The web brigades (Russian: Веб-бригады ) are alleged online teams of commentators linked to security services that participate in political blogs and Internet forums to promote disinformation and prevent free discussions of undesirable subjects. Allegations of the existence of web brigades were made in a 2003 article "The Virtual Eye of the Big Brother"
An article "Conspiracy theory" published in Russian journal in 2003 criticized the theory of web brigades as an attempt at creating myths by Russian liberal thinkers in a response to the massive "sobering up" of the Russian people. A point was made that the observed behaviour of forum participants may be explained without a theory of FSB-affiliated brigades.
As mentioned in 2007 sociological research of large groups in Russian society by the RIO-Center, the belief in the existence of web-brigades is widespread in RuNet. Authors say "it's difficult to say whether hypothesis of existence of web-brigades corresponds to reality", but acknowledge that users professing views and methods ascribed to members of web-brigades may be found at all opposition forums of RuNet.
The expression "red web-brigades" (Красные веб-бригады) used by Anna Polyanskaya as a title to her article is a pun with "Red Brigades".
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Polyanskaya's article
This alleged phenomenon in RuNet was described in 2003 by journalist Anna Polyanskaya (a former assistant to assassinated Russian politician Galina Starovoitova), historian Andrey Krivov and political activist Ivan Lomako. They described organized and professional "brigades", composed of ideologically and methodologically identical personalities, who were working in practically every popular liberal and pro-democracy Internet forums and Internet newspapers of RuNet.
The activity of Internet teams appeared in 1999 and were organized by the Russian state security service, according to Polyanskaya. According to authors, about 70% of audience of Russian Internet were people of generally liberal views prior to 1998–1999, however sudden surge (about 60-80%) of "antidemocratic" posts suddenly occurred at many Russian forums in 2000.
According to Polyanskaya and her colleagues, the behavior of people from the web brigades has distinct features, some of which are the following:
Any change in Moscow's agenda leads to immediate changes in the brigade's opinions.
Boundless loyalty to Vladimir Putin and his circle.
Respect and admiration for the KGB and FSB.
Nostalgia for the Soviet Union and propaganda of the Communist ideology, and constant attempts to present in a positive light the entire history of Russia and the Soviet Union, minimizing the number of people who died in repressions.
Anti-liberal, anti-American, anti-Chechen, anti-Semitic and anti-western opinions. Xenophobia, racism, approval of skinheads and pogroms.
Accusation of Russophobia against everyone who disagrees with them.
Hatred of dissidents and human rights organizations and activists, political prisoners and journalists, especially Anna Politkovskaya, Sergei Kovalev, Elena Bonner, Grigory Pasko, Victor Shenderovich, and Valeria Novodvorskaya.
Emigrants are accused of being traitors of the motherland. Some members will claim that they live in some Western country and tell stories about how much better life is in Putin's Russia.
Before the Iraq War, the brigade's anti-U.S. operations reached unseen scale. The original publication describes: "it sometimes seemed that the U.S. was not liberating the Iraqi people from Saddam Hussein, but at a minimum had actually launched an attack on Russia and was marching on the Kremlin." However, it fell silent suddenly after Putin announced that Russia was not opposed to the victory of the coalition forces in Iraq.
Polyanskaya's article describes the "tactics" of the alleged web brigades:
Frequent changes of pseudonyms.
Round-the-clock presence on forums. At least one of the uniform members of the team can be found online at all times, always ready to repulse any “attack” by a liberal.
Intentional diversion of pointed discussions. For instance, the brigade may claim that Pol Pot never had any connection with Communism or that not a single person was killed in Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968 by Soviet tanks.
Individual work on opponents. "As soon as an opposition-minded liberal arrives on a forum, expressing a position that makes them a clear "ideological enemy”, he is immediately cornered and subjected to “active measures” by the unified web-brigade. Without provocation, the opponent is piled on with abuse or vicious “arguments” of the sort that the average person cannot adequately react to. As a result, the liberal either answers sharply, causing a scandal and getting himself labeled a “boor” by the rest of the brigade, or else he starts to make arguments against the obvious absurdities, to which his opponents pay no attention, but simply ridicule him and put forth other similar arguments."
Accusations that opponents are working for “enemies”. The opponents are accused of taking money from Berezovskiy, the CIA, the MOSSAD, Saudi Arabia, the Zionists, or the Chechen rebels.
