Fake News Overlords in the EU

[angelburst29]

The 'Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media' (Paul McKeigue, David Miller, Jake Mason, Piers Robinson) published their Briefing notes on said Integrity Initiative, December 21st. Of course this wraps into Ukraine, Syria (the UK of course) and all other places under the NATO eye. From their briefing (a large document), it looks to the organization structure, main people, journalists, methods et cetera.

Here is an extract (starting from heading #8):

Great find, Voyageur!

Hopefully, after the Holidays, I'll find more time to study these Documents. The information looks like a treasure trove!

Again, I suspect the Pope and Rome are behind this division of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine and if you take into account the Bandana/Nazi "atmosphere", ask yourself "Who helped the Nazi's get out of Germany safely, after WW11?" Not surprising, to think that the UK and Israel - also play a part in all this?

Quote: The Integrity Initiative handbook lists one of the ‘topics for research’ as ‘The Russian Orthodox Church and religion as weapons’. The slide presentation and the quotes above make clear that the Russian Orthodox Church itself is viewed as the threat, and not just wealthy donors to the Church like the Greek-Russian businessman Ivan Savvidis.

Two individuals with current or past affiliation to the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales (CBCEW), the governing body of the Catholic Church in England, appear in the UK Cluster document. Dr David Ryall, Secretary of the International Affairs Department of the CBCEW, appears under ‘UK General – Inner Core – Military & Defenceâ’. Primavera Quantrill, who held a post in the CBCEW from 2002 to 2005 and is now Partnerships Director at the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, appears under ‘Outer Core – Military & Defence’. Although there is no evidence that these individuals were involved with the Integrity Initiative (Ryall reported receiving emails only, and Quantrill reported knowing nothing about them), it is of interest that those running the programme apparently sought to involve lay officials of the Catholic Church. End Quote.

Document - https://www.cyberguerrilla.org/blog/operation-integrity-initiative-british-informational-war-against-all/

Anonymous threatens to release more information on the clandestine operations of the UK government, unless it agrees to remove the shroud of secrecy protecting those information-warfare efforts. On Nov. 24 Twitter deleted RT comments on the issue. The UK knows it has friends it can rely on in a crunch.

I suspect, Israeli minions and Reuter's News Agency are the primary forces behind RT having to file as a "Foreign Agency" and has kicked up a lot of dust trying to bury "RT" in a black hole? I remember awhile back, an article describing how Israel set up a an organization and staffed it with College and High School students - to combat disinformation about Israel. Guess, they have expanded the operation to include anything Israel doesn't approve of?

Sat Dec 22, 2018 - Twitter Blocked Hamas, Hezbollah Accounts at Israel’s Demand
Farsnews

 

[thorbiorn]

Fake News Overlords in the EU are deserving of such a name, considering the recent headline.
European Union tells tech giants they're not doing enough to enforce Big Brother

The EU believes that monolithic social media corporations aren't doing enough to curtail digital freedom and create the Orwellian nightmare

Facebook, Google, Twitter, Amazon and other monolithic tech corporations are under fire worldwide for destroying internet freedom and maliciously violating the privacy of its customers. However, one entity thinks these corporations haven't gone far enough in enforcing Big Brother: the globalists at the European Union (EU).

The EU believes that fake news (ie. news not approved by the regime) poses a threat to their control of upcoming parliamentary elections. They expect these private companies to snap into action to "protect our democracy" which is newspeak for "manipulating information to help us win elections."

The Associated Press covers this system of thought control as it develops in front of our very eyes: [...]

Whether for political purposes, or for business purposes or even military or psychological purposes the kind and quality of information we get is being vectored, shaped and monitored by interested parties.

 

[thorbiorn]

Here is someone speaking his mind and good for him.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1091774591926558726

 

[Voyageur]

Here is someone speaking his mind and good for him.

Wow, Stefan really let it out at the EU Parliament, "and good for him" indeed! The body count is truly repulsive.

 

[thorbiorn]

Recent SOTT articles highlights the issues in the developments to increase control with information in the EU.
First I saw:

France And Germany Cut A Deal To Save The EU's Appalling #CopyrightDirective -- Demolishing Internet Freedom

The EU's on-again/off-again Copyright Directive keeps sinking under its own weight: on the one side, you have German politicians who felt that it was politically impossible to force every online platform to spend hundreds of millions of euros to...

www.sott.net

[...] Chancellor Merkel and President Macron sat down to broker a deal, in which Merkel caved on every single measure that even looked like it might protect small businesses, co-operatives, nonprofits, and individuals, ending up with a deal that guarantees that every existing small platform will be destroyed and no new ones can be started, leaving Europe in the hands of US Big Tech -- forever.

