Since it is now exposed, maybe readers can be extra vigilant and notice it as well. The reaction boxes were to allow freedom of expression but it seems that it is not even worth having active if they are being manipulated.
enerchi
************************************************************************
A site which frequently reposts my articles is ascensionwithearth.com, and the blogging software used by the site owner offers the feature of reaction boxes. The boxes, found at the bottom of each article, allow the readers to register how they feel about the article. But in this world, nothing is as it seems...
In the case of my most recent article about Steve Quayle and "V," I couldn't help but notice that someone was rolling back the counters on positive reactions and possibly rolling up the counters on negative reactions. On one early visit to the posting, I noticed that the counter on a certain positive reaction was up to three. Upon visiting later, it had been rolled back to one. On another visit, a counter on another positive reaction was also up to three; later, it too was rolled back to one. And all the while, the counters on two negative reactions were slowly but steadily increasing in lockstep. Since I'm quite certain it wasn't the owner of the site who was doing it, who was?
Although I have questions about some things John Kettler posts on his site, he made some rather solid observations in this article: NSA Manipulates Social Networks. Here are some relevant quotes...
"Most of you don’t realize it, but you’re already being manipulated! There are Internet shills/sockpuppets (people operating online under one or more false identities, advancing some topics and stifling others–by fair means or foul) and more. Government and contract operatives have the ability to run six or more simultaneous avatars in different online forums, raising all manner of havoc...
A more subtle approach is to reduce the perceived value of a site, therefore its content, by partially or totally depriving it of the social cred which would otherwise validate its message and expand its reach. And how do you do that? Simple. You intercept the social network ballots, changing them or not as desired...
SOCIETY PAGE deliberately seeks to distort and manipulate your and others’ fundamental perceptions of what is and isn’t true, what has meaning and value to you and what doesn’t. It’s a practically invisible means of herding you in the direction those controlling NSA desire...
'But how do they do this?' you ask. NSA puts a trap between your Likes and such and the social network which records them and reports them back to the site you’re on. NSA decides what to do with ballots which it intercepts. There, it a) allows them to pass unimpeded and be handled normally; b) kills them outright; c) reduces them or d) increases them."
Beyond the techniques Kettler mentions, it would seem that the government agencies and their contractors also have backdoors into commonly used blogging software which allow them to delete entries and manipulate comments and counters. Since deleting entries and comments generates unwanted attention, though, they use those particular tools sparingly. They most often utilize a combination of trolls in the comment boards and gremlins in the reaction and read counters to sway readers' perceptions. And in sites that have multiple administrators, it stands to reason that they infiltrate their agents into the admin ranks or compromise existing administrators (or hack their accounts) in order to do their damage.
To give an immediate example of this, the Beforeitsnews posting about V referenced in my recent article has been deleted. Was this because Steve and/or V complained to Beforeitsnews or did they have a "friend" in the admin ranks do them a favor? I've also had previous problems with that site which include entire articles I've submitted simply disappearing into the void, and articles of mine others have submitted having their view counters rolled back. One conspicuous example of the latter problem was my article on the likely nuclear blast in Homs, Syria. I'd frequently go back to find the article had been viewed fewer times than the last time I'd visited.
On Rumor Mill News and another news aggregator site, I've also had articles of mine flat-out deleted only to be restored later by the site owners/administrators. In a particular case of an RMN post of one of my entries, it was "disappeared" as it made the transition from the front page to page two, leaving behind only a sub-article someone had appended to it. Upon writing to someone about it (who wasn't even connected to RMN), it magically reappeared.
In addition, I've had infrequent problems with my own website being inexplicably taken down. Whenever I'd call GoDaddy about the problem, it would suddenly reappear as soon as I started talking to a customer service rep. I don't blame GoDaddy for this, though, as they have done a wonderful job of providing me with a stable and trouble-free blogging experience. When I hear of the woes other bloggers have suffered in keeping their sites up and in order, I'm very happy I chose the provider I did.
Getting back to the reaction counters, I've noticed the mischief-makers employing four approaches to articles:
1) They don't rig the counters because the article/message is insignificant to them.
2) They don't rig the counters because they want to gauge the real public reaction to a message. Since monkeying with the counters affects how subsequent voters react, they must take a hands-off approach if they want to get a genuine reaction. I suspect this is why you see articles from the likes of Canauzzie rack up double-digit untrue votes with virtually no true votes. They want to see how their message is really going over, and it ain't pretty.
3) They rig the counters because they want to promote a message. In such a case, they'll discreetly dial back the negative counters little-by-little while dialing up the positive counters.
4) They rig the counters because they want to suppress a message. In such a case, they'll discreetly dial back the positive counters little-by-little while dialing up the negative counters.
So why do they do all this? They want to use a form of peer pressure to influence our perceptions and make us feel defective when we embrace truths that are inconvenient to their agenda. They also want those of us who are moving beyond their deceptions to feel despair and aloneness that we seem so few. But let me tell you something: there are far more of us than they would have us believe. You are not alone, so have the courage of your convictions as you face the distortions they present to you. We are many, and we will win.
I send you my love....
http://blog.redefininggod.com/2013/12/13/a-quick-note-on-trolls-reaction-boxes-and-perception-engineering.aspx
