No Side Peoples Movement manipulating voters through Google adwords

turgon

If you search Google for Generation Yes you may be surprised to see a Sponsored Link titled "Generation Yes" that not from Generation Yes - or any other Yes campaign - but from No side campaigners People Movement (www.people.ie).

Picture: http://boards.ie/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=91756&stc=1&d=1253790716

Once again, the No side takes it down a peg by trying to manipulate voters into viewing their biased propaganda on-line.

According to Gen Yes' Facebook page it costs Peoples movement €1 every time someone clicks, although I have reservations its that high. They have also filled a formal complaint with Google asfaik.

ei.sdraob

nasty, i never donated to any political party

but i can donate a small adwords voucher send to me by Google (expires in a week) if they want

How can i contact generation yes? if anyone here is involved pm me

Hydrosylator

SO what you're saying is, they were using targeted google ads to try and divert people from what they, the users, were looking for, to what they, the advertiser, wanted them to see.

That's actually the way google ads works.

Their link is gone now, but I'd say that's more likely because they've had the allocated number of clicks.

ei.sdraob

Hydrosylator wrote: »

SO what you're saying is, they were using targeted google ads to try and divert people from what they, the users, were looking for, to what they, the advertiser, wanted them to see.

That's actually the way google ads works.

Their link is gone now, but I'd say that's more likely because they've had the allocated number of clicks.

Google has strict guidelines about using advertising over competitors keywords, since they got sued for things like this before

PopeBuckfastXVI

It's not like they advertised using the words "lisbon treaty" or variants thereof.

They advertised using the words "generation yes".

That is like doing a google search for pepsi, clicking on a link that says pepsi and winding up on the coke homepage.

Indefensible.

meglome

Hydrosylator wrote: »

SO what you're saying is, they were using targeted google ads to try and divert people from what they, the users, were looking for, to what they, the advertiser, wanted them to see.

That's actually the way google ads works.

So is this tactic is okay then? you wouldn't mind the Yes campaign doing it?

Hydrosylator

meglome wrote: »

So is this tactic is okay then? you wouldn't mind the Yes campaign doing it?

It doesn't matter what I think about it, there'd be nothing I could do to stop them.

As for poor old Generation Yes, the innocent victims in all this, I regard it as an astroturfing campaign by FF and the Greens, who seem to think that if you're between the ages of 18 and 30, you must be retarded.

If the People's Movement want to spray them all with raw sewage I wouldn't regard it as too much.

Sam Vimes

Hydrosylator wrote: »

It doesn't matter what I think about it, there'd be nothing I could do to stop them.

As for poor old Generation Yes, the innocent victims in all this, I regard it as an astroturfing campaign by FF and the Greens, who seem to think that if you're between the ages of 18 and 30, you must be retarded.

If the People's Movement want to spray them all with raw sewage I wouldn't regard it as too much.

Your first post in this forum was suggesting that what they were doing was "the way google ads works", ie condoning it. So does your opinion matter or doesn't it? And do you condone deliberately misleading people to come to their website by pretending to be associated with another organisation?

meglome

Hydrosylator wrote: »

It doesn't matter what I think about it, there'd be nothing I could do to stop them.

I didn't ask could or would you stop them. I asked do you think the tactic is okay? Especially if the Yes campaign were doing it?

Hydrosylator wrote: »

As for poor old Generation Yes, the innocent victims in all this, I regard it as an astroturfing campaign by FF and the Greens, who seem to think that if you're between the ages of 18 and 30, you must be retarded.

Serious question how do you know that Generation Yes are "astroturfing campaign by FF and the Greens"? I don't know anything about them so I'd be interested.

Hydrosylator

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Your first post in this forum was suggesting that what they were doing was "the way google ads works", ie condoning it. So does your opinion matter or doesn't it? And do you condone deliberately misleading people to come to their website by pretending to be associated with another organisation?

In this particular case, yes I condone it. Generation Yes is, as far as I'm concerned, a con job. The effort by the People's Movement is a counter-con. I just made that word up, but you get what I'm saying.

If the same tactics were being used against less dubious organisations, I wouldn't condone it.

Sam Vimes

Hydrosylator wrote: »

In this particular case, yes I condone it. Generation Yes is, as far as I'm concerned, a con job. The effort by the People's Movement is a counter-con. I just made that word up, but you get what I'm saying.

If the same tactics were being used against less dubious organisations, I wouldn't condone it.

I love your "two wrongs make a right" logic. I assume you will never accuse the yes side of scaremongering again since we've decided that deception is acceptable as long as it serves your goal?