Under the new deal, any platform where the public can communicate will have to buy copyright filters to intercept all public communications and compare them to a database of so-called "copyrighted works" (which anyone, anywhere, can add anything to), and then block anything that appears to be a match.

Today there was this Sott Focus: All Your Meme Are Belong to Us: EU Plans 'European Firewall' to End Free Internet -- Sott.net
It ends:

However things transpire, keep in mind is that this is very likely part of wider culture war. The generally Leftist, Globalist, pro-empire ideologues that populate and petition the EU structure are, in a sense, trying to take back the means of cultural production by 'mainstreaming' speech and artistic expression, turning the Internet into a corporate-controlled cyber version of the cable TV system. The fact that they're having to resort to outright censorship suggests that they've already lost the battle for 'hearts and minds'. Watch as nationalist candidates become the majority grouping in the European Parliament this May...

Should the Copyright Directive pass those stages and be adopted as is, it won't become law until 2021. In which case, you'd better get your meme on while you still can!

It almost seems to me as if a "Kill the Internet" campaig is in progress, a topic discussed in:

9/9/2018, 6:00:00 PM
NewsReal: 9/11: Kill The Internet
Article [ogg/vorbis] [mp3]

NewsReal: 9/11: Kill The Internet -- Sott.net has:

It's time to shut down the Internet.

It's been fun, at times, but the technological behemoth it gave rise to is killing us. Sometimes literally, but for the most part culturally. As an experiment in social networking that would 'progress humanity', the core belief that fueled its most ardent proponents and techie innovators, it has failed. In aggregate, its net result has been the generation of a new set of oligarchs and a general population that is increasingly bombarded with lies and half-truths about reality, downloading instructions through corrupt intermediaries about how they should think, feel and act.

Certainly, the Internet is integrated with everything in our lives now, but it has to go. Or rather, it ought to go. This week on NewsReal, Joe and Niall explore this idea as a philosophical exercise. They are not seriously proposing that people go out and 'burn it all down' - rather, that people maintain as much intellectual and emotional distance from it as possible. In any event, the Internet age will likely naturally come to an end soon enough.

There was a time without the internet and there will be one without, before we could do something useful and hopefully that will also be the case after. What will be the possibilities?

 

[Tuatha de Danaan]

Before the internet many many people would go to the libraries and spend hours learning. Most of those libraries are now gone or have been rifled, hell they are even changing the dictionaries. People have lost the knack of reading books or, in these frenetic days, have no time. Where to get relevant information? The circuit is closing.

 

[SHNAGFNAY]

EU Council of Ministers Approves Copyright Directive, Including Article 17 (13) – (Updated)

• BY ANDY
• ON APRIL 15, 2019
• C: 18

BREAKING

The EU Council of Ministers has approved the Copyright Directive, which includes the controversial Article 17 (formerly 13). The legislation was voted through by a majority of EU ministers just a few minutes ago, despite opposition from Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Finland, and Sweden.

Back in 2016, the European Commission announced plans to modernize EU copyright law, a move that initially received very little mainstream attention.

By 2018, there was intensive lobbying both in favor and against two extremely controversial elements of the Copyright Directive.

Article 11 (later renamed to Article 15) was decried by opponents as a “tax” on links to Internet-based news, contrary to the claims of publishers who felt that such a mechanism is necessary to prevent online platforms from monetizing their reporting.

Article 13 (renamed to Article 17 in the final text) was framed by supporters as a much-needed tool to ensure copyright holders are fairly remunerated for content published on platforms like YouTube without their permission. Opponents feared this would inevitably lead to upload filters and censorship.

On March 26, a proposal to allow amendments to the text of the directive was voted down, with 317 in favor and 312 against. The EU Parliament then moved to vote on the entire text of the Copyright Directive without amendments.

The Copyright Directive was adopted, with 348 Members of Parliament in favor, 274 against, and 36 abstentions.

That, however, wasn’t the end of the road as the legislation still needed to be approved by the Council of Ministers (the EU’s main legislative body) before formal adoption. That vote took place a few moments ago during the Agriculture and Fisheries Council.

As highlighted by Julia Reda MEP earlier this morning, a majority of 55% of Member States, representing 65% of the population, was required to adopt the legislation. That was easily achieved with 71.26% in favor, so the Copyright Directive will now pass into law.

As the image above shows, several countries voted against adoption, including Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Finland, and Sweden. Belgium, Estonia, and Slovenia abstained.

But in the final picture that just wasn’t enough, with both Germany and the UK voting in favor, the Copyright Directive is now adopted.

