D
Deleted member
Guest
Cambridge Analytica (CA) had helped to influence elections around the world for a very long time. I don't think this is in dispute.
Protagonists in election campaigns are allowed to lie and attempt to convince people - this is considered completely normal and widely accepted. Politicians are, after all, renowned for their dishonesty in making good on their election promises. Arguably the type of people who want to be in power are naturally probably the best deceivers of all of us.
Is lying the same as what Cambridge Analytica did though? The difference, as far as I can see is the level of targeting. Lying went on of course on the Leave and Remain sides - but that is normal.
What bothers me most is that, while CA helped achieve results in many elections, this intervention was so high-tech and so finely targeted as to be of a significantly higher order than in previous efforts.
If we even suspect that Military Grade information manipulation may have been used during the Brexit referendum then I still cannot understand why the whole thing was not declared invalid especially given the closeness of the result and the potential magnitude and long-lasting effects of the outcome.
It is nothing new that humans are almost hopelessly malleable - advertisers wouldn't advertise unless that were the case. I would go as far as saying that we are almost powerless over being manipulated and it could be regarded by some as being the ultimate weakness, even fragility of humankind.
So, do you think the level of manipulation at this level would be going too far? Are subconscious manipulations going too far?
I am not siding with anyone - it is a question about how far things should be allowed to go in elections, not a prelude to a discussion on whether it is true or not
Protagonists in election campaigns are allowed to lie and attempt to convince people - this is considered completely normal and widely accepted. Politicians are, after all, renowned for their dishonesty in making good on their election promises. Arguably the type of people who want to be in power are naturally probably the best deceivers of all of us.
Is lying the same as what Cambridge Analytica did though? The difference, as far as I can see is the level of targeting. Lying went on of course on the Leave and Remain sides - but that is normal.
What bothers me most is that, while CA helped achieve results in many elections, this intervention was so high-tech and so finely targeted as to be of a significantly higher order than in previous efforts.
If we even suspect that Military Grade information manipulation may have been used during the Brexit referendum then I still cannot understand why the whole thing was not declared invalid especially given the closeness of the result and the potential magnitude and long-lasting effects of the outcome.
It is nothing new that humans are almost hopelessly malleable - advertisers wouldn't advertise unless that were the case. I would go as far as saying that we are almost powerless over being manipulated and it could be regarded by some as being the ultimate weakness, even fragility of humankind.
So, do you think the level of manipulation at this level would be going too far? Are subconscious manipulations going too far?
I am not siding with anyone - it is a question about how far things should be allowed to go in elections, not a prelude to a discussion on whether it is true or not
Last edited by a moderator: