particular case the local county jurisdiction was attempting to force Azure Farms to use Monsanto's product, 2-4-D (more commonly known as "Roundup") in order to kill a specific invasive weed which is very difficult to deal with (and it IS a serious PITA to deal with, speaking from personal experience). The weed, Canadian Thistle, is very difficult to kill and it spreads like wildfire if left unchecked. The problem was, because of Azure Farm's failure to contain this weed, farmer's on adjacent properties were being overrun with the weeds because Azure wasn't doing enough to stop them. So, let's examine this incident from two different perspectives...
On the one hand, the message propagated across the internet was essentially this...'Corrupt government officials, being paid off by Monsanto, force a small local farm to spray known carcinogens on their certified organic non-GMO crops thereby destroying their healthy benefits, not to mention making Azure lose their "organic" certification and introducing non-organic herbicides.' Sounds plenty sinister and evil, right? Now let's look at the other side of this same coin...
On the other hand, just some casual investigation into the reality of the matter would reveal a vastly different story, and that story goes something like this....'For years prior to the Roundup order by the county, local farms were pleading with county officials to make Azure observe responsible farming practices across the board. Things like erosion control to prevent soil loss, containing runoff from fields and a whole host of farming related issues. It was because of these issues that the Canadian Thistle got a foothold and created so much damage to both Azure and surrounding farms. Had Azure conducted responsible farming practices for years prior, there never would have been a Canadian Thistle invasion, and thus the Monsanto issue would have never come up.' (incidentally, 2-4-D / Roundup is about one of the only effective means to eradicate Canadian Thistle that I am aware of...as much as I loathe Monsanto). Quite a different perspective.
A far different reality from the one painted on the 'interwebz'. So who really was the "troll" in this incident? The article tries to paint Monsanto as the troll, but the reality is it was all the militant vegans on the internet who created the "perception" of a trolling Monsanto to activate the internet "conspiracy theorists" into spinning up the whole troll argument to begin with. In other words, the real trolls were the ones who started the whole troll conversation! You see, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts. And, had it not been for the 'Internet', none of it would have ever happened.
We've now circled all they way back to the start. Internet trolls can't be effective without the Internet. Internet trolls are created by people who want the conspiracy of trolls to be true, not the other way around (as they would have you think). Without people depending on the Internet for their reality, trolls cannot exist.
Long reply, I know, but it's a lot to unpack.
1. Just in general, as a society, we have allowed ourselves to become FAR too dependent on complex electronic devices, computers and other 'smart' technology. More importantly, hand in hand with the above, large segments of society today have allowed themselves to become almost completely dependent on the "Internet" for survival. What I mean by this is, we have allowed the internet and electronics to replace skills and knowledge which are considered fundamental abilities for human survival to the point that many are unable to perform basic functions without the aid of all these devices.
A simple trip to McDonald's will illustrate this in real time. I've had this happen numerous times at McDonald's and numerous other places, so it's not an isolated incident. I walked into a McDonald's recently and ordered (2) cheeseburgers (with no onions) for my dogs. My total was $3.19. I put a $5 bill on the counter, and the clerk quickly punched this into their register. At the same time, I reached in my pocket and realized I had a bunch of change. Among other coins, I had a dime, a nickle and four pennies...$0.19 cents, which I quickly plopped down on the counter. Too late! The clerk had already keyed in my $5.00 bill and was digging $1.81 in change out of the drawer. I didn't want $0.81 cents more in change, I wanted (2) whole dollar bills back (thus my $0.19 contribution). Sorry, no can do! Computer says $1.81 in change, and $1.81 in change is what you're going to get, like it or not. Well, it was time to make a point; I wasn't going to accept $1.81 in change back, so do whatever it takes to fix it. (yes, I can be stubborn sometimes when warranted). Long story short, the clerk ultimately had to call a manager over, and even the manager had to void out the first order, re-ring up the whole sale, and basically start over. Unreal! Rather than just give me two dollars back (after putting the $0.19 cents in the drawer), they had to go through all of that. And the thing which galled me the most was the manager shaking his head the entire time (like I was the real problem). It was complete and absolute dependence on technology to count back change at McDonald's...something store clerks have been doing for over 200 years in their head's is now impossible without their coveted computer telling them what to do. There are a million other examples, but I think you get the point.
