• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Social Media Analysis suggests links between Baltimore and Ferguson violence

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
75,495
Reaction score
39,819
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I've been waiting for someone to do something like this. Mix in some facial recognition software, and you can start highlighting individuals in the act, too.

An analysis of social media traffic in downtown Baltimore Monday has unearthed striking connections to the protests in Ferguson, Mo. last year, according to a leading data mining firm that shared its findings exclusively with Fox News.

The firm, which asked to remain anonymous because of its government work, found between 20 and 50 social media accounts in Baltimore that were also tied to the peak period of violence in Ferguson. While further analysis is being conducted on the data, it suggests the presence of "professional protesters" or anarchists taking advantage of Freddie Gray's death to incite more violence.

This is where LE should focus. Find these people, and by breaking up their network, you can get rid of the instigators who turn protests violent.
 
I've been waiting for someone to do something like this. Mix in some facial recognition software, and you can start highlighting individuals in the act, too.



This is where LE should focus. Find these people, and by breaking up their network, you can get rid of the instigators who turn protests violent.

I remember that fairly early on in Ferguson it was really clear much of the problem came from outside. Remember the video of the alderman getting in a fight with one of those outside agitators? It would not surprise me in the least if outsiders drove much of these events, for several possible motives.
 
I remember that fairly early on in Ferguson it was really clear much of the problem came from outside. Remember the video of the alderman getting in a fight with one of those outside agitators? It would not surprise me in the least if outsiders drove much of these events, for several possible motives.

:shrug: I think the basic motive is the same. Engage in cathartic violence. Hopefully spark a harshening of police attitudes towards the demographic you seem to come from.

In a very real way, people like this have broken the Social Contract and are currently in a state of war against Society.
 
I remember that fairly early on in Ferguson it was really clear much of the problem came from outside. Remember the video of the alderman getting in a fight with one of those outside agitators? It would not surprise me in the least if outsiders drove much of these events, for several possible motives.

It's like those traveling storm damage repair men going from city to city following major storms fixing hail damage to cars and roofs.
 
It's like those traveling storm damage repair men going from city to city following major storms fixing hail damage to cars and roofs.

Riot Gypsies!
 
Quick question. By social media activity do they mean "retweets", "shares", "likes", "comments"? Because I can think of plenty of social media accounts that are "tied to cities 825 miles apart"... News organizations...
 
Quick question. By social media activity do they mean "retweets", "shares", "likes", "comments"? Because I can think of plenty of social media accounts that are "tied to cities 825 miles apart"... News organizations...

That's why I haven't really commended on the article. It casts such a wide net that it's impossible to tell just what it is referring to. Between Ferguson, Missouri and Baltimore, Maryland, there are 3 big cities (Indianapolis, Cincinnati and Columbus). It's not hard to imagine 20-50 political junkies from the left traveling to both of the cities. What I find more interesting is the supposed relationship between them, their accounts and the violence. Is the article saying that these people incited the violence through their twitter accounts in two cities? That should be looked into. However, if the connection is that they were in both cities, and tweeted about the incidents, that's a pretty weak connection.
 
Quick question. By social media activity do they mean "retweets", "shares", "likes", "comments"? Because I can think of plenty of social media accounts that are "tied to cities 825 miles apart"... News organizations...

If you read through it, it seems to be looking at individuals not tied to organizations who are uploading as a first-person source. It's not exactly impossible to filter out everything with a @cnn.com email address.

It also matches, as Redress points out, the on-site reports that the majority of the worst offenders were outsiders.
 
I've been waiting for someone to do something like this. Mix in some facial recognition software, and you can start highlighting individuals in the act, too.



This is where LE should focus. Find these people, and by breaking up their network, you can get rid of the instigators who turn protests violent.

It's really no different from the Black Bloc and those who follow them who infiltrate citizen protests at G20/G7 meetings and create havoc and mass violence and destruction of public and private property and then slink away to their next site of "protest".

And before some idiot here asks why I only refer to the "Black" Bloc, it's not a race reference :roll:
 
If you read through it,
I did.

it seems to be looking at individuals not tied to organizations who are uploading as a first-person source.
I just saw 20-50 accounts. No other real information, other than "further analysis is being conducted on the data"

It's not exactly impossible to filter out everything with a @cnn.com email address.
I dont see any indication that they did or did not do that...

