• rayyy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 months ago

      By getting paid

      More like bribed out of their minds. They absolutely KNEW that what they were doing wasn’t worth a fraction of the money was handed to them.

      • futatorius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        What they’re doing isn’t worth a monkey’s fruity fart. But I’m sure they have senses of entitlement that are off the scale.

    • realcaseyrollins@thelemmy.clubOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The U.S. Justice Department doesn’t allege any wrongdoing by the influencers, some of whom it says were given false information about the source of the company’s funding. Instead, it accuses two employees of RT, a Russian state media company, of funneling nearly $10 million to a Tennessee-based content creation company for Russia-friendly content.

    • RicoBerto@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      2 months ago

      My job dupes me into coming in every night by uploading some wacky numbers to my bank account every two weeks. I fall for it every time.

  • Maple Engineer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    2 months ago

    They weren’t duped. They gleefully and knowingly pushed anti-American propaganda in support of the Project 2025 Handmaid’s Tale christofascist theocratic dictatorship. They knew where the money was coming from but didn’t care.

    • snooggums@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Bags of money!

      Apparently they were duped into thinking the money came from pro-Russian US conservatives or something like that instead of directly from the source.

      I disagree that they were duped in any way since the pro Russian messaging was still pro Russian messaging and the source of the money is not important.

  • irotsoma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t think most of them were duped. It’s been exceptionally obvious for years. I mean I guess some of them are dumb enough not to realize, but most are just taking advantage of the money and power.

    • linearchaos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah, that’s like saying Old spice sponsors and influencer to sell Old spice then saying that they were duped to work for Proctor and Gamble.

  • jaemo@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Because conservatives are fundamentally uncurious weirdos who prove the worthlessness of an unexamined life for the rest of us.

  • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    i’m always getting duped to say obvious pro russian talking points after taking a bunch of money and signing a contract to say obvious pro russian talking points. hate when it happens, honestly.

    • MarciaLynnDorsett@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      the people producing the content that I’ve seen talk about it so far have said there was no editorial line at all, and they individually all had full control of what they produced. the company’s only creative contributions were when it made thumbnails and posted clips

        • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          Deflection of what? I’m only invested in giving you guys shit. An anti-trump russian shill is funny as fuck and runs counter to the narrative.

          At least someone responded, despite essentially no content. Maybe a bit of projection.

            • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Yeah, no response. Kinda figured.

              At least criticize her because her views are worse than trump instead of making shit up. But no, fuck reality. We’re all going to suffer until the left sorts out how to be effective and useful. Society needs you but you’re going to take yourself out of the fight with delusions.

  • gedaliyah@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Third straight election, you say? I wonder if there is any other factor shared by the last three elections? Like maybe one of the candidates has been the same person?

  • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Pool, a journalist-turned-YouTuber who first gained public attention for livestreaming the Occupy Wall Street protests, hosted Trump on his podcast earlier this year.

    Johnson is an outspoken Trump supporter and internet personality who was fired from BuzzFeed after the company found evidence he’d plagiarized other works.

    So these two were formally “journalists”, and should know at least something about confirming sources and information before publishing, or in this case I guess making a video/podcast, about the topic given them by this company that wanted to just give them hundreds of thousands of dollars. And maybe look into why a company would pay you that kind of money out of nowhere if they were supplying all the talking points, and they just want you to say them into a camera? Maybe?

    I think anyone with any background in media should see right through something like this, and has no leg to stand on when crying “we had no idea!”. They saw a check and all morals/questions went out the window.

    • realcaseyrollins@thelemmy.clubOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      If what you say is true, they are guilty of crimes and should be prosecuted. I think the DOJ is unlikely to do this. What legitimate reason would the DOJ have to not prosecute these people?

      • scarabine@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        No. My god, no. What sort of nonsense is that?

        You’re taking the position of a catastrophic extreme in response to someone saying they should have been more circumspect about where their money came from.

        They should have been more circumspect, though. There’s leagues between acknowledging that and saying that they should be prosecuted by the DOJ.

        • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          How is that extreme?

          Prosecution isn’t execution, it is trying them for a crime that they may have committed. If they’re found guilty, even punishment could include things like seizing the money paid to them for those videos and putting watermark warnings on those videos explaining who funded them or taking them down entirely, not exclusively jail time.

          • scarabine@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            It’s not extreme to seek their prosecution, it’s an extreme leap to jump from a post about how they should’ve known better (they really should have!) to “They should be prosecuted by the DOJ”.

            I’m not sure they need to be prosecuted to have these funds seized, though. The government doesn’t even need to ask them for it I don’t think, depending on how the case proceeds. If the money is part of the case it is probably part of the verdict.

            • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              That still seems reasonable to me, though. If there’s evidence that they knew what they were doing, put it to a trial to determine culpability. If they’re not obviously in a position to have known better, I can see not prosecuting them, but prosecution is the normal next step when someone seemingly knowingly commits a crime. If it turns out that they really all got scammed, they’ll be found innocent.

              I’m also not sure how it will proceed, but I think it’s much more fucked up if a non-party to a criminal case has assets seized. Given that there are currently sanctions against Russia, I could see it being seized separately by the DOJ and/or IRS, but I’d honestly much prefer that it go through a trial instead of just having the DOJ decide. At least then they can have a jury if they want and they can defend themselves. Civil forfeiture is fucked up

        • futatorius@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          They’re repeating verbatim the talking points of official propaganda outlets of a hostile power. That makes them undeclared foreign agents.

      • futatorius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Oh, maybe the fact that the US legal system has had a long policy of rightwing impunity, almost as much as it practices elite impunity?

  • psvrh@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    “Duped” is doing some heavy lifting in that sentence.

    • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 months ago

      “I’m shocked, shocked to find that Russia was funding me to spout these talking points!”

      “Your gratuities, sir”

      “Oh, thank you very much.”