Making personally offensive comments. Tendency to accuse their opponents of being insane during arguments.
Remarkable ability to reveal personal information about their opponents and their quotes from old postings, sometimes more than a year old.
Teamwork. "They unwaveringly support each other in discussions, ask each other leading questions, put fine points on each other’s answers, and even pretend not to know each other. If an opponent starts to be hounded, this hounding invariably becomes a team effort, involving all of the three to twenty nicknames that invariably are present on any political forum 24 hours a day."
Appealing to the Administration. The members of teams often "write mass collective complaints about their opponents to the editors, site administrators, or the electronic “complaints book”, demanding that one or another posting or whole discussion thread they don’t like be removed, or calling for the banning of individuals they find problematic."
Destruction of inconvenient forums. For example, on the site of the Moscow News, all critics of Putin and the FSB "were suddenly and without any explanation banned from all discussions, despite their having broken none of the site’s rules of conduct. All the postings of this group of readers, going back a year and a half, were erased by the site administrator."
The activity of Internet teams appeared in 1999 and were organized by the Russian state security service, according to Polyanskaya. According to authors, about 70% of audience of Russian Internet were people of generally liberal views prior to 1998–1999, however sudden surge (about 60-80%) of "antidemocratic" posts suddenly occurred at many Russian forums in 2000.
According to Polyanskaya and her colleagues, the behavior of people from the web brigades has distinct features, some of which are the following:
Any change in Moscow's agenda leads to immediate changes in the brigade's opinions.
Boundless loyalty to Vladimir Putin and his circle.
Respect and admiration for the KGB and FSB.
Nostalgia for the Soviet Union and propaganda of the Communist ideology, and constant attempts to present in a positive light the entire history of Russia and the Soviet Union, minimizing the number of people who died in repressions.
Anti-liberal, anti-American, anti-Chechen, anti-Semitic and anti-western opinions. Xenophobia, racism, approval of skinheads and pogroms.
Accusation of Russophobia against everyone who disagrees with them.
Hatred of dissidents and human rights organizations and activists, political prisoners and journalists, especially Anna Politkovskaya, Sergei Kovalev, Elena Bonner, Grigory Pasko, Victor Shenderovich, and Valeria Novodvorskaya.
Emigrants are accused of being traitors of the motherland. Some members will claim that they live in some Western country and tell stories about how much better life is in Putin's Russia.
Before the Iraq War, the brigade's anti-U.S. operations reached unseen scale. The original publication describes: "it sometimes seemed that the U.S. was not liberating the Iraqi people from Saddam Hussein, but at a minimum had actually launched an attack on Russia and was marching on the Kremlin." However, it fell silent suddenly after Putin announced that Russia was not opposed to the victory of the coalition forces in Iraq.
Polyanskaya's article describes the "tactics" of the alleged web brigades:
Frequent changes of pseudonyms.
Round-the-clock presence on forums. At least one of the uniform members of the team can be found online at all times, always ready to repulse any “attack” by a liberal.
Intentional diversion of pointed discussions. For instance, the brigade may claim that Pol Pot never had any connection with Communism or that not a single person was killed in Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968 by Soviet tanks.
Individual work on opponents. "As soon as an opposition-minded liberal arrives on a forum, expressing a position that makes them a clear "ideological enemy”, he is immediately cornered and subjected to “active measures” by the unified web-brigade. Without provocation, the opponent is piled on with abuse or vicious “arguments” of the sort that the average person cannot adequately react to. As a result, the liberal either answers sharply, causing a scandal and getting himself labeled a “boor” by the rest of the brigade, or else he starts to make arguments against the obvious absurdities, to which his opponents pay no attention, but simply ridicule him and put forth other similar arguments."
Accusations that opponents are working for “enemies”. The opponents are accused of taking money from Berezovskiy, the CIA, the MOSSAD, Saudi Arabia, the Zionists, or the Chechen rebels.
Making personally offensive comments. Tendency to accuse their opponents of being insane during arguments.
Remarkable ability to reveal personal information about their opponents and their quotes from old postings, sometimes more than a year old.
Teamwork. "They unwaveringly support each other in discussions, ask each other leading questions, put fine points on each other’s answers, and even pretend not to know each other. If an opponent starts to be hounded, this hounding invariably becomes a team effort, involving all of the three to twenty nicknames that invariably are present on any political forum 24 hours a day."
