PBS - "Sock Puppetry::Bloggers Must Be Vigilant Against Astroturf Comments" - Paranoia or Not?

[TomCADem]

Here is a blogger who wrote an article a while back promoting net neutrality. He was surprised by the number of comments from individuals who were opposed to net neutrality, and endorsed a very pro-telecom company view. It is one thing to have the companies themselves oppose net neutrality, but random folks on the internet?

The question is whether this blogger is simply being paranoid or whether the posts on his site accurately reflect that most of his readers are actually against net neutrality. Afterall, the number of negative posts against net neutrality must be an accurate proxy of opposition, right?

For example, on DU, during e-mail climategate, just because this Board experienced a deluge of posts attacking the climate scientists for their alleged duplicity, that does not mean that the anti-climate change posters were necessarily sock puppets. Indeed, perhaps I can find a link to such threads because I was surprised at how many DUers question the basic science of climate change, and in fact believe that the earth is cooling. Indeed, I learned on DU that efforts to control greenhouse gases were nothing more than an effort by banks to securitize pollution! Who knew that environmentalists were the man!

http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2006/06/sock-puppetrybloggers-must-be-vigilant-against-astroturf-comments156.html

If you run an online forum or a blog that allows readers to comment, you sometimes feel like you're having a conversation in the fog. Often people will contribute anonymously or make up names or places where they live, or even lie about their gender, age or occupation.

So what can you do about it? You might require a valid email address, but it's difficult to force people to be honest in an online forum because dishonesty is so ingrained in this type of forum, as is anonymity.

The issue came up here on MediaShift when a number of people (or what appeared to be a number of people) expressed their opposition to Net neutrality legislation. Timothy Karr, campaign director of Free Press, did a little basic sleuthing to find a coordinated campaign by various blog and forum posters who gave talking points from telecom companies opposed to Net neutrality. I followed up and wondered whether this campaign was indeed coming from telecom companies or people they paid.

While I have seen a lot of evidence pointing toward certain individuals who post time and again against Net neutrality, I haven't found a "smoking gun" that proves without a doubt that this campaign is paid for by telecom companies. But it does speak volumes that none of these individuals would respond to my queries or those of other bloggers interested in this topic. If they are not being paid, and are not working in a concerted effort as it appears, then why not at least deny it?

[Puzzler]

1. ... and no denials from the sock puppets themselves.

[FrenchieCat]

2. I've been smelling them for weeks.....

they pile on where the piling on looks nice and high!

Like they say, an enemy of Barack Obama is a Friend of theirs!

[Turn CO Blue]

3. I have been here since 2004. I took a year off from DU

I came back about a month ago - read DU for an hour per day...and MAN! there are some posters and threads that smell funky to me. I can hardly believe it.

[jberryhill]

4. On Usenet, people used their real names

And in the real world, people used to stand behind their words.