EU member states will now have two years to implement the law, which requires platforms like YouTube to sign licensing agreements with creators in order to use their content. If that is not possible, they will have to ensure that infringing content uploaded by users is taken down and not re-uploaded to their services.

“The entertainment lobby will not stop here, over the next two years, they will push for national implementations that ignore users’ fundamental rights,” comments Julia Reda.

“It will be more important than ever for civil society to keep up the pressure in the Member States!”

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker says that with the passing of the legislation this morning, Europe is making copyright rules “fit for the digital age.”

“Europe will now have clear rules that guarantee fair remuneration for creators, strong rights for users and responsibility for platforms,” Juncker says. “When it comes to completing Europe’s digital single market, the copyright reform is the missing piece of the puzzle.”

Juncker also makes an additional comment which is likely to come under intense scrutiny.

He suggests that in addition to not having to worry about uploading memes, users will also be able to upload otherwise ‘pirate’ content to sites like YouTube without having to worry about the consequences.

“Users will benefit from the new rules, which will allow them to upload copyright protected content on platforms legally,” he says.

“Moreover, they will benefit from enhanced safeguards linked to the freedom of expression when they upload videos that contain rights holders’ content, i.e. in memes or parodies.”

While the theory is that sites like YouTube will have licenses in place in future, some content is simply not licensable (first run movies, for example), at least as things stand today. It’s a head-scratching statement that will need clarification.

Breaking news, this piece is being updated

 

[thorbiorn]

EU Council of Ministers Approves Copyright Directive, Including Article 17 (13) - (Updated) - TorrentFreak

Was that the same day the Notre Dame "caught" fire? That makes it easier to remember.

 

[thorbiorn]

The EU shows itself again:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1180415658284244992

 

[thorbiorn]

In Europe the internal instability in the US is getting very little media coverage, very little, it is along the lines of the Gilets Jaune/Yellow Vests. It is managed democracy.
One event that has not caught up is the problems faced by CNN for years a standard for US news in Europe:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1185327862884253696

https://twitter.com/x/status/1185566985972862979

https://twitter.com/x/status/1185549753393799168

https://twitter.com/x/status/1185345695575953408

And from Britain The Guardian was promoting itself as a guardian but not of "Russian bots" that turn out to be real people:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1185575776290131973

It is an illiberal or managed democracy.

 

[thorbiorn]

It is an illiberal or managed democracy.

If a few Tweets and simple statements makes for a weak argument, here is a broader explanation of guided democracy which is another word for managed democracy with examples:

 

[thorbiorn]

In this post there are a few updates about entities and organisations that proclaim to counter information that is not true. It is not that there is nothing to learn from them, or that all they say is distorted, but to claim some of them are onesided can hardly be wrong. The very organizations that have founded them have agendas of thier own, which have to be defended and protected, not seldom by leading the reader to think the lies are to be found in only one corner. One very popular corner is Russia. Russia like any country also has goals that it pursues, but it is misleading, like some would like us to believe, to think these as the only ones worth questioning.

It is not a post where I think there is a clear message or just one topic, but I hope it presents some issues and some actors to be aware of when being presented with the daily news.

Today there was this article on SOTT, about the press in the US:
SOTT Focus: MSM Journalist on Lies, Newsweek And Control of The Media Narrative: 'Freedom of The Press is Dead'
The issues the US press have faced, in particular since the 2016 election, the lies and distortions promoted by the Washington Post, the New Your Times and CNN in particular have not been covered much in Europe. In Europe the US medias are safe from criticism while the focus is somewhere else. In Prague the "European Values Center for Security Policy" on the other hand proposes:
'European values'? Czech think tank funded by NATO govt's calls for EU BLANKET BAN on Russian outlets like RT
The European Values Center for Security Policy is at present led by Jakub Janda who writes about his mission and himself:

Countering hostile Russian & Chinese influence ops Proud Czech Army Reservist

For his Twitter (@ + _JakubJanda)

One of the more recent new associates of the this European Values Center is Mariam Tsitsikashvili from Georgia, (@ + mtsitsikashvili) the same country from where people came to participate in the Ukraine Maidan and shooting both left and right. Without using an argument of guilt by association, it is still instructive to understand the underlying vectors in the games of diplomacy by taking a look at the components of the networks.

The EU and the US have much to be grateful for when it comes to Ukraine, and the organizers of the Maidan, after which the Fake News trend became popular. Already in March 2014 there was:



The next account came a year later and is less active on Twitter and for the moment less directed towards one single area:

In November of 2015 came this account:

The above is very active. Recently they posted this:
æ

You probably noticed "Greta Thunberg" above so now we know were they would place the following article: SOTT Focus: Surprise! Greta Thunberg BIOPIC reveals cameras were rolling from day one of her 'viral' rise There were a few other buzz words in the above image, but I will skip commenting on them, as there is plenty in other threads on the forum if one makes a search or does the same on SOTT. This of course show that the EU is very much in the pocket of a military power and is very much under the foot of the US State Department and its cohorts of allies in various European countries.