Also, the fact that you consider generation yes a con job just shows how successful the no side's campaign has been. It's depressing that the lies have been repeated so often that anyone that tries to fight them is branded as a liar himself.

ei.sdraob

more manipulation here

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055691354

Daftendirekt

Surely the gods of Google will smite those responsible?

ei.sdraob

Daftendirekt wrote: »

Surely the gods of Google will smite those responsible?

google are laughing all the way to the Bank

do no evil they say

Hydrosylator

meglome wrote: »

I didn't ask could or would you stop them. I asked do you think the tactic is okay? Especially if the Yes campaign were doing it?

Serious question how do you know that Generation Yes are "astroturfing campaign by FF and the Greens"? I don't know anything about them so I'd be interested.

I'd oppose the tactic in most cases, but not in this one, because I think Generation Yes are pretty low. If it happened to Cóir it wouldn't upset me greatly.

Generation Yes is headed by Andrew Byrne, who sits on the Green Party's National Executive Committee. This distinction is conspicuous by it's absence on the "Meet the Team" page on Generation Yes's site.

Second-in-command is Bart Storan, who it seems, has been his sidekick since their TCD student politician days.

Generation YES is independent of any parties or interest groups. The only interest we have is getting the country back on track.

This can't be defended in light of the above facts.

FF involvement? I dunno, this is all I can manage this lunch break. I'd wager there's a significant overlap in membership though.

Hydrosylator

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I love your "two wrongs make a right" logic. I assume you will never accuse the yes side of scaremongering again since we've decided that deception is acceptable as long as it serves your goal?

Also, the fact that you consider generation yes a con job just shows how successful the no side's campaign has been. It's depressing that the lies have been repeated so often that anyone that tries to fight them is branded as a liar himself.

You're just being black and white about it to serve your own argument.
A google ad doesn't count as a deception, as all ads involve some kind of deception it's illogical to single out this one.

Political parties and companies both routinely try and steal each others traffic. Welcome to the internet.

Sam Vimes

Hydrosylator wrote: »

I'd oppose the tactic in most cases, but not in this one, because I think Generation Yes are pretty low. If it happened to Cóir it wouldn't upset me greatly.

Generation Yes is headed by Andrew Byrne, who sits on the Green Party's National Executive Committee. This distinction is conspicuous by it's absence on the "Meet the Team" page on Generation Yes's site.

Second-in-command is Bart Storan, who it seems, has been his sidekick since their TCD student politician days.


This can't be defended in light of the above facts.

FF involvement? I dunno, this is all I can manage this lunch break. I'd wager there's a significant overlap in membership though.

What's your point? The guy's associated with both groups but that doesn't mean that he's incapable of separating the two allegiances. Do you have anything to suggest that they're lying or spreading misinformation? As I've said previously I don't care who is associated with what group as long as what they're saying is true.

Sam Vimes

Hydrosylator wrote: »

You're just being black and white about it to serve your own argument.
A google ad doesn't count as a deception, as all ads involve some kind of deception it's illogical to single out this one.

Political parties and companies both routinely try and steal each others traffic. Welcome to the internet.

Now we have an "everybody's doing it" argument. We have an advertising standards agency and google has terms of service to prevent exactly this kind of abuse. I'm going to use an argument from our childhoods and ask you: if everyone jumped off a cliff would you do it too?

Hydrosylator

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I love your "two wrongs make a right" logic. I assume you will never accuse the yes side of scaremongering again since we've decided that deception is acceptable as long as it serves your goal?

Also, you're ignoring the qualifier, "In this particular case...", which I used.

I never once stated "Deception is acceptable as long as it serves your goal".
I never put words in anybody else's mouth and you shouldn't either.

WeeBushy

turgon wrote: »

According to Gen Yes' Facebook page it costs Peoples movement €1 every time someone clicks, although I have reservations its that high. They have also filled a formal complaint with Google asfaik.

It costs Peoples Movement a euro for every click? Well I have an hour off now, would it be childish of me to spend it clicking on the link, wasting as much of their money as I can?

meglome

Hydrosylator wrote: »

I'd oppose the tactic in most cases, but not in this one, because I think Generation Yes are pretty low. If it happened to Cóir it wouldn't upset me greatly.

Cóir have earned the low opinion we hold on them by their constant lying. Generation Yes on the other have not resorted to lying as far as I can tell.

Hydrosylator wrote: »

FF involvement? I dunno, this is all I can manage this lunch break. I'd wager there's a significant overlap in membership though.

