Russian Collusion Rages On As Newest Study Targets “Fake News” And Social Media

christian dating news


RWC News Russian Collusion Rages On As Newest Study Targets “Fake News” And Social Media

Researchers at Oxford say that swing states had more “junk news” tweets before the election than other states. The new report is trying to prove Russian interference, but even the leftist behind the Oxford report admit that the project is a “working paper.”

In the democrats never-ending attempt to blame someone or anyone for their defeat to conservatives last fall, a new Oxford study is adding fuel to the narrative that fake news caused Hillary’s and other liberal candidates’ utter demise at the polls.

Researchers working on the university’s Computational Propaganda Project went looking for the supposed far-right influence that social media supposedly delivered in the 2016 election. They studied a mere one percent of Twitter traffic from between November 1-11, which contained politically related hashtags.

The findings show, according to them, that the majority of information shared on the social media platform was not “professional news content,” but came from “junk” sources like Breitbart, InfoWars, and wikileaks. People from another country who don’t even live here consider any site that is not part of the liberal brotherhood, “polarizing and conspiracy” sources.


RWC News Russian Collusion Rages On As Newest Study Targets “Fake News” And Social Media

These extremely far left professors and researchers consider Breitbart and Wikileaks part of the “junk news” that dominated Twitter before the election, they say.

The majority of liberal news networks are presenting the study as a complete and utter truth, but there are huge flaws in that idea. In fact, CNN this morning made a point of reminding viewers that they were a “legitimate” news source.

Liberals around the world know that America is the last bastion of individual freedom left on the planet. It appears that the study was specifically designed to fuel the non-existent Russia interference narrative. Ranking democrat on the Senate Intelligence panel Mark Warner told reporters, “We already know that Russia sought to hijack platforms like Facebook in order to disrupt our elections.”

He added, “the findings from this study raise further questions about the extent to which fake news and polarizing content may have been targeted towards our most competitive states. In the weeks ahead, I hope that Twitter will be fully forthcoming with our committee so that we can inform the American public about what happened in 2016, and make sure that it doesn’t happen again.”


RWC News Russian Collusion Rages On As Newest Study Targets “Fake News” And Social Media

The illegitimate report has not undergone peer review, it only looked at about one percent of twitter content, and did not take into consideration the liberal media bias from major news networks during the entire campaign, yet CNN and other fake news sites are treating it like proof of Russian interference.

What doesn’t happen again? The truth get out about the disgusting level of corruption, greed, and deep state activities conducted by liberals in Washington? Perhaps he means that conservatives in the nation won’t win again?

Rather than place the blame where it rightly belongs, on their freedom-stripping socialist policies, massive corruption, and FBI stated incompetence, liberals are looking for any data that might prove someone else had a hand in their loss. But the honest truth is that the American people are sick of their lies and manipulations.

The wholly contrived “study” reports that people in swing states like West Virginia, Colorado, North Carolina and Michigan were bombarded with “junk news.”


“It turns out that junk news was concentrated in swing states in a measurable way,” said lead researcher Philip Howard, an Oxford professor of Internet studies.

RWC News Russian Collusion Rages On As Newest Study Targets “Fake News” And Social Media

These swing states went against Hillary Clinton because she was “incompetent,” a cheater, and a liar. The wikileaks “junk news” showed the true colors of the DNC which revolted voters.

What the researchers consider “professional news content” includes the New York Times, CNN, and other highly bias liberal news outlets. Considering the evidence that CNN deliberately pushed a Russia report that they knew was false, the entire “study” becomes one massive propaganda document.

If, and only if the information is taken at face value, why didn’t the highly leftist university study the predominately negative coverage President Trump was given during the election? How do a few social media posts stack up against the liberal media juggernaut that has done everything in its power to maintain control of the American thought process?

Not everyone is jumping on the bandwagon here. After speaking about the research like it was the gospel, Howard admitted that the report is a “working paper.” The reason for his caution stems from the fact that the study did not undergo peer review to ensure that it was “authoritative and empirically sound.”


Howard went on to claim that researchers had traced a measly three percent of the “polarizing and conspiracy” source tweets to Russia Today. Apparently, that’s plenty of evidence for liberal lawmakers who are determined to do President Trump harm.

Adam Schiff praised the Oxford report, saying that it confirms social media platforms were “rife with viral reports that were highly partisan, conspiratorial or simply false.”

As a result, he said, millions of Americans were “easy prey on Facebook and Twitter for propagandists, peddlers of false news and hostile foreign powers such as Russia.”

Millions of Americans were “easy prey” he claims. What sort of intelligence level does that indicate Schiff thinks most Americans have? He apparently thinks voters in these swing states are too stupid to differentiate between the real truth and the media spin.

In fact, many of the “junk news” sources that the study considers false include the email leaks by wikileaks, which demonstrated not only Clinton’s highly illegal server practice and that she lied to congressional investigators, but also that the DNC is highly racist.

Twitter VP Colin Crowell has defended the platform and is scoffing at the study. “We cannot distinguish whether every single Tweet from every person is truthful or not. We, as a company, should not be the arbiter of truth,” he said.

And Crowell makes an excellent point here. No one government entity or university should get to determine what “truth” is. That decision should be left to the individual. Isn’t that the left’s claim concerning religion? Perhaps it doesn’t apply to the propaganda they want people to swallow.

Twitter also pointed out that the study is not legitimate until a peer review has verified it. Leftist will most likely find a group of liberals to sign off on it, but the fact remains that the study is just another impotent attempt to control what thinking Americans believe.

You may share this post on Facebook and Twitter.
Let us know what you think in the comments section below:

Share This:

Emma Laftchu
I began reporting for RWC News on October 12th of 2016. Prior to that I was a reporter for WOKR Radio.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


two × five =