Appealing to the Administration. The members of teams often "write mass collective complaints about their opponents to the editors, site administrators, or the electronic “complaints book”, demanding that one or another posting or whole discussion thread they don’t like be removed, or calling for the banning of individuals they find problematic."
Destruction of inconvenient forums. For example, on the site of the Moscow News, all critics of Putin and the FSB "were suddenly and without any explanation banned from all discussions, despite their having broken none of the site’s rules of conduct. All the postings of this group of readers, going back a year and a half, were erased by the site administrator."
Friday, February 27, 2009
In general, attempts at hiding the blogger's name and/or the place of employment in anonymity have proved ineffective at protecting the blogger.
In general, attempts at hiding the blogger's name and/or the place of employment in anonymity have proved ineffective at protecting the blogger. Employees who blog about elements of their place of employment raise the issue of employee branding, since their activities can begin to affect the brand recognition of their employer.
In fall 2004, Ellen Simonetti was fired for what was deemed by her employer, Delta Air Lines, to be inappropriate material on her blog. She subsequently wrote a book based on her blog.Delta Air Lines fired flight attendant Ellen Simonetti because she posted photographs of herself in uniform on an airplane and because of comments posted on her blog "Queen of Sky: Diary of a Flight Attendant" which the employer deemed inappropriate. This case highlighted the issue of personal blogging and freedom of expression vs. employer rights and responsibilities, and so it received wide media attention. Simonetti took legal action against the airline for "wrongful termination, defamation of character and lost future wages". The suit was postponed while Delta was in bankruptcy proceedings (court docket).
In the spring of 2006, Erik Ringmar, a tenured senior lecturer at the London School of Economics, was ordered by the convenor of his department to "take down and destroy" his blog in which he discussed the quality of education at the school.
Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks, was fined during the 2006 NBA playoffs for criticizing NBA officials on the court and in his blog.
Mark Jen was terminated in 2005 after 10 days of employment as an Assistant Product Manager at Google for discussing corporate secrets on his personal blog, then called 99zeros and hosted on the Google-owned Blogger service. He blogged about unreleased products and company finances a week before the company's earnings announcement. He was fired two days after he complied with his employer's request to remove the sensitive material from his blog.
In India, blogger Gaurav Sabnis resigned from IBM after his posts exposing the false claims of a management school, IIPM, led to management of IIPM threatening to burn their IBM laptops as a sign of protest against him.
Jessica Cutler, aka "The Washingtonienne", blogged about her sex life while employed as a congressional assistant. After the blog was discovered and she was fired, she wrote a novel based on her experiences and blog: The Washingtonienne: A Novel. Cutler is presently being sued by one of her former lovers in a case that could establish the extent to which bloggers are obligated to protect the privacy of their real life associates.
Catherine Sanderson, a.k.a. Petite Anglaise, lost her job in Paris at a British accountancy firm because of blogging.[41] Although given in the blog in a fairly anonymous manner, some of the descriptions of the firm and some of its people were less than flattering. Sanderson later won a compensation claim case against the British firm, however.
On the other hand, Penelope Trunk, writing in the Globe in 2006, was one of the first to point out that a large portion of bloggers are professionals and that a well-written blog can actually help attract employers.
Political Dangers
Blogging can sometimes have unforeseen consequences in politically sensitive areas. Blogs are much harder to control than broadcast or even print media. As a result, totalitarian and authoritarian regimes often seek to suppress blogs and/or to punish those who maintain them.
In Singapore, two ethnic Chinese were imprisoned under the country’s anti-sedition law for posting anti-Muslim remarks in their blogs.
Egyptian blogger Kareem Amer was charged with insulting the Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak and an Islamic institution through his online blog. It is the first time in the history of Egypt that a blogger was prosecuted. After a brief trial session that took place in Alexandria, the blogger was found guilty and sentenced to prison terms of three years for insulting Islam and inciting sedition, and one year for insulting Mubarak.
Egyptian blogger Abdel Monem Mahmoud was arrested in April 2007 for anti-government writings in his blog. Monem is a member of the banned Muslim Brotherhood.
After expressing opinions in his personal blog about the state of the Sudanese armed forces, Jan Pronk, United Nations Special Representative for the Sudan, was given three days notice to leave Sudan. The Sudanese army had demanded his deportation.