It also matches, as Redress points out, the on-site reports that the majority of the worst offenders were outsiders.
I'm sure they were just saying we dont have very much information on the study at all from the article.
 
I did.
I just saw 20-50 accounts. No other real information, other than "further analysis is being conducted on the data"
I dont see any indication that they did or did not do that...
I'm sure they were just saying we dont have very much information on the study at all from the article.

OP said:
....The use of social media to fuel violence in Baltimore has already been highlighted by law enforcement. On Monday, police said an online call was issued for a "purge" at 3 p.m. ET, starting at Mondawmin Mall and ending in the downtown area. That type of threat is based on a movie called “The Purge,” the plot of which involves rampant lawlessness....

Okedoke then, which media outlets do you find as plausible sources for an attempt to coordinate timing and location for that sort of activity?

When they say:

...While further analysis is being conducted on the data, it suggests the presence of "professional protesters" or anarchists taking advantage of Freddie Gray's death to incite more violence....

How, exactly, do you get the assumption that they could be talking about media taking advantage of Gray's death to incite more violence?
 
cpwill said:
How, exactly, do you get the assumption that they could be talking about media taking advantage of Gray's death to incite more violence?

I think the question is, based on the information contained in the article, how we even get to the possibility of there being professional protesters. Saying there are "social media links" is like saying A is "related" to B--without more information, it's impossible to know what "related" means. In this case, I'd be surprised if there weren't people in Baltimore, or any other American city looking at FB posts about Michael Brown and "liking" them. That's a far cry from showing that anyone, even those same people, are inciting violence in an organized and clandestine manner.

I'm not saying that isn't happening. Only that it takes more than an anonymous company claiming there are between 20-50 accounts "linking" Baltimore and Ferguson to establish or even suggest that.
 
Okedoke then, which media outlets do you find as plausible sources for an attempt to coordinate timing and location for that sort of activity?
Is that the study saying the example you just gave or the new outlet? Nor does one example prove anything...

When they say:
How, exactly, do you get the assumption that they could be talking about media taking advantage of Gray's death to incite more violence?
I think you are a little confused on what I am and what I am asking, "By social media activity do they mean "retweets", "shares", "likes", "comments"?

I ask this because:
1.)The article does not go into much detail into the study. It simply states that there is a lot of social media activity during protests and especially when they turn violent. Doesnt go much into details, and just says further analysis is being done.
2.)Then the author of the article talks about the "purge" and New York City. Ok... Is the authors point to show that things can be organized on social media or is it "professional protesters" are controlling protesters via social media? Or what is the point?
3.)Also what are the details of the tweets during the violence? Is it "**** the police! Burn it all down! Revolution!", or something along those lines? Or is it reporting going on? Marchers tweeting what they see? What are the details?
 
If you read through it, it seems to be looking at individuals not tied to organizations who are uploading as a first-person source.
Their methodology is obscure and unclear -- we don't even know who is doing the analysis, let alone what criteria they're using. It's not at all clear that anyone is traveling anywhere, as you certainly don't need to leave your living room to comment on a current event 800 miles away or to tweet "I bet there will be violence in Baltimore tonight."

On a side note, I find it fascinating that the police can't track down people who stalk and threaten women (e.g. Gamergate) but are experts at finding people who threaten police via social media. Hmmmm


It also matches, as Redress points out, the on-site reports that the majority of the worst offenders were outsiders.
Nothing in the article makes any such suggestion. All it does is make a vague and unsourced claim that there were 20-50 people who were actively discussing those topics during the peak violence.

It's also a bit absurd to suggest that cities like Baltimore or Ferguson are having issues because of a few agitators on social media, when you've got large numbers of local residents outraged over years of allegations of police abuse. E.g.:
Baltimore paid $5 million in 4 years for police brutality lawsuits - Business Insider
 
I think the question is, based on the information contained in the article, how we even get to the possibility of there being professional protesters. Saying there are "social media links" is like saying A is "related" to B--without more information, it's impossible to know what "related" means. In this case, I'd be surprised if there weren't people in Baltimore, or any other American city looking at FB posts about Michael Brown and "liking" them. That's a far cry from showing that anyone, even those same people, are inciting violence in an organized and clandestine manner.