Another organisation is Atlantic Council which is a NATO support organisation, they have the following office:

Here is one article they did on the presence of Ukrainian far right people in the recent Hong Kong protests, elegantly refraining from looking into the deeper background of the Ukrainian far right, although I think their article is still reasonable.

Far-right hooligans from Ukraine at the Hong Kong protests

Prolific hooligans crashed Hong Kong pro-democracy protests just to flex on the gram

medium.com

From the above article:

Like Filimonov, Maliar is also a combat veteran of Azov. Lysyi used to be listed on Facebook as Sashko Vovk but changed his name after a Bellingcat investigation into the Azov network.

The Bellingcat investigation is Ukrainian Far-Right Fighters, White Supremacists Trained by Major European Security Firm - bellingcat

Since 2016, the European Security Academy (ESA) an EU-based company that offers advanced training programs for security, law enforcement and military professionals, has provided sophisticated training geared towards combat application to elements of Ukraine’s controversial Azov Regiment, also known as the Azov Battalion, which has been integrated into the Ukrainian National Guard in Mariupol.

The European Security Academy one finds here: European Security Academy - Home page - euseca They were established in 1992 and operate out of a small village near Poznan in Poland: ESA Campus - euseca
And then it turns out the DFRLab quoting the Bellingcat investigation was not fact checking enough. One may even suspect it was a cover story for the more real deal that the Ukraine Army including the Azov Battalion was trained by NATO instructors, because according to Azov Battalion - Wikipedia they were incorporated into the Ukraine Army already on November 12, 2014. I found another source on this training by the Polish security company:

Setting the record straight: British publication 'Bellingcat' lied about Azov Regiment in Ukraine

Last year, Bellingcat, a website founded by the British journalist and former blogger Eliot Higgins, published a story titled, "Ukrainian Far-Right

sofrep.com

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT: BRITISH PUBLICATION ‘BELLINGCAT’ LIED ABOUT AZOV REGIMENT IN UKRAINE

Last year, Bellingcat, a website founded by the British journalist and former blogger Eliot Higgins, published a story titled, “Ukrainian Far-Right Fighters, White Supremacists Trained by Major European Security Firm.” It was written by Oleksiy Kuzmenko, a journalist focused on Ukraine and specific issues pertaining to the region. The comprehensive report was full of assumptions, and he spent a great deal of time searching through social media in an effort to connect the dots between his wild assertions.

Much like several articles published by Bellingcat, this piece was based entirely on open-source information and trolling social media. That alone does not make for inaccurate reporting, but Kuzmenko got this narrative so inaccurate it requires refutation.

The European Security Academy (ESA) never officially instructed the Azov Regiment, as was posited by the article. Two ESA instructors appeared in Ukraine in 2015. They asked members of the Azov Regiment if they would want to take part in a training program that lasted 10 days. Those who participated paid a little money out of their own pocket to do so. Afterward, the two instructors worked to create ESA Ukraine, an affiliated firm of the ESA. This new affiliated firm never took off. If Bellingcat had done their research and had spoken with the guys on the ground, they would have learned that ESA has never been back to Ukraine, and further, that the regiment didn’t approve of their work.

I was in the country during that time and those who participated in the training said there was nothing to gain from crawling around while guys kick dirt in your face. Bear in mind the Azov Regiment is considered a special operations unit, and the trainers from the ESA were treating them like new recruits.

But they received a letter of recommendation. I have one, too. If we’re being honest, this doesn’t do much to prove they officially trained the unit. Again, it’s clear that Bellingcat does not have the means to speak with members of the regiment. Based on that alone the article should never have been written.

The narrative put forth by the Bellingcat article is all wrong. Yes, members of the Azov Regiment have trained with the ESA, not to strengthen their soldiering abilities but to get qualifications so they can go on to work in the Middle East, much like many former service personnel. Several former members of Azov have gone on to seek further employment in the security industry.
[...]

Recall the Atlantic Council organisation was called Digital Forensic Research Lab. A lab is a laboratory where one can make experiments, analyze something or make something. They seem to be good at it.

Here is another "Lab" from 2017, but are they better?