Personal Safety
One consequence of blogging is the possibility of attacks or threats against the blogger, sometimes without apparent reason. Kathy Sierra, author of the innocuous blog Creating Passionate Users, was the target of such vicious threats and misogynistic insults that she canceled her keynote speech at a technology conference in San Diego, fearing for her safety. While a blogger's anonymity is often tenuous, Internet trolls who would attack a blogger with threats or insults can be emboldened by anonymity. Sierra and supporters initiated an online discussion aimed at countering abusive online behavior and developed a blogger's code of conduct.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Teem Links
Alexander Yusupovskiy, head of the analytical department of the Federation Council of Russia (Russian Parliament) published in 2003 an article "Conspiracy theory" in Russian Journal with criticism of theory of web brigades. [2]
Yusupovskiy's points included:
According to Yusupovskiy, an active forum participant, it's not the first time he's faced an unfair method of polemics, when a person with "liberal democratic views" accused one's opponent of being an FSB agent as a final argument. Yusupovskiy himself didn't take Web brigades theory seriously, "naively" considering that officers of GRU or FSB have more topical problems than "comparing virtual penises" with liberals and emigrants. His own experience at forums also did not give him a reason proving the theory.
Yusupovskiy considered Polyanskaya's article an interesting opportunity to draw a line of demarcation between analytics and its imitation. According to Yusupovskiy, authors of the article are obsessed with "a single but strong affection": to find a "Big Brother" beyond any phenomena not fitting their mindsets. Yusupovskiy called an article a classic illustration of reverted "masonic conspiracy".
Although Yusupovskiy himself has a list of claims against Russian security services and their presense in virtual world (as "according to statements of media every security service is busy in the Internet tracking terrorism, extremism, narcotic traffic, human trafficking and child pornography"), his claims are of different nature than those of Polyanskaya.
Criticising Polyanskaya's point that Russian forums after 9/11 show "outstanding level of malice and hatred of the USA, gloat, slander and inhumanity" as "undifferentiated assessment bordering lie and slander", Yusupovskiy noted that there is a difference between "dislike of hegemonic policy of the United States" at Russian forums and "quite friendly attitude towards usual Americans". Aggression and xenophobia don't characterize one side but are a common place of discussion (as Yusupovskiy suggested, illusion of anonymity and absence of censorship allows such stuff to be taken from subconsciousness that won't let to be spoken aloud by an internal censor otherwise). According to Yusupovskiy,
No matter you are looking for Mail or Search any thin........Log on ez2.Me
Markets Now
Shop Links
Easy Shopping
World Travel
Jobs and Friendship Dating
Online Shops
Yusupovskiy's points included:
According to Yusupovskiy, an active forum participant, it's not the first time he's faced an unfair method of polemics, when a person with "liberal democratic views" accused one's opponent of being an FSB agent as a final argument. Yusupovskiy himself didn't take Web brigades theory seriously, "naively" considering that officers of GRU or FSB have more topical problems than "comparing virtual penises" with liberals and emigrants. His own experience at forums also did not give him a reason proving the theory.
Yusupovskiy considered Polyanskaya's article an interesting opportunity to draw a line of demarcation between analytics and its imitation. According to Yusupovskiy, authors of the article are obsessed with "a single but strong affection": to find a "Big Brother" beyond any phenomena not fitting their mindsets. Yusupovskiy called an article a classic illustration of reverted "masonic conspiracy".
Although Yusupovskiy himself has a list of claims against Russian security services and their presense in virtual world (as "according to statements of media every security service is busy in the Internet tracking terrorism, extremism, narcotic traffic, human trafficking and child pornography"), his claims are of different nature than those of Polyanskaya.
Criticising Polyanskaya's point that Russian forums after 9/11 show "outstanding level of malice and hatred of the USA, gloat, slander and inhumanity" as "undifferentiated assessment bordering lie and slander", Yusupovskiy noted that there is a difference between "dislike of hegemonic policy of the United States" at Russian forums and "quite friendly attitude towards usual Americans". Aggression and xenophobia don't characterize one side but are a common place of discussion (as Yusupovskiy suggested, illusion of anonymity and absence of censorship allows such stuff to be taken from subconsciousness that won't let to be spoken aloud by an internal censor otherwise). According to Yusupovskiy,
No matter you are looking for Mail or Search any thin........Log on ez2.Me
Markets Now
Shop Links
Easy Shopping
World Travel
Jobs and Friendship Dating
Online Shops
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
