The following helps to explain other questions discussed or noticed in this thread. It turns out someone in Denmark has noticed that the perpetual policy of blaming the Russians serves very well to stifle local debate. It was written by the opinion editor fr
He continues:
The above version was translated from a blog Det er russernes skyld – Ekstra Bladet Actually I found a picture of the article, in which the language is somewhat more elaborated. The blog has probably served as a draft for the final article and probably some language editors have been working to perfect the wording. When I translated parts of the text using a machine, whether Google or Yandex, there were quite a few errors. Perhaps it is because "the draft" is closer to informal speech and uses phrases and ways of spelling that the machines are unfamiliar with. This hypothesis could be tested by entering the written text into the same machines and compare.
The last paragraph shows something quite common, at least in parts of Scandinavia; people will discover something rotten in their own backyard, but be convinced the world as a whole is honest and decent. Many can not imagine how deep it goes. One could also interpret the last paragraph as a caveat, in order to prepare the minds of people very convinced of what they read about Russia to even consider his suggestion that "It's the Russian" card is being misused.Friday. 14. dec. 2018 - at. 16:19
It is the fault of the Russians
Mads Kastrup. editor of opinions at Ekstrabladet, writes about politics, culture, and society.
It is their fault.
They conspire against us. The Russians are behind or have manifestly a hand in virtually all the stir in the West. Any European election and any debate is manipulated through robot-profiles, that generates ’fake news’ on the social media, it is said.
Hasn't this become a too convenient explanation, I would like to ask.
For example, the Prime Minister, Lars Løkke, left Monday for Morocco and signed a migration pact, which has, to put it mildly, been marinated in dissatisfaction on domestic social media.
A bad case for the Prime Minister, apparently. But the Ministry of Foreign Affairs allowed a leak to the Althing.dk, that ’Facebook-bots’ probably had a part in the criticism. The Alting gave uncritically the story wings. Others flew with it.
Løkke could then without being direct - imply that ’someone had turned on’ dissatisfaction with the Migrations Pact. There was talk about a dangerous influence of attitudes here. Løkke did not even have to say the Russians. For that he had people, he had the media.
I do not doubt the Russians like to interfere. And do influence. The French government has initiated a study of possible Russian influence on the violent demonstrations in several French cities in recent weeks. And the great beast of revelation - beyond the Brexit beast - is as well known how much the Russians had in the election of Donald Trump as American president. It is still in committee.
He continues:
He ends by referring to the news that there was little influencing going on via automated bots on a platform like Facebook.But hardly every criticism or stir in the West can be attributed to the Russians. Or 'unknown forces', as it is sometimes called when Russians are intended.
Altinget presented five of allegedly 16 profiles, which a ministerial review meant were bots. They probably were too. But when one investigates them, none of the five facebook profiles - left in the Alting's letterbox by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs - show clear evidence that they have manipulated the migration debate. Yes, no signs of major activity in any relevant context exist.
Nevertheless, there was great uproar and praise for the Alting. With remarks like 'scary'. And in addition, 'good work'. In spite of the angle of the history and the reactions to this, it showed most of all, how passivating speculation about "Russian interference" works on the media. It has turned into something like commanding a dog to 'sit!' .
[...]
The above version was translated from a blog Det er russernes skyld – Ekstra Bladet Actually I found a picture of the article, in which the language is somewhat more elaborated. The blog has probably served as a draft for the final article and probably some language editors have been working to perfect the wording. When I translated parts of the text using a machine, whether Google or Yandex, there were quite a few errors. Perhaps it is because "the draft" is closer to informal speech and uses phrases and ways of spelling that the machines are unfamiliar with. This hypothesis could be tested by entering the written text into the same machines and compare.
Last edited: