The Chinese government has built up the world’s largest known online disinformation operation and is using it to harass US residents, politicians, and businesses—at times threatening its targets with violence, a CNN review of court documents and public disclosures by social media companies has found.

The onslaught of attacks – often of a vile and deeply personal nature – is part of a well-organized, increasingly brazen Chinese government intimidation campaign targeting people in the United States, documents show.

The US State Department says the tactics are part of a broader multi-billion-dollar effort to shape the world’s information environment and silence critics of Beijing that has expanded under President Xi Jinping. On Wednesday, President Biden is due to meet Xi at a summit in San Francisco.

Victims face a barrage of tens of thousands of social media posts that call them traitors, dogs, and racist and homophobic slurs. They say it’s all part of an effort to drive them into a state of constant fear and paranoia.

  • GBU_28@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hit em with that “Taiwan number 1” to send em back to the shadow realm

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I can’t prove it, but my hunch is a lot of the obnoxious people I argue with online, who seem unable to see reason or resist devolving to insults and twisting my words, are actually foreign operatives tasked with depleting American morale

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      IDK, I think there are a lot of pretentious idiots who refuse to engage in good faith discussions without any direct ties to any foreign governments. People adamantly hold on to all kinds of stupid opinions and argue fervently for them.

      So it’s hard to tell who the foreign operatives are if regular people are willing to spread disinformation without any kind of compensation.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        True, but the people funding disinformation operations believe they’re making a difference, and anti-disinformation operations like Bellingcat agree with them.

        I think a better way to view is that malicious actors have managed to weaponize the “pretentious idiots” you referred to, making them an integral part of their propaganda strategy. They’re useful idiots working for foreign governments without even knowing it, and the way they’re manipulated and amplifying deliberate propaganda makes them far more influential than they would be if they were just spewing their own personal idiocy.

      • cannache@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I prefer to add a dose of spicey humour or sweet idiocy to my conspiracies to keep the real spies off my tail

    • ExLisper@linux.community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Weird, my sensation is that everyone online agrees with me and thinks I’m very smart and overall a great guy.

    • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That’s where the psy-op is though. So much of our communication even in our local communities is done online anymore.

      So just putting that uncertainty in your head of “I bet a large percentage of people we interact with are just Pooh-bear sock puppets” might be enough subtle false-flagging to heavily polarize entire societies, when we remember China excels at taking bad things and applying them “at scale.”

      At a time when we’re deprived of and seeking community and social bonds, it’s isolating, it’s depressing, and it’s doing a ton of potential damage.

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I honestly can’t imagine any other reason why internet leftists would defend an autocratic capitalist nation so vehemently, while also putting so much effort into excluding European social democracy from leftist spaces.

      • StalinsSpoon@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Certainly social democracy would be an improvement for the US people over what the US currently has.

        Quick question, though, Wikipedia gives this definition of a communist state:

        A communist state is a form of government that combines state leadership of a communist party, Marxist–Leninist political philosophy and an official commitment to construct a communist society.

        How does this not apply to China? It sure makes sense to me that a communist forum would support a communist state…

        • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The problem with that is the fact its a descriptor. Basically ever so called communist state since the Soviet Union has in some way been influenced by so called “Marxist-Leninism” due to soviet and now chinese influence. The thing there is a shit-ton of leftists who see MLs as nothing more than fascists with a red paint job, so will thusly argue that china isnt communist.

          Plus you could have a communist society which actively lynches MLs which would actively invalidate that qoute you put up.

          Its a bad definition, itd be like making a definition for republics based solely on the the Commonwealth of England.

          • StalinsSpoon@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Fair, I’m not saying it’s a definition. This is Wikipedia we’re talking about. My point was more that a “communist state” (although the term is misleading) is really in active usage referring to a country with MLs in power that are working for the benefit of their citizens to achieve communism. That’s not an exact definition either, but it should convey the point well enough in terms of currently existing countries.

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nono tankies aren’t Chinese operators, they’re CIA, tasked to discredit the left. That’s important because they’d be proud of the former but are enraged by the latter.

      • StalinsSpoon@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        tasked to discredit the left

        Ah, yes, of course, the classic strategy of discrediting the left by using the viewpoints of the definitely not left wing movement of … checks notes communism?

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The strategy of equating a classless, stateless, and moneyless society with brutal, authoritarian, oligarchy-run, very much statist, state capitalism. Just paint all means of oppression red and it’s going to be fine, amirite?

          • StalinsSpoon@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Marxist-Leninists do not argue that when you have a communist revolution that you’ll just magically end up with communism. Look into the “dictatorship of the proletariat.”

            Just paint all means of oppression red and it’s going to be fine, amirite?

