Some Very Strong Thoughts Against the BBC Report about -- TNT We are the People

POSTED ON FACEBOOK by
 
Kändiß K. Zimbelmann‎We Are the People - TNT
I got some more info for u guys.
 
There's this hit-job article on the BBC's website by Cordelia Hebblethwaite. This person has the gall to think themselves some kind of journalist. Seriously?
 
Do some DUE DILIGENCE!
 
She did some "funny numbers" math tricks.
 
She writes " Since it took off on 26 January, there have been more than four million tweets. - That said, those who are real followers are heavily engaged. Statistics from the group's chat forum show as many as 25,000 people logging in per day. "
 
This is what we call in the media as "spin".
If she'd ACTUALLY done her REAL due diligence she would've LEARNED that the reason it's ONLY about 25K members on the site is BECAUSE IT'S CLOSED TO NEW MENDERS!
 
Say it with me now: DUH!!!!!!
 
Guess she would've known that IF she ACTUALLY did some REAL JOURNALISM. But, SHE DIDN'T! ‪#‎BUSTED‬!
 
Say it with me now: DUH!!!!
 
So, WHY are there so many tweets? Because there's online broadcasts which previously could be listened to WITHOUT BEING A MEMBER.
There's this thing called "the ripple effect" and "the 6 degrees of separation". It goes like this, I know someone, they know someone, and it ripples out. That's how you get bigger numbers of tweets than members in the forum.
See also: MEME
Say it with me now: DUH!!!!!
 
Also, many of the twitter profile ARE REAL, but people have chosen to use what are known as "nom de plumes" which is what media creators/writers use as an assumed name to write content under a different name. Social media involves writing, and one would assume a "trending" "media" writer, allegedly schooled in authorship, would understand "social media"... but apparently in her case, that would be a wrong assumption, because she is terrible at her job. #BUSTED
 
Now, if she's ACTUALLY listened to Tony's broadcasts back when the movement began to go to twitter she would've KNOWN that Tony recommended to timid folks to use a false name, if they felt they wished to preserve their identity, or backlash, or trouble.
 
But, that would involve her, u know, ACTUALLY DOING HER JOB. #BUSTED
 
Say it with me now: DUH!!!!!
 
She's also tried to use what we call "association" to create this mystique that it's somehow a sinister movement by equating the movement with Occupy Wall Street, which has undergone several attacks in the media, unfairly (but that's another story, and I know firsthand what went down with that).
 
She claims she's getting information which she typed in QUOTES, but get this: NO ACTUAL SOURCES CITED!
 
U know what that is? BAD JOURNALISM!
AKA "spin". #BUSTED
 
Not only that, but SHE IS A "Trending" reporter" That's GOSSIP, internet tabloid BS, NOT JOURNALISM! #BUSTED!
The lowest of the LOW, bottom rung, trash news. Smut.
 
Is she an economist? A financial expert?
Looks like she's NOT! #BUSTED!
 
Get this: On her Twitter profile she says about herself:
"Previously feature writer for BBC in Washington, DC and with @BBCWorldService."
 
Oh, really? What? Did ya get demoted or something?
Shoved into Gossip 'cause ya STINK at ACTUAL journalism?
 
I'm not sayin' anything... just sayin'...
 
I'm guessing she doesn't understand the whole 'deletion of zeros' thing. Awwww... was it over her simple lil' mind?
Gee wiz, that's too bad... My bleeds for u.
 
She also tries to slander the movement by saying "Rv" and "GCR" aren't real financial terms!
 
*face-palm*
 
Yeah... it's called SLANG!
Obviously, this outsider has NEVER sat in on ANY conference calls with this stuff, for the past several years, like I have, and several others, including those whom I know personally...
 
Why don't doesn't this chick report on actual "pumpers"?
Oh, wait, I bet she never heard THAT insider term EITHER!
(Man, I hate those pumpers!)
 
So, I'm guessing her idea of "investigating" and 'reporting" is just look around a lil' bit, NOT do a thorough research of methodical inquiry, and just make it all up as she goes.
 