2. In concert with #1 above, we as a society have allowed our reality to be defined by the Internet. While the Internet has (on occasion) broadened our collective horizons, it is not a substitute for going outside, touching reality, and seeing for one's self what is true and what is not. This is where the 'Internet Trolls' come into the picture. They prey on a false assumption, and this assumption is that reality can only be gleaned from the 'interwebz'. (Ergo, if it ain't on the internet, it ain't real) Internet content providers love this mindset, and the more of it they can create, the more likely they are to achieve their agenda (profit, political ideology, etc.). And, there's a lot of parts to this, but one of the most important is one people seldom realize. The 'Internet' is different.
Before the creation of the 'web' as we know it today it took considerable effort and expense to reach large quantities of society. Now, with the internet, this same thing can be accomplished with a single press of a key on a keyboard. This is a paradigm shift. But the real world didn't change, only the access to it did. Corporations, and governments, and many others, have realized there is power in this vast access to the masses. It only stands to reason that shortly after this realization certain organizations and entities would use the same technology to influence 'hearts and minds'. This is the objective of organized trolling activity.
If we as a society would collectively 'wake up', get our noses out of our cellular phones (or whatever), and see the real world around us for what it is, rather than depending on some device to tell us how we should perceive the things around us, well, we will be better off for it.
I wanted to circle back to the Monsanto link for a moment as some final commentary on the subject. Full disclosure, I am not a fan of Monsanto at all; they are, in my opinion, an evil corporation who have destroyed many thousands of small farms and agri-businesses and catered to the massive conglomerates gobbling up much of agricultural America. I could probably write a book on all the different forms of evil they perpetuate. But I digress. The link you provided encapsulates many of the exact same things I've addressed in this reply in a single place, and if one looks at it objectively they can see all of these elements at work. The article uses a specific, and at the time (2017) popular, trendy, and somewhat notable example as its justification.
At issue was a 2,000 acre farm in Oregon known as Azure Farms. They are a popular supplier to the vegan non-GMO community which is a vocal one. Although I could point out numerous examples of FAR more evil things Monsanto does, the Azure Farms issues resonates better with a very vocal segment of the online community. This is likely exactly why it was used as an example (mind f*cking people). I just happened to know some things about Azure Farms, and they had been in the news for years before the Monsanto issue came up. In this particular case the local county jurisdiction was attempting to force Azure Farms to use Monsanto's product, 2-4-D (more commonly known as "Roundup") in order to kill a specific invasive weed which is very difficult to deal with (and it IS a serious PITA to deal with, speaking from personal experience). The weed, Canadian Thistle, is very difficult to kill and it spreads like wildfire if left unchecked. The problem was, because of Azure Farm's failure to contain this weed, farmer's on adjacent properties were being overrun with the weeds because Azure wasn't doing enough to stop them. So, let's examine this incident from two different perspectives...
On the one hand, the message propagated across the internet was essentially this...'Corrupt government officials, being paid off by Monsanto, force a small local farm to spray known carcinogens on their certified organic non-GMO crops thereby destroying their healthy benefits, not to mention making Azure lose their "organic" certification and introducing non-organic herbicides.' Sounds plenty sinister and evil, right? Now let's look at the other side of this same coin...
On the other hand, just some casual investigation into the reality of the matter would reveal a vastly different story, and that story goes something like this....'For years prior to the Roundup order by the county, local farms were pleading with county officials to make Azure observe responsible farming practices across the board. Things like erosion control to prevent soil loss, containing runoff from fields and a whole host of farming related issues. It was because of these issues that the Canadian Thistle got a foothold and created so much damage to both Azure and surrounding farms. Had Azure conducted responsible farming practices for years prior, there never would have been a Canadian Thistle invasion, and thus the Monsanto issue would have never come up.' (incidentally, 2-4-D / Roundup is about one of the only effective means to eradicate Canadian Thistle that I am aware of...as much as I loathe Monsanto). Quite a different perspective.
A far different reality from the one painted on the 'interwebz'. So who really was the "troll" in this incident? The article tries to paint Monsanto as the troll, but the reality is it was all the militant vegans on the internet who created the "perception" of a trolling Monsanto to activate the internet "conspiracy theorists" into spinning up the whole troll argument to begin with. In other words, the real trolls were the ones who started the whole troll conversation! You see, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts. And, had it not been for the 'Internet', none of it would have ever happened.
We've now circled all they way back to the start. Internet trolls can't be effective without the Internet. Internet trolls are created by people who want the conspiracy of trolls to be true, not the other way around (as they would have you think). Without people depending on the Internet for their reality, trolls cannot exist.
Long reply, I know, but it's a lot to unpack.