I'm not saying that isn't happening. Only that it takes more than an anonymous company claiming there are between 20-50 accounts "linking" Baltimore and Ferguson to establish or even suggest that.

Social Media Analysis is a lot more than just aggregating "likes" and filtering for multiple locations. What they are describing are individuals actively inciting / taking part in violence.

TheDemSocialist said:
I think you are a little confused on what I am and what I am asking, "By social media activity do they mean "retweets", "shares", "likes", "comments"?

Social media can mean that and a lot more, to include the associated metadata. Social Media Analysis involves more than simple data aggregation, however,

1.)The article does not go into much detail into the study. It simply states that there is a lot of social media activity during protests and especially when they turn violent. Doesnt go much into details, and just says further analysis is being done.

Yup.

2.)Then the author of the article talks about the "purge" and New York City. Ok... Is the authors point to show that things can be organized on social media or is it "professional protesters" are controlling protesters via social media? Or what is the point?

The point is that people are attempting to use social media to organize particular violent / lawless outbursts, and that some of these people are apparently doing so in multiple locations.

3.)Also what are the details of the tweets during the violence? Is it "**** the police! Burn it all down! Revolution!", or something along those lines? Or is it reporting going on? Marchers tweeting what they see? What are the details?

:shrug: social media analysis can scoop up (as I said) quite a lot, including content, yes, but also beyond it.
 
Social Media Analysis is a lot more than just aggregating "likes" and filtering for multiple locations. What they are describing are individuals actively inciting / taking part in violence.
No, that's not what this obscure sketch of the report says. It only says it identified 20-50 people active in social media at times of peak unrest in those two communities. There's no indication those people are anywhere near the events, let alone that anyone is even paying much attention to what they're saying.

And again, the source is anonymous, the data is not shared, and they tipped off a right-wing news outlet. Yes, transparency is important, isn't it? ;)


The point is that people are attempting to use social media to organize particular violent / lawless outbursts....
You can't draw that conclusion either. The Fox article (not entirely by accident) conflates this report, with claims that "social media incites violence." Classic media obfuscation, btw.
 
Their methodology is obscure and unclear -- we don't even know who is doing the analysis, let alone what criteria they're using. It's not at all clear that anyone is traveling anywhere, as you certainly don't need to leave your living room to comment on a current event 800 miles away or to tweet "I bet there will be violence in Baltimore tonight."

On a side note, I find it fascinating that the police can't track down people who stalk and threaten women (e.g. Gamergate) but are experts at finding people who threaten police via social media. Hmmmm

Social Media has the handy habit of often including links to your full name, associations, and recent location. I wouldn't be able to speak to gamergate, as this is the first I've heard of it.

Nothing in the article makes any such suggestion. All it does is make a vague and unsourced claim that there were 20-50 people who were actively discussing those topics during the peak violence.

No. "Actively discussing" would be in the hundreds of thousands, if not millions. The first thing (well, one of the first things) you would do would be to filter for folks who were at both locations and then you would look at content, timing, etc.

It's also a bit absurd to suggest that cities like Baltimore or Ferguson are having issues because of a few agitators on social media

No - their violence is increased because of agitators who use social media.

In Ferguson, Many Outsiders Are Among Those Arrested
Ferguson protesters claim outsiders shot police
Ferguson residents want 'outsiders' to leave
Baltimore mayor says outsiders turned peaceful protest violent
Former national chairman of the New Black Panther Party said the purpose of yesterday’s rally was to cause a major disruption in Baltimore

when you've got large numbers of local residents outraged over years of allegations of police abuse. E.g.:
Baltimore paid $5 million in 4 years for police brutality lawsuits - Business Insider

:shrug: I have no doubt that many are angry, nor any doubt that investigation will reveal that the city was run poorly.
 
