A. C. Grayling: Cambridge Analytica’s Influence on Trump & Brexit Voters
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 11. 2017
- A. C. Grayling, master of the New College of Humanities, describes Cambridge Analytica's sophisticated pro-Trump and pro-Brexit social media influence campaigns and why they are troubling for democracy.
For full transcript and audio, please go to: www.carnegiecouncil.org/studi...
Grayling was talking about this last November? Wow...that's prescient.
American Exceptionalism - Where losers get crowned winners.
Very comprehensive thank you
The world needs to listen more to A.C Greyling
So the rain in London made the Brexit? How typical
Haven't advertising companies been applying these tactics for years and I can honestly say I have never bought anything i didnt want or like.
Can you honestly say you haven't 'liked' or commented on anything on social media?
yes but nothing like the scale and sophistication it can be done with the internet, algorithms and now AI
Facebook stock plummets 50% over night.
Good. I ended my acount months ago.
OMG we have all seen this happen. Trump can't and won't play fair, look where we are at.
We the people think we can't be taken, when we can.
To be fair it's not just Trump and the Republicans at it. Trump has just been caught doing something illegal.
AI fan they fail to understand that there is no democracy.
@@TheGodlessGuitaristWhat was illegal about it? It’s Target Audience analysis. Every advertising agency does it.
This is scary because I was recommended it because of the fallout of the scandal with Cambridge Analytica.
The will of the people... yeah, right.
Mr. Grayling ... Kudos.
Superb explanation
Apparently the psychological research that was accepted at the time of this video has been "recalled". Cambridge Analytica, btw, worked for candidates in African countries at around the same time and lost all elections.
Grayling says of the Brexit vote on the 23rd June 2016 "in London on that day it rained. The predictable drop in the vote occurred and that drop in the turnout was enough to lose the vote to Leave". What is he talking about? Remain won the London vote! Or have I missed something?
The idea is something like this. 13% of UK population is in London so 13% of referendum voters should be Londoners. That 13% will be among the most pro remain in UK. So a strategy to help leave win is to try to suppress the London vote. If londoners vote in fewer numbers than elsewhere they might become only 10% of the nationwide vote, reducing the overall remain vote.
@@Guaguanco11 Carol Catwalder did some stories about how they accomplished the task.
Robert Mercer now seems to charge folks to use his methods.
Joni Ernst was promoted by Mercer and retained her Committee Position in the US Senate. Josh Hawley was another Mercer promotion.
The Crown on his Renaissance Noggin was when Mercer dropped Trump in 2020, basically proving that Trump was enabled by the Mercer Team.
Trumps Transition Team included Rebekah Mercer, who appeared to name drop who was desired. Bannon was a integral part of the team, but they maintain a certain tasteful distance so Bannon can harvest the Bullet Headed Gunsels Vote.
The subtle methods are impeccable, and I suspect the Mercer Organization had their fingers in the Electoral Knickers of Ursula Van Der loon.
Directing voter thoughts is big business.....
Why do you suppose Robert Mercer quit his Day Job?
Ethics matter!
Electronic Edwatd Bernays
Are not both sides using the data?
No both sides are not illegally using Facebook data.
@@waltermcphee3787Yes they are.
I wonder if Grayling would be disturbed by this if Remain had won the referendum? If you said to him the vote was swayed for Remain because Remainers were naive and were influenced by social media content I suspect he'd say I was being insulting and patronising. He'd say they voted based on weighing up the pros and cons. In the past political parties just used party political broadcasts to sway voters. Social media is the modern day version. The whole point of campaigns is to sway the vote in your favour and Grayling just peed off his side lost.
He proposes greater transparency, that doesn't inherently benefit one side or the other.
Also he does say that remainers were targeted by such techniques- with messages like "you don't have to vote, remain will win easily".
Edward Kirkhope. You could ask yourself the same question. If these tactics are used in a context in which 'your side' comes worse off, will you be equally approving of them? The real debate is not whether Grayling would be equally outraged had 'his side' won (clue - he's human), but whether these covert tactics are ethical or not.Your post attacks the man, not the point, and just seems like more 'this side, that side' mud slinging and rhetoric to me. Maybe you could pretend that instead of Grayling, it's actually someone you admire and trust making the same point, and then see how you feel.
Edward Kirkhope CA is linked to right wing groups ... you think this is good for a free democracy? They brag about blackmail and bribery...
WRONG. As in ALL cases of a reply like YOURS, HERE.... YOU miss the point of it all. It would be ok, AND THE SAME as advertising has been, as you say, except for one major difference, it is NOT TRANSPARENT. IT IS MANIPULATIVE. Your comment has no merit.
Edward Kirkhope you were not listening, he stated that the psychological techniques were used to sway undecided voters not leave voters. You people and your false straw man arguments.
Welllpppp
What utter nonsense!!!! 😨
Great argument, genius...
They were all hypnotised and made to vote for Trump. What a joke.
Totally unethical in the case of brexit... however a political tool that will be used by both...like a sward...politics has become a sward batle
This is very worrying, I remember Obama using social media with huge success when first elected but on a much bigger scale. Time to use alternatives.
I see this train of thought everywhere, so I'm not really hoping to change much. But, just in case there are a few people who are on the verge of coming back to the Light side of the Force.. heres the difference.
- Obama used data analytics to understand what were the shortcomings in his messaging and campaign. Also, his campaign team gathered data through ethical, transparent means.
- Trump and Cambridge Analytica stole data that was gathered through unethical means. Furthermore, CA lied to Facebook about deleting said data. Worst of all, Trump and CA used the gathered information to twist facts, spread lies, and used fearmongering to target the most gullible of our fellow Americans.
Its a big fucking difference.
@@trefader32Nah. It’s really the same.
This only pertains to/affects the weak minded.
Not true. The misinformation is so insidiously delivered that it can sway all kinds of people. And even if it only affected the weak minded, as you say, that does not make it less effective. You do not have to change everyone´s mind, sometimes a few thousand people is all you need.
which is a lot of people
What is this guy's main thesis, Trump used politics to win?
His observation is that technology exploiting weaknesses in personal privacy online allowed private interests to collate data on you to mislead you about the candidates to vote for the one that would benefit them....
If you think lying to people to get power to make yourself money is 'politics'... I would thank Trump and Co for that.
No, the main thesis is that Trump had used a psy ops specialist to crack and exploit people's weaknesses mentally to influence them. This is dangerous and unethical on many levels.
Ac Grayling's viewpoint.
'if you voted for Brexit or Trump you were brainwashed, if you voted remain or Clinton you're an intelligent and honorable person'.
The man's arrogance and sense of entitlement is nauseating.
It’s truth, though.
Chris
If you voted for Trump, an incompetent, pathological liar then you are either an idiot or brainwashed. As for Brexit, pretty much every expert agrees that it will be bad for the country so it was a pretty stupid thing to vote for. In my experience most Brexiteers are just racists who hate immigrants and they gave no thought to the economic disaster it would create. And regarding Clinton, the woman is a disaster so he is wrong on that one.
However what he is saying is actually proven by studies so your ad hominems just don't work, sorry.
I can't stand AC Grayling. He's just barking mad and can't accept he lost.