That's what we call a ‪#‎hack‬.
 
You know how you investigate something?
Well, while you're looking through your materials, and sources, you find ‪#‎clues‬. Lil' bits of info, and ironically trends... and THEN you research THOSE CLUES.
 
There's things like CONTEXT, Basic research, due diligence, cross referencing, cross examining, checking sources...
 
ANYONE with a WORKING, FUNCTIONING BRAIN CAN DO THIS!
 
Say it with me now: DUH!!!!
 
Clearly, she did diddly squat research on Iraq. Even 1 quote cites "2010".
 
R u friggin' kidding me?
 
Her LinkedIn profile has her as a student of the "European School, Culham".
 
Well, if so, and she's THAT terrible of a reporter, then either she's an embarrassment to her collage, or it's a terrible school.
 
Yeesh...
 
But, hey, I'm not sayin' anything.... I'm just sayin'....
 
Oh, and what would I know?
Me n my lil' provincial mind....
 
*dusts off shoulders*
 
But, ya know what?
 
I view this as a positive.
 
Based on our matrix of information from historical replication regarding past currency revaluations, we know for FACT that when currencies are JUST about to Rv they put out media saying it's all over, it fell trough, it's a scam, and literally it happens like the next day, or shortly after.
 
So, when I see these kinds of shenanigans take place, I KNOW it's close.
 
Ya know how I KNOW?
 
I FRIGGIN' DID MY DUE DILIGENCE RECHARGE!
Bwah-ha-ha-haaaaaa!!!!! XD

Maybe you should go back and do your due diligence in grammar and journalism, since your supposed due diligence is filled with grammatical errors, logical fallacies and supposition. In short, long on BS short on fact.

Take one of your first points for example, they do not automatically label twitter accounts as fake because of a pen name, BTW, did using non-de-plume make you feel smarter? The majority of people who use twitter use some sort of pen name. Here are some of the criteria they use: 

We define suspicious or empty followers by the following criteria:

• The account has a following : followers ratio of 50:1 or more. This means the profile is following 50 accounts while only being followed by one
  
• More than 30% of all tweets use spam phrases, such as “diet,” “make money,” and “work from home”
  
• The same tweets are repeated more than three times, even when posted to different accounts
  
• More than 90% of the account’s tweets are retweets
  
• More than 90% of the account’s tweets are links
  
• The account has never tweeted
  
• The account is more than two months old and still has a default profile image
  
• The user didn’t fill in neither bio nor location and, at the same time, is following more than 100 accounts
  

Each of these criteria have a given number of points valuation and once an account exceeds a certain number of points, we identify him as suspicious. Then, if the account isn’t identified as suspicious, we test it according to the following two rules to see if it’s not inactive:

• The account has posted less than 3 tweets
  
• The last tweet is more than 90 days old
  

And if we identify the account neither as suspicious, nor as inactive, then we define it is a legitimate Twitter account.
We understand that these criteria, number 6 in particular, don’t necessarily define suspicious followers. However these kinds of followers can be considered empty or inactive and therefore not helpful to you in terms of reach.
http://www.socialbakers.com/twitter/fakefollowercheck/methodology

In following the trending myself I have noticed that a lot of the tweets are identical or almost so, and that they are almost entirely in very high spikes. I have to arrive at one conclusion. Either Tony has turned all his followers into very obedient "bots" who tweet when he says to, but do nothing independently, or Tony is activating some sort of program that tweets through multiple accounts. Either way, the numbers are padded and therefore meaningless. #FAIL

Oh BTW, I looked at a couple of audit sites and close to 50% of Tony's followers had a quality score of zero. His overall score was 73% likely fake. #FAIL

No you are right she is not a financial analyst, but neither is Tony and she at least talked to some who really were experts. #FAIL

The fact that Tony has closed his membership is not germane to the discussion. #FAIL

She did not try to associate Tony with the Occupy movement, only observed that at first it seemed similar ... at first .. #FAIL

BBC Trending is not a gossip rag, who told you that? Tony? It is a legitimate branch of the BBC News department. From their website:

BBC wrote:About BBC Trending: A hand-picked selection of stories trending on social media around the world. Includes posts on the Magazine's Trending blog, twice weekly videos via @BBCWorld and a weekly radio programme on Saturday on BBC World Service.

#FAIL

Matrix of Information? My, my you do like using big terms. Matrix of misinformation is more like it. There is no GCR, there is absolutely zero in the Basel accords that applies to any sort regulation of central banks and gold, and last but not least, Tony has said that nothing like this has happened before, so what happens to your matrix then? #FAIL

Face it Kandi ... Tony is a pumper, and under Federal indictment for fraud, he is as dishonest as the day is long. Based on everything I mentioned, and some stuff I don't have time to cover right now, I can only give you one grade #FAIL

Funny how people think that they always have an answer to disprove the truth.  Kevin is 100% true with the stats he gave...you can now buy followers on Twitter. Alot of people do this for the exact reason that Tony is doing...to get things trending. 

At the end of the day the hardcore sheeple will always talk about "facts" that they take as truth simply because someone told it to them. Tony is a higher level of schister because he always has a lie to cover up previous lies.  The most common form of lie is to blame people in the shadows that no one can really prove. Since time began there have always been back door deals going on in all aspects of leadership, but these days its almost impossible to cover up things forever. Especially these days with the internet and all kinds of Freedom of Info acts etc that are out there.  Unfortunately those who don't know much about the processes that happen in the government, are always the first to believe the conspiracy theories that are out there.  Listen to Tony's calls...most of the idiots that call in sound like they are from the backwoods...probably the same people that see big foot and aliens all the time!

Thank you Kevin for taking that endeavor on.  I couldn't even bring myself to disect and respond.  You did an amazing job as usual! BRAVO !

Guess there are similarities between the fake twitter followers and the auto-surf scam, 14 DailyPlus, that Tony is currently under indictment for.

Gotta a new hashtag for the folks at TNT:  #trainedseals

Behind the big business of selling Twitter followers and Facebook likes
Tuesday 11 Feb 2014 6:00 am

Behind the big business of selling Twitter followers and Facebook likes

They say money can’t buy you love, but it can definitely buy likes. And followers, views and shares.

The vertiginous rise of social networking has fuelled a global race to gobble up as many endorsements as possible. From major celebrities to normal individuals, big brands to small businesses, the hunt for ways to expand their profiles is relentless.

And the appetite to increase tallies on sites such as Facebook and Twitter has spawned a burgeoning, shady industry as brokers attempt to capitalise on the phenomenon by hawking likes and followers.

As the internet has become flooded with vendors of ‘likes’ and followers, suspicion has followed that bogus endorsements may be rife on social networks.

Schemes include ‘click farms’, where low-paid workers in poor countries are paid to repeatedly click the like button, view videos or retweet links, while support can also be given by fake profiles or genuine accounts hijacked by hackers and used to endorse profiles without their knowledge.

The scale of the problem of bogus accounts has been laid bare recently. Figures published by Facebook that suggested as many as 11.2 per cent of its 1.23bn monthly active users may be false or duplicate accounts, while YouTube announced last week that it is to audit clips in an attempt to remove fraudulent views.

They were the latest developments in an issue that has surfaced increasingly in recent years. In 2011, Republican US presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich faced allegations that his campaign had enlisted a firm to increase his Twitter follower numbers, with one search engine claiming as many as 92 per cent of his tally were bogus. His office denied the claims. Even the US State Department has been revealed to have spent more than £350,000 on boosting its Facebook contingent.

One group of analysts claims that as many as 45 per cent and 39 per cent of Barack Obama and Lady Gaga’s Twitter followings are bogus respectively, though there is no suggestion any of those followers have been bought.

Anyone wanting to boost their numbers would not struggle to find a seller. A cursory Google search is enough to reveal the sheer volume of websites offering to boost social media presences for a fee ranging from a few pounds to hundreds.