The above has this story:

Fake media and NGOs: A pro-Indian network designed to influence policymakers - EU DisinfoLab

How could you know that your local news website, such as newyorkmorningtelegraph.com, thedublingazette.com, or timesofportugal.com serves Indian government interests? Here’s the story of how we uncovered this network designed to influence the EU and the UN by repeatedly criticising Pakistan.

www.disinfo.eu

Fake media and NGOs: A pro-Indian network designed to influence policymakers

16 December 2019 - osint
How could you know that your local news website, such as newyorkmorningtelegraph.com, thedublingazette.com, or timesofportugal.com serves Indian government interests? Here’s the story of how we uncovered this network designed to influence the EU and the UN by repeatedly criticising Pakistan.

Pro- Indian does not mean it is from India, it might even just be an experiment in influencing. I have not looked enough into the above case to tell.
Another post from them was:

Disinfo Update 25/11/2019 - EU DisinfoLab

Uncovered: A network that boosts political polarisation in France managed from Ukraine // What's new with the Digital Services Act

www.disinfo.eu

Uncovered: A network that boosts political polarisation in France managed from Ukraine

While the above may be all true, how much money would it take for a third party to hire someone in poor Ukraine with a few IT skills and tell them what to do? Later we could have someone discover there was something sinister going on in Ukraine and turn the discovery whichever way we would like, or even do nothing and just wait to see if our bet won in the lottery of media attention. In this case it did.

There is also a British organization with a Twitter account dating back to 2009 called Full Fact: Full Fact - Full Fact is the UK's independent fact checking organisation They have some ideas of how to go about fact checking and some of it is useful.

The UK is still a member of the EU and probably will remain, what is the situation there? That is a huge subject, but recently there was: Calling out the MSM: Corbyn ally slams BBC for 'consciously' contributing to Labour's disastrous election defeat
But there was also:
Someone Meddled in the UK Election & It Wasn't Russia
which had these links in a comment:

• BBC deliberately broadcasts 'coded negative imagery' of Corbyn, top British lawyer claims
• BBC's anti-Corbyn hatchet job fails to land blow - Panorama exposé full of innuendo and ommissions
• UK intelligence report finds NO EVIDENCE of Russian meddling in British politics - No.10 delays release until after election
• Polls show Corbyn is the most unpopular opposition leader since 1977

See also Hot mic moment exposes insane sleaziness of British political/media class -- Sott.net

Labour MP and chronic left-puncher Jess Phillips appeared on Channel 4 to talk about how devastated she was about the news of exit polls showing her party's crushing defeat, except the cameras switched on before she was prepared and caught her in the middle of a joyful chuckle. It took several seconds and the overt reminders from the show's hosts to put on a "straight face" and act emotional before she could conceal her cheery mood as Corbyn's Labour leadership was trampled underfoot by odious empire lackey Boris Johnson.

Britain also is home to the present prison of Julian Assange. And if those who stand up for Assange in the UK appear to be a minority, how many in the EU parliament have spoken up for Julian Assange? Not many, as I found out in another post.
Wikileaks - Julian Assange Discussion where the most recent article about the issue was Conference at European Parliament defends Julian Assange
That the defence of Julian Assange is left to a few people on the European left is very revealing about the Fake News Overlords in the EU, don't you think? It really puts the efforts of DFRLab and EUvsDisinfo and StopFake in perspective.

 

[thorbiorn]

An update, since RT and Sputnik, have been made unavailable within the EU

Tonight I had a funny incident. I was looking for the original of an image, to find out where it came from, but was informed by the Google system:

As a result of a legal request submitted to Google, we have removed 3 result (s) from this page. You can read more about the request at LumenDatabase.org.

Okay! Following the above link followed

Government Request Removal Complaint to Google​

SENDER European Commission​

[Private]BESent on March 04, 2022COUNTRY: BE

RECIPIENT Google LLC​

[Private]Mountain View, CA, 94043, US

SUBMITTER​

Google LLC​

OTHER ENTITIES:

• PRINCIPAL

Re: Unknown​

NOTICE TYPE:Government Request

Explanation of Request​

I formatted the text and bolded sections too. There was a printing error, therefore the (sic). One could ask questions to how these decisions were really taken. At the moment, there is no information.

From: <@ec.europa.eu>
Date: Fri, Mar 4, 2022, 6:57 PM
Subject: Ukraine
Dear Signatories,
I am sending you the below email on behalf of [redacted], in order to provide clarifications related to the sanctions, following up on questions received.
Kind regards,
[redacted]
Disclaimer: please note that this is an informal position, which does not bind the Commission. Please also note that it is for national judges and ultimately for the European Court of Justice to rule on the interpretation of Union law.