            No, of course not. China has a strategy of democratic centralism, which actually seems to be a quite effective implementation of a democracy. Unlike in countries like the US, Chinese citizens are quite satisfied with their government.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              democratic centralism, which actually seems to be a quite effective implementation of a democracy.

              Read your fucking Lenin. Democratic centralism is an organisational principle for parties, not for societies. Also it doesn’t work as the enforced unity (“thou shalt not question shit that has been voted on”) allows authoritarianism to take root, especially considering that party officials were never freely elected, but from lists drawn up by guess who those already in power.

              It’s always funny, Tankies thinking other leftists don’t know anything about the mechanics of ML parties and their state-level experiments. We do. We understand it. We know where it leads. That’s why we don’t want that shit because to communism it leads not. Granted Cuba is on a good path right now but, well, they’ve left a lot of that old ML stuff behind them.


              As to China. Fucking China. China doesn’t even have public healthcare. It has billionaires. It’s not even state capitalism it’s straight-up authoritarian capitalism. Singapore but in corrupt, without rule of law, and with polling that you can’t trust because people are both afraid of speaking their mind, as well as isolated from the world.

    • MrSqueezles@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Tik-Tok’s only problem is capitalism. /s

      I’d bet I’m not the first person to write that sentence on Lemmy, Hexbear and elsewhere. The problem is right here and everywhere.

  • 🖖USS-Ethernet@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Fuck the CCP, fuck and Chinese citizen participating in this, fuck your mudda, fuck your whole ancesta, like a someboody fuck you bic, Taiwan numba wun

  • Onfire@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ve been on reddit for over a decade. There were clear signs of Russian trolls on reddit during the 2016 election. What I witnessed was that people in general were very easily deceived.

    No longer on reddit so i cant tell of they are there, but the Chinese spam and disinformation bots/accounts are quite active on Twitter(X). I follow dozens of Chinese dissidents on Twitter and each time they tweet something, there are 5-10 bots tweeting sexual contents. It’s ridiculous.

    • crackajack@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      My experience with Chinese trolls on Reddit is that they are not discreet. They do not hide that they’re actively propagandising. Whereas Russian trolls are more effective and subtle by pretending to be local of other countries and sowing division. Although with the Ukrainian invasion, I see that Russian trolls became less discreet. Creative, in fact, with putting interesting spins into how the war in Ukraine is unfolding. My favourite is when a Russian troll asked “was Stalin a necessary evil?”. The poster reasoned that Stalin may have killed people, but he industrialised the Soviet Union. And Stalin may have blundered during the first phase of the invasion of Nazi Germany, but he won in the end. The poster then projected the history to support Putin and the war in Ukraine. An interesting spin but Putin has no competent military command and there is no one near enough to competently lead. Someone made a point that Putin has no Zhukov.

      Edit: spelling

    • Aolley@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is an idea that may help this, if it were built and then also used. it’s a form of group decision making based on fluid data that solidifies as more data comes in.

      One of the main aspects is that comments and things are compared to others to find how similar they are, something may present itself differently but be the same discussion. This method of identifying each ‘argument’ and ‘rebuttal’ goes hand in hand with declaring definitions so that conversations can’t be flipped around by a bad actor. There’s a big write up of the way it can be used to combat disinformation but as far as I know it’s just the outline of how such a system would work, no one has built the system.

      It’s kind of similar to voting sites like reddit but goes a lot farther in defining ways things work, and works so ostracize trolls and the like. but as it would require something no one online would ever go for, being in one way ‘tied’ to your offline person, that I don’t see it ever being a mainstream thing. Of course the accounts people would be using would be in no way identifiable unless selfdoxed they would still be like voter registration in that a real person had to be there once, and all things that person does online are here tied to them so that trolls and things show clearly over time. It’s really designed to be mostly a niche discussion platform engine for people in the same hobby or interest.

  • paddirn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Victims face a barrage of tens of thousands of social media posts that call them traitors, dogs, and racist and homophobic slurs. They say it’s all part of an effort to drive them into a state of constant fear and paranoia.

    I don’t think I’ve heard/read somebody getting called a “dog” much before (unless they’re referring to the other name somebody might use “b****”), isn’t that more a foreign and/or rural insult? I don’t remember ever getting hit with any of these myself, so maybe it stings more in that context, but that list of insults is almost comical and reads like words somebody would say that didn’t speak English as their primary language.

  • Bri Guy @sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean, just look at the comments section on X or Instagram and you’ll see this playing out in real time.

  • rusticus@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Freedom of speech should not extend to foreign adversaries. Give me the ability to geoblock social media just like I can with my router at home. Accurately label any domestic sources that are relaying this disinformation as well so I can block them too.

    • Pretzilla@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Geoblocking only works when they don’t VPN, Tor, or hack and remotely control grandma’s domestic computer, including her FB account.

      Keep trying, though. We need to figure something out.