No, that's not what this obscure sketch of the report says. It only says it identified 20-50 people active in social media at times of peak unrest in those two communities. There's no indication those people are anywhere near the events, let alone that anyone is even paying much attention to what they're saying.

Hm. Maybe this means more to me because Social Media Analysis has a more precise meaning in my RL. However, if this company is indeed one of the ones I think it is, then no, that simple identification is in no way the sum of that analysis. That filter (very active) would give you hundreds of thousands if not millions of names, even if tied to subject matter.

And again, the source is anonymous, the data is not shared, and they tipped off a right-wing news outlet. Yes, transparency is important, isn't it? ;)

:shrug: the company doesn't want to be named because it does this sort of thing for the government, meaning probably our military/intelligence structures. This is part of how we find and kill bad guys.

You can't draw that conclusion either

You can, actually. That is what calling for a Purge means. No one is suggesting an ancient roman dining habit.
 
Social Media Analysis is a lot more than just aggregating "likes" and filtering for multiple locations. What they are describing are individuals actively inciting / taking part in violence.
Well they dont even give a really solid definition in what they mean of activity.. They just say "social media activity" in the article.. My question is what does that mean? If it means "retweets" or "likes" then **** I imagine that social media "activity" would spike then, because people are retweeting a bunch of stories, images, videos etc. Does that mean "social media is driving violent protests", I would say no its not. Its people retweeting and liking shocking images, or videos, not for the purpose of "lets go riot woohooo!", I would say its more for the informative nature, and shock value.

Social media can mean that and a lot more, to include the associated metadata.
"Can". Does this study take that into account?

Social Media Analysis involves more than simple data aggregation, however,
Well do we even know the substance of this study?

So im confused on what your reticule over my comment is....

The point is that people are attempting to use social media to organize particular violent / lawless outbursts, and that some of these people are apparently doing so in multiple locations.
I dont see how an increase in social media activity in an area at one time equates to "they are using it to organize violence, look at the social media spike!", especially when we dont even know the details behind the study... And especially what the messages of those messages on social media... If I tweet a message, "lets march!" during a time in one of these "social media spikes", does that mean im organizing violence and "lawless outbursts?"

:shrug: social media analysis can scoop up (as I said) quite a lot, including content, yes, but also beyond it.
Well is that study even doing that?

No - their violence is increased because of agitators who use social media.

None of those articles were about specific social media, or their use of social media. It was about people coming in from Ferguson who are not members of the city or surrounding areas...


 
Social Media has the handy habit of often including links to your full name, associations, and recent location.
Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, none of these require a verifiable identity. A poster can easily fake or disguise their identity. Location is only publicly visible if you allow it, otherwise law enforcement would need the cooperation of the service provider -- which usually requires a warrant.


I wouldn't be able to speak to gamergate, as this is the first I've heard of it.
So you know all about social media and how it's analyzed, but you've never heard of Gamergate, the biggest social media controversy in 2014? Riiiiight


No. "Actively discussing" would be in the hundreds of thousands, if not millions...
Again, this is an anonymous source, we don't have access to the data, and it's filtered through a biased site. We don't really know what the data indicates.


No - their violence is increased because of agitators who use social media.
Or, it's easy for authorities to blame outsiders for the problems of their own making. Most of the people busted in Ferguson were, in fact, from Missouri or across the border in Illinois.

No, ‘outside agitators’ have not been dominating the unrest in Ferguson - The Washington Post

The "Ferguson sniper" who shot 2 police officers lived in the area, wasn't affiliated with the protests, and apparently is not a professional agitator.
Ferguson Police Shooting Suspect Jeffrey Williams Allegedly Said He Wasn't Aiming For Cops
 
Hm. Maybe this means more to me because Social Media Analysis has a more precise meaning in my RL.
Oh? So what exactly is "Social Media Analysis?" Who did the analysis? What were their metrics? How are they tracking IPs and poster's locations? What are the content of the posts in question? What are the posts saying?

None of this is available. We have no way to know if the research organization has any credibility, because we don't know who they are.


the company doesn't want to be named because it does this sort of thing for the government, meaning probably our military/intelligence structures. This is part of how we find and kill bad guys.
I'm sorry, but that's fairly ridiculous. We don't know who it is, which means they could make up any excuse

We should also note that if they're doing intelligence work (e.g. an NSA subcontractor), then that data is probably classified, and releasing this data would be a serious legal violation, and they'd probably be identifiable to whoever is in charge of that contract. Isn't wild speculation about anonymous sources fun?