Internet search services
In the Regulation the legislator intends to set out a very broad and comprehensive prohibition. Internet search services are provided by “operators” for the purposes of the Regulation. The Regulation prohibits both the broadcasting (which is a very broad concept in this Regulation) and the fact that operators “enable, facilitate or otherwise contribute to broadcast”. The Regulation refers in that regard to “including through transmission or distribution by any means such as cable, satellite, IP-TV, internet service providers, internet video-sharing platforms or applications.” Furthermore, the anti-circumvention clause laid down in the Regulation is worded in very broad terms. A broad construction of the prohibition laid down in the Regulation is also consistent with its objective, which is in particular to tackle the fact that RT and Sputnik have to date gravely distorted and manipulated facts and have repeatedly and consistently targeted European political parties, especially during election periods, as well as civil society, asylum seekers, Russian ethnic minorities, gender minorities, and the functioning of democratic institutions in the Union and its Member States (recital 6); the Russian Federation has engaged in continuous and concerted propaganda actions targeted at civil society in the Union and neighbouring countries, gravely distorting and manipulating facts (recital 7).

Search engines such as Google are designed to index results containing any possible content; they index websites throughout the world; the information is indexed by their ‘web crawlers’ or robots, that is to say, computer programmes used to locate and sweep up the content of web pages methodically and automatically (see by analogy judgment of the ECJ in Google Spain, C‑131/12, para. 43). The activity of search engines plays a decisive role in the overall dissemination of content in that it renders the latter accessible to any internet user making a search on the basis of the content indication or related terms, including to internet users who otherwise would not have found the web page on which that content is published (see by analogy judgment of the ECJ in Google Spain, C‑131/12, para. 36). Consequently, if search engines such as Google did not delist RT and Sputnik, they would facilitate the public’s access to the content of RT and Sputnik, or contribute to such access.

It follows from the foregoing that by virtue of the Regulation, providers of Internet search services must make sure that i) any link to the Internet sites of RT and Sputnik and ii) any content of RT and Sputnik, including short textual descriptions, visual elements and links to the corresponding websites do not appear in the search results delivered to users located in the EU.

Social media
In the Regulation the legislator intends to set out a very broad and comprehensive prohibition. Social media are operators and they offer a service to their users. The Regulation prohibits both the broadcasting (which is a very broad concept in this Regulation) and the fact that operators “enable, facilitate or otherwise contribute to broadcast”. The Regulation refers to “including through transmission or distribution by any means such as cable, satellite, IP-TV, internet service providers, internet video-sharing platforms or applications.” Furthermore, the circumvention clause is worded in very broad terms. A broad construction of those terms is also consistent with
the objective of the Regulation, which aims to tackle the fact that RT and Sputnik have to date gravely distorted and manipulated facts and have repeatedly and consistently targeted European political parties, especially during election periods, as well as civil society, asylum seekers, Russian ethnic minorities, gender minorities, and the functioning of democratic institutions in the Union and its Member States (recital 6); the Russian Federation has engaged in continuous and concerted propaganda actions targeted at civil society in the Union and neighbouring countries, gravely distorting and manipulating facts (recital 7).

It follows from the foregoing that social media must prevent users from broadcasting (lato sensu) any content of RT and Sputnik. That applies both to accounts which appear as belonging to individuals who are likely to be used by RT/Sputnik and to any other individuals. Moreover, social media accounts that either formally or de facto belong to RT and Sputnik or their affiliates must be suspended because it is prohibited under paragraph 1 and furthermore falls into “distribution arrangement”. As regards the posts made by individuals that reproduce the content of RT and Sputnik, those posts shall not be published and, if published, must be deleted. There is of course a dividing line between, on the one hand, content by RT and Sputnik reproduced (broadcast) by an individual and, on the other hand, content by the author of the post; that line needs to be drawn also because the Regulation needs to be construed in line with the principle of proportionality and the fundamental right to freedom of speech. Admittedly, that line might be difficult to draw in
certain cases in practice. It is true that social media are put under strain and that is in tension with the prohibition of general monitoring obligation laid down in Art. 15 E-commerce Directive. However, the decision to fully depart in the present Regulation from the E-commerce Directive has been a conscious one and justified on the ground of the situation and its temporary character.

Use of the content in media reporting on the sanction
Pursuant to the freedom of speech, media have the right to report objectively on current events and to form their opinions thereon. The freedom of speech also entails that users have the right to receive objective information on current events. At the same time, the right to free speech can be restricted for legitimate public interests in a proportionate manner. Where a media outlet other than Russia Today and Sputnik reports about the current Regulation and it (sic) consequences, it may inter alia provide the content and in that regard it may refer to pieces of news by RT and Sputnik, in order to illustrate the type of information given by the two Russian media outlets concerned with a view to informing their readers/viewers objectively and completely. The right of free speech of other media outlets can however not be used to circumvent the Regulation: under Article 12, “It shall be prohibited to participate, knowingly and
intentionally, in activities the object or effect of which is to circumvent prohibitions in this Regulation.” Therefore, if another media outlet purports to inform its readers/viewers, but in reality its conduct aims at broadcasting Russia Today or Sputink content to the public or has that effect, it will be in breach of the prohibition laid down in the Regulation.