British-based MoveSocial.co.uk offers packages of Facebook likes starting at 500 for £9.99 rising all the way to 100,000 for £749.99. Its website insists the likes are real and ‘gained using our in house network and system’.

Boostlikes.com, which offers up to 10,000 likes and 30,000 Twitter followers, claimed its clients ranged from small businesses to well-known celebrities.
‘Our financial success has varied,’ a spokesman told Metro. ‘It’s not uncommon for us to be working with a hundred orders at once.’

Asked how the site can provide thousands of likes from genuine profiles, he said they have an ‘extensive network of popular Facebook pages, websites and PR contacts’ as well as their own ‘proprietary system’.

He added: ‘Details about or proprietary software is a trade secret.’ Google+ shares, Instagram followers and YouTube views are also available at the click of a button.

Other services have been found to boost their clients’ numbers by using a so-called ‘click farm’, where low-paid workers use genuine profiles to hit the necessary button to order.

One Dhaka-based website claims to provide a ‘crowd-sourcing’ platform to help customers ‘improve social media presence’.

It says: ‘Do you need Facebook fans, likes, followers, event joiners or sharers? We made it as simple as mouse-clicking. Whenever and wherever you need massive workforce to complete petty tasks, call and get it done like magic!’

Experts said the trade is thriving. Richard Baxter, chief executive officer of SEOGadget.com, said: ‘Unfortunately, we suspect it’s a huge business.’

One study estimated that sales of fake Twitter followers could reach £220m, while activity surrounding bogus Facebook likes may be worth more than £120m.

Its author, online researcher Andrea Stroppa, said some vendors even offer bespoke services.

‘Some agencies offer whatever you want – likes only from American girls, aged from 17 to 20-years-old, positive comments about your product. All is possible.’

The spread of bogus endorsements has been linked to cyber crime. An investigation by Channel 4 last year claimed to have uncovered evidence that hackers were stoking a ‘massive black market’ in Facebook likes.

James Lyne, global head of security research at Sophos, said likes are often generated by injecting automated ‘click code’ into hacked websites, which are mostly legitimate but suffering security problems.

He said: ‘Bogus likes, fake followers and traffic generators are remarkably popular. They are used by cyber criminals and also legitimate businesses that don’t know better alike.’

Like ‘exchanges’ in which people agree to endorse a page in return for a reciprocation are also increasingly common, according to analysts.
So why would someone pay to boost their presence on Facebook, Twitter or other social media sites?

Research has suggested that a single like on Facebook is worth more than £100 to a brand and Mike Tinmouth, founder of social media agency TSP Digital, said too many businesses ‘get caught up with the popularity aspect’.

He said: ‘Yes, thousands of likes add a perceived credibility but at longer term risk. The dangers are that diluting your audience with either fake likes or by attracting the wrong type of follower you are going to make it harder to reach those customers who actually want to engage with you and buy from you. It’s an issue because it’s ultimately a con.’

Social media giants insist they are taking the problem of bogus endorsements seriously and carry out regular purges. Facebook conducts regular culls and one of its first purges in 2012 saw pop star Lady Gaga lose about 66,000 likes.

Twitter claims that false or spam accounts make up less than five per cent of its total active users. Buying and selling followers is banned by Twitter, with culprits facing suspension if caught.

Google has also taken action to combat the problem, wiping out billions of supposedly fake views on YouTube.

http://metro.co.uk/2014/02/11/behind-the-big-business-of-selling-twitter-followers-and-facebook-likes-4298398/

By some estimates, the selling of false Twitter accounts, Facebook likes, and U Tube views is a half billion dollar industry. Twitter has a department dedicated to false and spoofed accounts.

Brief review of 14 Daily Plus......Tony's previous scam:

Great Auto Surf

Pays 14% for 10 days of surfing at least 14 pages.
Minimum Upgrade: $6.00
Maximum Upgrade: $6000.00
25 Second Timer
14% Referral Commissions
Accepts E-gold or Safepay Solutions
Payouts in 7 business days from expiration.

Check out 14DailyPlus!!

Sounds like a click mill to me ....