You can, actually. That is what calling for a Purge means. No one is suggesting an ancient roman dining habit.
No, you can't, because the article did NOT say that the person calling for the purge was one of the alleged 20-50 ringleaders. Read it again.
 
cpwill said:
Social Media Analysis is a lot more than just aggregating "likes" and filtering for multiple locations. What they are describing are individuals actively inciting / taking part in violence.

None of that is obvious from the article.

But let's just play this out: suppose it is the case that people are organizing violence. I'm not sure I understand the point. Consider, for example, the peasant revolts of 1524-5 (I bring this comparison because there's unusually good documentation of this revolt). The revolts were organized. And of course, Charles the Vth and Phillip of Hesse were furious that the peasants were organized. But our moral judgment about the revolts really has nothing to do with whether they were organized or not.
 
None of that is obvious from the article.

But let's just play this out: suppose it is the case that people are organizing violence. I'm not sure I understand the point. Consider, for example, the peasant revolts of 1524-5 (I bring this comparison because there's unusually good documentation of this revolt). The revolts were organized. And of course, Charles the Vth and Phillip of Hesse were furious that the peasants were organized. But our moral judgment about the revolts really has nothing to do with whether they were organized or not.

6900e22130e77b88a417cd939fef6bc4092459b5070f36cea0250645b2082359.jpg
 
Oh? So what exactly is "Social Media Analysis?"

Social Media Analysis in the government (vice business) sphere is the utilization of information gleaned from Social Media in a manner similar to Social Network Analysis, and also as an additional stream within OSINT reporting.

Who did the analysis?

Apparently a company that sells Social Media Analysis tools to or services to the government.

What were their metrics?

By which you mean what did they measure? Social media activity. Probably facebook and twitter, although there are plenty of secondary tiered social media platforms for the US.

How are they tracking IPs and poster's locations?

Most folks don't know how to strip the metadata out of their uploaded content. For those who know what they are doing, it's actually not terribly dificult.

What are the content of the posts in question? What are the posts saying?

They appear to be organizing or taking part in lawless activity.

None of this is available. We have no way to know if the research organization has any credibility, because we don't know who they are.

:shrug: I'm not aware of anyone trying to reach a barrier of proof necessary for a guilty verdict. The evidence matches what we've seen thus far, what we've seen from previous protest movements, and what was observed on the ground at both locations, as linked earlier.

I'm sorry, but that's fairly ridiculous. We don't know who it is, which means they could make up any excuse

Sure. Maybe they did it to cover up the government's role in the 9/11 attacks. Or maybe they did it so that Scully wouldn't find out the truth about the Smoking Man and Aliens.

There are multiple companies that do this for the government - a few years ago, C2/C4I systems were all the rage. Now it's social media analysis and the like.

We should also note that if they're doing intelligence work (e.g. an NSA subcontractor), then that data is probably classified, and releasing this data would be a serious legal violation, and they'd probably be identifiable to whoever is in charge of that contract.

Well, no. Classification indicates government ownership of information. Everything you upload to the internet is public material, available (legally) for anyone to look at. Plenty of security contractors work with the DOD (which NSA falls under) and civilian law-enforcement; the authorities can change with the mission, but for a private company, if you post it on social media, they can exploit it without any classification whatsoever.
 

You just read perfectly intelligible English. Contained therein was an argument, which seems cogent to me. My claim is twofold: first, your evidence doesn't support your conclusions. Second, suppose for the sake of discussion that it does: you're expressing what at base is a certain amount of moral outrage--outside forces manipulating tragic circumstances to push a violent and harmful political agenda, which they should not do. But your outrage is subjunctively based on evidence that the violence is organized--which doesn't support any moral position about it. Violence can be both organized, even stirred up, and still both justified and morally obligatory. I gave an example of such violence well known in history to prove the point.

Argue against that if you can.
 
Back
Top Bottom