1. Government Request #1​

   SUBJECT
   URLS OF ORIGINAL WORK:
   1. No copyrighted URLs were submitted.
   URLS MENTIONED IN REQUEST:
   1. rt.com - 1 URL
   2. sputniknews.com - 1 URL
   3. Click here
   to request access and see full URLs.

JURISDICTIONSBE

Supporting Documents​

1. Request full access to Government Request Removal Complaint to Google :: Lumen

I did request, but there was not more to say than above. I should however get updates. Attached is also a print of the pages.

It is a long time since I wrote anything here, so just to refresh, one actor is: EUvsDisinfo, which has a disclaimer:

DISCLAIMER
Cases in the EUvsDisinfo database focus on messages in the international information space that are identified as providing a partial, distorted, or false depiction of reality and spread key pro-Kremlin messages. This does not necessarily imply, however, that a given outlet is linked to the Kremlin or editorially pro-Kremlin, or that it has intentionally sought to disinform. EUvsDisinfo publications do not represent an official EU position, as the information and opinions expressed are based on media reporting and analysis of the East Stratcom Task Force.

However.

East StratCom Task Force​

The East StratCom Task Force (ESCTF) is a part of the European External Action Service, focused on "effective communication" and promotion of European Union activities in Eastern Europe (including Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine)[1][2] and beyond[3] (Russia itself).[1] The task force's flagship project is EUvsDisinfo, a database of articles and media which the organization considers as providing false, distorted or partial information.[4]

StratCom is short for "Strategic Communication" As mentioned earlier, I believe, the name has a parallel in NATO StratCom COE. Indeed: https://stratcomcoe(.)org/news/eu-commission-president-and-nato-secretary-general-visits-nato-stratcom-coe/145 reports

28th November 2021

EU Commission President and NATO Secretary General visit NATO StratCom COE​

The joint visit of NATO Secretary General Mr Jens Stoltenberg and and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen to Lithuania and Latvia took place on November 27, 2021 to demonstrate solidarity with NATO Allies and EU member states in the Baltic region, and to further strengthen the cooperation between NATO and the EU. As part of the visit delegation received briefings on current hybrid threats by Col Jaak Tarien, Director of the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence, Ms Teija Tiilikainen, Director of the European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats and Mr Jānis Sārts, Director of the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence.

The brief prepared by the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence provides the information on influence as a tool of hybrid threats. The brief emphasizes the wide use of hybrid tools by authoritatian regimes, the intentions of malicious actors to exploit the open nature of democratic societies to deliberately interfere in internal affairs and create a climate of distrust, as well as provides a summary of recent malign activities StratCom COE has observed in the digital environment. For the full version of the brief see the attachment.
More information on the visit: Joint NATO-EU visit highlights solidarity and cooperation through visit to Baltic region by NATO

And going back to 2016, the EU published a document. The Muslim fundamentalist were in hindsight, little more than a smoke screen.

DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR EXTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT EP/EXPO/B/FWC/AFET/2015-01/02 EN May 2016 - PE 578.008 © European Union, 2016 IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS
EU strategic communications With a view to counteracting propaganda
Emanating from Russia in the east and the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in the south, the EU has been increasingly hit by destabilising messages amounting – in different forms and to different degrees – to coherent hostile ‘strategic communications’ campaigns, or the processes of infusing communications activities with an agenda or plan to impact the behaviour of a target audience. Both Russia and ISIL have engaged in aggressive messaging and deceptive media campaigns, albeit with distinct narratives, targets and audiences. This paper analyses the ‘what’ and the ‘how’: the respective narratives of each actor, their specificities, their similarities and their differences. The analysis also draws attention to strategic communications efforts undertaken by the EU, which are vectored into defensive (react and respond) and offensive (probe and push) dimensions. This understanding of the present context finally allows for an evaluation of what actions can be taken to enhance the effectiveness of the EU’s own strategic communications.

The content shows, again, a parallel path of EU and NATO, with NATO leading, in fact.