It seems to me then you were a bit quick with your accusation that Generation Yes is a front for Fianna Fail. I wouldn't be shocked to find that young people involved in Generation Yes might well be involved in other political parties. That's still a long way off them being basically a front for one of those political parties.

Sam Vimes

Hydrosylator wrote: »

Also, you're ignoring the qualifier, "In this particular case...", which I used.

I never once stated "Deception is acceptable as long as it serves your goal".
I never put words in anybody else's mouth and you shouldn't either.

I don't care about your qualifier. At no point in any political debate is it acceptable to engage in any form of deliberate deception. I don't care if you think everyone else is doing it, I don't care if it's only a google ad and I don't care if you think the group whose traffic you're stealing is a "con job". Pretending to be associated with them to steal their traffic and to add credibility to their arguments makes them just as much of a con job and since generation yes are not in fact a con job, it makes them the only con job in this situation.

I can't believe you're defending this tbh. Any reasonable person should be able to put his desire for either a yes or no vote aside when he sees people on the same side as him engaged in dirty tricks. Otherwise you're just as bad as them.

hugthemountain

Right, hydroslater, your argument is that Andrew Byrne is Executive Director and Bart Storan is campaign manager, so this means (conclusively) that Generation Yes is an astroturfing operation by FF and the Greens. That is ridiculous, and patently pathetic, logic.

First, you have utterly failed to provide any connection to FF. Second, your connection with the Green party is that Andrew is a member of the national executive. That is public knowledge. Well done. Can you prove that any of the other volunteers that make up the organisation, that go out canvassing every day, are members of these political parties?

Your failure to provide anything that could even touch an argument with a ten foot clown pole clearly shows the depths you have sunk to in a vain attempt to justify what is obviously an irrational hatred and fear of those genuinely arguing for a Yes to Lisbon.

I would ask that you refrain from making wild allegations which you are incapable of proving. Try sticking to arguments about the merits of the treaty. I wish you luck in justfiying your positions in the future.

oscarBravo

Hydrosylator wrote: »

As for poor old Generation Yes... I regard it as an astroturfing campaign by FF and the Greens...

Hydrosylator wrote: »

Generation Yes is, as far as I'm concerned, a con job.

Hydrosylator wrote: »

...I think Generation Yes are pretty low.

...

Generation Yes is headed by Andrew Byrne, who sits on the Green Party's National Executive Committee.

...

FF involvement? I dunno, this is all I can manage this lunch break. I'd wager there's a significant overlap in membership though.

That's a lot of vitriol, and very little evidence. If GY is a FF/Green astroturfing campaign, that would preclude the involvement of any FG or Labour types, yes?

BlitzKrieg

I'd wager there's a significant overlap in membership though.

they dont deny this?

http://www.generationyes.ie/who-are-we/

Are you a fully independent group?
Yes. Generation Yes takes no direction or funds from any political parties. Members of parties are of course welcome to join and take an active role, but the organisation is fully independent.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Hydroslyter,

You might want to stump up some evidence for your accusation, or retract it sharpish, in light of the forum charter.

I'm going to draw a line here that's going to hold for the rest of the debate on Lisbon on this forum. I will ban people for making accusations of links between groups without providing evidence to suggest it, and no, knowing a few lads who're part of Generation Yes or Coir who happen to be members of Ogra doesn't make either group formally linked to FF.

Hydrosylator

hugthemountain wrote: »

Right, hydroslater, your argument is that Andrew Byrne is Executive Director and Bart Storan is campaign manager, so this means (conclusively) that Generation Yes is an astroturfing operation by FF and the Greens. That is ridiculous, and patently pathetic, logic.

That's all the evidence I have. It's really more of a hunch than anything else, but I'm sticking to it. Astro-turfing is notoriously difficult to prove, by design. If I was able to prove it was astro-turfing using google, they'd be amateurs.

hugthemountain wrote: »

Your failure to provide anything that could even touch an argument with a ten foot clown pole clearly shows the depths you have sunk to in a vain attempt to justify what is obviously an irrational hatred and fear of those genuinely arguing for a Yes to Lisbon.

I know tons of people who argue for a yes and I don't anything like an irrational fear or hatred for any of them. I think GY are slimy and dishonest, and I don;t like that sort of thing. How is that irrational?

Try sticking to arguments about the merits of the treaty. I wish you luck in justfiying your positions in the future.

This thread isn't about the treaty it's about a google ad put up by the people's Movement to win traffic from Generation Yes. If I started arguing the merits of the treaty, I'd be off topic.