      In 2016 a friend was attacking another of my friends on FB, and the ‘attacker’ had no idea it was happening.

      Presumably it was GRU at work, based on the nature of the attack.

      So that’s at least one vector that FB and NSA, etc., need to address for starters.

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Freedom of speech should not extend to foreign adversaries.

      Hot take incoming…

      Actually, I would argue the opposite.

      Now that we have global access to each other, we should be speaking to each other, and finding common ground. We all share the same planet.

      And when speaking to adversaries, we should consider what they’re saying for truthfulness or if it’s just an attack, before deciding to ignore/block it or not.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        A foreign adversary isn’t a uninformed troll engaging in debate. Their job is to attack a target. Supporting their right to attack is like supporting telemarketer scammers right to robocall everyone. You aren’t going to debate them out of scamming. They have a job to do.

        • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          A foreign adversary isn’t a uninformed troll engaging in debate.

          How do you know? It could be his/her day off.

          They have a job to do.

          A “foreign adversary” has many jobs, not all of them is to shape a narrative on the Internet.

          Having said that, my use of the term was more generic in nature, as a country that has opposing motives/goals than we do (Iran, etc.).

          We’re dancing close enough to the Armageddon line at this point as it is, its ok to pull back a bit and try peaceful means to resolve issues, instead of just ‘pushing the button’. Generally speaking, the more we talk, the less we fight.

          • Serinus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, but it makes a difference when that conversation is effectively controlled by whoever has the most bots and/or money. Especially when they’re using tactics like spam and just drowning out the conversation.

            I mean, you’ve seen Hexbear respond to things.

            • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Yes, but it makes a difference when that conversation is effectively controlled by whoever has the most bots and/or money. Especially when they’re using tactics like spam and just drowning out the conversation.

              Very true, but that’s not the point being discussed, this is …

              A foreign adversary isn’t a uninformed troll engaging in debate. Their job is to attack a target.

              Using misinformation on the Internet is a generic response to shape a false narrative, and not to attack a specific target (though that can be a side effect result).

              And also, an adversary will use the Internet as you described, where the OP was (effectively) saying that they don’t use comments on forums on the Internet at all, but instead do physical attacks only.

          • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You are ignoring the premise that these are identified foreign adversaries who are not looking for debate. There is no one to debate because the harassment if from fake accounts.

            The targets are being doxed, dogpiled, and “told to kill themselves”.

            • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              these are identified foreign adversaries who are not looking for debate.

              You are making an assumption (the italicized part).

              • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                It’s not an assumption. It is the basis of the article! Or do you actually support death threats?

                • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Or do you actually support death threats?

                  Ah damn it! You’ve discovered my nefarious plan! Curses!

                  /s

      • seejur@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is the same problem with being tolerant with intolerants. While ideologically might make sense, it’s a losing battle that favors bad faith actors.

        • hark@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not the same problem at all. Intolerance is straight-up hate with no logical basis and it calls for harmful actions against groups of people. Meanwhile there is a lot of room for interpretation and disagreement in global politics. What we’re seeing here is a fight between global powers to control the narrative, and it’s not just China doing it either.

        • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          While ideologically might make sense, it’s a losing battle that favors bad faith actors.

          That’s an assumption. You “trust but verify” (as a famous former president said), and if they’re not acting in good faith, then you move on from talking to other actions.

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    What? Shocked! Shocked I am to find out the second you go after the CCP an army of trolls shows up!

    • hark@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      After the army of CIA trolls had their circlejerk. Were you all directed to reply when the post dropped?

        • hark@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Based on downvotes, some people certainly are angry it’s being pointed out.

          • Krauerking@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No you are just being reactionary with a WhatAboutism. It’s about tone. It absolutely does deserve to be called out but like it can be pointed out for similarities or because you just want to shout that “they do it too!” And people don’t care much for that. It just doesn’t work to change minds, but shrink them against your statement because people are also reactionary.

  • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    From the article…

    But Linvill of Clemson University argues that the network uses a unique strategy of “flooding” conversations with so many comments that posts from genuine users receive less attention.

    “They are operating thousands of accounts at a time on a given platform, often to drown out conversations, just with sheer volume of messaging,” Linvill said. “When we think of disinformation, we often think of pushing ideas on users and making ideas more salient, whereas what China is doing is the opposite. They are trying to remove conversations from social media.”

    This is what’s always concerned me, more than anything else.

    If you can’t shape the narrative, you might as well destroy the environment any other narrative that would come from it. An anti-control, basically.

    As an analogy, a band at a party that plays it’s music so loud that no one can hear each other to be able to talk to each other.

    If we don’t get these bots/shills under control then meaningful conversation will never happen again in any large scale, and any chance for peace at a species level goes with it.

    The center will not hold.