Table of contents 1
Introduction 4
1.1 What’s in a name? 4
1.2 East, south and inside 4
2 Strategic communications from the east: Russia 6
2.1 Russia’s grand narrative(s)… 6
2.2 …and target audiences 10
2.3 Russia’s impact 13
3 NATO’s strategic communications 18
3.1 Back to the future? 19
4 Strategic communications from the south: ISIL 20
4.1 ISIL’s grand narrative(s)… 20
4.2 …and target audiences 21
4.3 ISIL’s modus operandi 23
4.4 Counter-narratives in Arabic 24
4.5 Counter-narratives in English and other languages 26
5 EU strategic communications: where from and what next 29
5.1 General approaches 29
5.2 Specific approaches 31
6 Bibliography 33

I looked up what the paper blames Russia for:

Box 2: Conspiracy theories Several Kremlin-financed media outlets are covertly spreading anti-Western conspiracy theories.
Among them are:
• The disappeared Malaysian MH370 airplane might have been shot down by the US;
• The Malaysian MH17 plane could have been shot down by an Israeli missile or a Ukrainian fighter jet;
• The German authorities tried to cover up the alleged rape of Russian girl ‘Liza’ by migrants in Berlin;
• The West is killing off defence witnesses of Serbian war criminals in the Hague;
• The 9/11 attacks may have been planned by the US government; and
• Western politicians such as Madeleine Albright’s have a ‘pathological hatred of Slavs’ and ‘the war in Kosovo was considered only a first step to establish control over Russia’. These were allegedly determined by a former KGB officer with the supposed ability to read minds.

The impression is that even the paper about counteracting propaganda is itself very much a piece of propaganda, in fact of a worse kind.

 

[thorbiorn]

Box 2: Conspiracy theories Several Kremlin-financed media outlets are covertly spreading anti-Western conspiracy theories.
Among them are:
• The disappeared Malaysian MH370 airplane might have been shot down by the US;
• The Malaysian MH17 plane could have been shot down by an Israeli missile or a Ukrainian fighter jet;
• The German authorities tried to cover up the alleged rape of Russian girl ‘Liza’ by migrants in Berlin;
• The West is killing off defence witnesses of Serbian war criminals in the Hague;
• The 9/11 attacks may have been planned by the US government; and
• Western politicians such as Madeleine Albright’s have a ‘pathological hatred of Slavs’ and ‘the war in Kosovo was considered only a first step to establish control over Russia’. These were allegedly determined by a former KGB officer with the supposed ability to read minds.

The impression is that even the paper about counteracting propaganda is itself very much a piece of propaganda, in fact of a worse kind.

One more note about the above is that while it may be wrong to claim that "The 9/11 attacks may have been planned by the US government" it certainly is in the right direction compared to the Osama bin Laden did it. Similarly with "The Malaysian MH17 plane could have been shot down by an Israeli missile or a Ukrainian fighter jet;" which actually reveal some very serious ideas. To argue a case that is not official and "self-evident", one would need to substantiate and go into the details.

Looking through the list of posts, I could not find a place in this thread where I had shared the image from 2016 which explains what NATO-EU deem to be troll tactics. One can hardly be surprised to find out that they consider using historical references and discussing what they label conspiracy to be troll tactics.

That irony and sarcasm are listed, which does not mean one can not get away with it if done well. What would survive in a more tightly controlled environment are allusions that fly under the radar, something like this image of George Orwell reading the update to his 1984, "2022", that is up on SOTT at the time of posting:

For an example of how information campaigns are used in 2022, with reagard to Ukraine see: Ukraine’s Propaganda War: International PR Firms, DC Lobbyists and CIA Cutouts The impression is that much of the news information control is spread out and even outsourced.

 

[thorbiorn]

Listening to an interview with Abby Martin, where they discuss the action against Sputnik and RT in the US. But it actually took place in many NATO aligned western countries, including all of the EU, where the networks were even technologically logged out.

What she says is that it is part of a long term plan, as we know, the Governments wish to clamp down on perspectives that contradict what they wish.

In fact, there are many videos in old SOTT articles, that in my location come with a message "Not available in your country". As a way out, one can try to find alternative postings of the same video, by looking up the title and author in one or more search engines.

Here is an example where it is gone: Government Mind Control: MKULTRA & LSD -- Sott.net This video is of course very relevant for the security of NATO in its proxy war in Ukraine. This video is from 2012, and others can be found, but still. Here is an example where it worked out: 'The goal was to destroy the human mind': Chris Hedges interviews author Stephen Kinzer on the CIA's search for mind control -- Sott.net

The last NewsReal show also ended up in the Google delete basket, though I still wonder why. Here it is: NewsReal: USA De-industrializing Europe? EU Insiders Issue Stark Warning This is the new normal after Covide and Ukraine conflict.