Have you seen me mention Generation Yes anywhere else? I have only ever argued on the merits of the Treaty when it comes to arguing about the Treaty, and have pointedly refused to use "who's making the arguments" as part of that.

I wish you luck in attempting to use this as an argument against my positions, as it impacts none of them in any way.

oscarBravo

Hydrosylator wrote: »

That's all the evidence I have. It's really more of a hunch than anything else, but I'm sticking to it.

You can stick to it in the privacy of your own head, but if you reiterate the accusation here without evidence, you'll be banned.

Hydrosylator

oscarBravo wrote: »

You can stick to it in the privacy of your own head, but if you reiterate the accusation here without evidence, you'll be banned.

Fair enough.

dmfod

GenYes lists 6 'team' members http://www.generationyes.ie/the-team/
In 10 minutes of Googling, I've found links with Irish political parties and/or pro-EU thinktanks/other pro-Lisbon astroturf groups for 5 of them.

Andrew Byrne is a member of the Greens. When running for SU President in Trinity, he was supported in his campaign by Bart Storan, suggesting an affiliation with the Greens by Storan. Byrne is currently Chief of Operations for Pat Cox's (PD founder & corporate lobbyist) pro-Lisbon astroturf group Ireland for Europe.

Clare Tighe is friends with Shay Brennan on Facebook, suggesting FF links.

Sharon Waters has a background in PR for the Labour party and according to their GY's website "Prior to joining Generation YES, she worked in public relations, representing Dublin City Council, the Lord Mayor" i.e. Labour as they have controlled the mayoralty in recent times

David Walker is an employee of publicly-funded but rabidly pro-EU think tank the Institute for International and European Affairs (IIIEA) which is run by Labour hack Brendan Halligan and is which is also behind Ireland for Europe http://www.iiea.com/staff/david-walker

Dan Hayden is a former FF-backed UCDSU President who restricted abortion information for students while president http://www.indymedia.ie/article/74638
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/75320

I can't find any Irish political party links for Clodagh Power, but Hazel Nolan who the IT describe as one of GY's main organisers is a member of the Labour party http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0424/breaking49.html.

Quote from a Labour person on p.ie "Gen Yes grew out of a nucleus of several young political activists from the GP, Lab, FG & FF" http://www.politics.ie/lisbon-treaty/100629-generation-yes-self-parody-7.html

for what it's worth the only GY member I've met in person admitted he was a member of Young FG

An additional piece of info is that GY have attended meetings with other astroturf groups such as Women for Europe in IBEC's head office, where the latter are based.

PopeBuckfastXVI

dmfod wrote: »

GenYes lists 6 'team' members http://www.generationyes.ie/the-team/
In 10 minutes of Googling, I've found links with Irish political parties and/or pro-EU thinktanks/other pro-Lisbon astroturf groups for 5 of them.

Andrew Byrne is a member of the Greens. When running for SU President in Trinity, he was supported in his campaign by Bart Storan, suggesting an affiliation with the Greens by Storan. Byrne is currently Chief of Operations for Pat Cox's (PD founder & corporate lobbyist) pro-Lisbon astroturf group Ireland for Europe.

Clare Tighe is friends with Shay Brennan on Facebook, suggesting FF links.

Sharon Waters has a background in PR for the Labour party and according to their GY's website "Prior to joining Generation YES, she worked in public relations, representing Dublin City Council, the Lord Mayor" i.e. Labour as they have controlled the mayoralty in recent times

David Walker is an employee of publicly-funded but rabidly pro-EU think tank the Institute for International and European Affairs (IIIEA) which is run by Labour hack Brendan Halligan and is which is also behind Ireland for Europe http://www.iiea.com/staff/david-walker

Dan Hayden is a former FF-backed UCDSU President who restricted abortion information for students while president http://www.indymedia.ie/article/74638
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/75320

I can't find any Irish political party links for Clodagh Power, but Hazel Nolan who the IT describe as one of GY's main organisers is a member of the Labour party http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0424/breaking49.html.

Quote from a Labour person on p.ie "Gen Yes grew out of a nucleus of several young political activists from the GP, Lab, FG & FF" http://www.politics.ie/lisbon-treaty/100629-generation-yes-self-parody-7.html

for what it's worth the only GY member I've met in person admitted he was a member of Young FG

An additional piece of info is that GY have attended meetings with other astroturf groups such as Women for Europe in IBEC's head office, where the latter are based.

Point.
Your post contains none.