DOCSLIB.ORG

November​​9,​​2017 Federal​​Election​​Commission Attn

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

November 9, 2017 ​ ​ ​ ​ Federal Election Commission ​ ​ ​ ​ Attn.: Neven F. Stipanovic, Acting Assistant General Counsel ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 999 E Street NW. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Washington, DC 20463 ​ ​ ​ ​ Re: REG 2011-02, Internet Communication Disclaimers ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Enclosed please find the signatures and comments of more than 25,000 Americans urging the ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ FEC to update disclosure requirements to include online ads. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ The petition reads: Online political ads should not be exempt from transparency rules. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Additionally, some activists have included their own comments as well. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Please enter the attached signatures and comments into REG 2011-02. If you have any ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ questions, please reach out to me directly. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Thank you for your time. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Best, Reuben Hayslett ​ ​ Campaigner Rootstrikers, a project of Demand Progress ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ [email protected] 347-756-9084 Online political ads should not be exempt from transparency rules. Comments provided by : Hayslett, Reuben first_name last_name city state zip comment Paul Holloway OCALA FL 34476 Exactly!!!! Lucy Harmon Lindale TX 75771 HONESTLY TRANSPARENCY Secrecy and disinformation led to the dysfunctional, dangerous, and bizarre administration we have today. Our democracy Curtis Hageland Anacortes WA 98221 itself is at stake. Transparency, yes! Disclose who pays for online Jim Yarbrough Ashland OR 97520 ads! Americans have a right to know who is trying to sway their vote. Update your disclosure Paula Goldsmid Claremont CA 91711 requirements to include online ads. John Dunphy Wyncote PA 19095 Campaign ads should disclose their funders. Ester Deel Oakland CA 94603 Do the right thing. Donna Garrison TX 78668 Take Action immediately and stop this insanity! The Russians knowingly paid, sometimes in rubles, for advertisements, to undermine our democracy with falsehoods,etc. Those whose responsibility it was to be erhical & factual, condoned it, or, found it to be unimportant. Many cirizens were misinformed, misled, which was the point.. -It is our right & need to know who pays. Period. There is no debate for those who support our democracy & Constitution & peg winternheimer Evansville IN 47712 want to protect both. The Internet form of “yellow journalism“ Mary Codispoti Airmont NY 10952 must be stopped! They say that you vote with your money. Every dollar is a type of boot. If businesses are allowed to spend their money as they choose, we as consumers should be able to see who we are giving our money to and what they are doing with it. I have had enough of propaganda, lies, ignoring the truth, ignoring the facts, ignoring science, I am not ready to see America plunged into the dark ages, and the money the companies earn from me should not be able to fund that dissent into the dark ages. I would like to know with whom and where and what I spend my money that I work very hard to earn. Transparency on Internet ads is necessity. The Internet is a great place to remain anonymous, become a cyber bully, and not be held accountable for anything that you put in writing. Dacelle Peckler Paris KY 40361 This should not be the case. A Bishop Mendon UT 84325 Voters a right to know We need to know who paid for ads and in what currency. We need to know truth from fiction. We Yvonne Brumleve Louisville KY 40223 need to know if bots are involved. Chaz Shukat Clifton NJ 7013 Americans have a right to know who is trying to sway their vote. Update your disclosure SUSAN PELICAN woodland CA 95695 requirements to include online ads. The internet is now a major source of news and, as such, should be subject to all regulations. Linda Ross Memphis TN 38119 Close the loophole, please! We do have a right to know!!! Maybe then there Pat Benabe Lawrence KS 66044 will be less lies in the ads. we need to know who is supporting whom and Anna Hinkle Sherman TX 75092 the reason for that support. When big money rules our elections we are in Susan Turner CANYON COUNTRCA 91351 great danger of losing our democracy!@ TracyBury Bury BELLEVUE WA 98006 ! "Americans have a right to know who is trying to sway their vote. Update your disclosure requirements to include online ads.Close the online ad loophole. ALL campaign ads should disclose their funders. There is strong evidence that Russian operatives bought Facebook ads seeking to sway the US election. As many as 126 million Americans may have been served content from Russia-linked pages, with no clue they were being influenced by foreign agents. And that is just organic content, not even including paid ads.3 Updating FEC disclosure requirements to cover internet ads will help protect against something Michelle Meyer Minneapolis MN 55422 like this ever happening again." "Consider the source" has always been good advice, nowhere more so than in politics. People who see ads on the internet are denied this fundamental information. This is unjust, unwise, and just plain dangerous. There can be no valid reason to exempt online ads from transparency Carol Voeller Salem OR 97301 rules. "REPUBLICAN'S ARE THE MOST USELESS PIGG'S ON THE PLANET, AND WE DO NOT NEED THEM Edward Luz FALL RIVER MA 2724 ANYMORE!" "We, the People" deserve to know exactly who is Mary Phillips-Burke WOODSTOCK NY 12498 supporting whom & by how much! Kevin Howley Bloomington IN 47401 #Right2Know (((***IT'S TIME***))) (((***STOP THE MODERN DAY "ROBBER BARONS BEFORE THEY DESTROY MERVIN PAULSON NASHVILLE TN 37217 OUR COUNTRY***))) *ALL* advertising for political and "issue" campaigns should disclose where the $$$ comes Henry Ickes Newton NJ 7860 from! No exceptions! Russell Se Brattleboro VT 5301 . .....who pays and should be Fact T Muhammad GERMANTOWN MD 20876 Checked......amen ...the entire gop is masquerading as christians, on the one hand claiming to be a christian nation and Jonathan Senn Tucson AZ 85755 then acting like heathens, non believers... Americans have a right to know who is trying to sway their vote. Update your disclosure John Silk Bridgeport CT 6604 requirements to include online ads. L L. Los Angeles CA 90035 100% disclosure! David Fee Bloomfield Hills MI 48301 2016 is case-in-point! Wendy Hartley CA 90210 45 needs to be removed from the White House. James Barron Natick MA 1760 A "no-brainer" if I ever heaqrd one. A democracy bought in secret and strip-mined is Jacquelyn Crawford San Jose CA 95136 shameful. A democracy requires reliable information. In this internet age, this change would help voters make William Stotts MILWAUKEE WI 53208 more informed decisions. A hostile foreign power found it all too easy to pollute our political landscape with "fake news" during the last election. This is intolerable, but rather than ban such on-line advertising outright, I would simply require full and clear disclosure of who bought the ad and where they can be reached. I think this inspires political involvement in the citizenry and honesty about who is paying who to say what. Then let the American voter Malcolm Brenner Punta Gorda FL 33982 figure it out! A new medium should still follow the same rules. And the Internet isn't even that new! We have a K Carlson Morehead KY 40351 right to know who's behind any paid ad. Ed Lizewski Eugene OR 97402 a no brainer A political ad is a political ad whether it’s on tv, radio or the Internet. And these days with the Russians out of control and injecting themselves online, it’s more important than ever to Gayle Janzen Seattle WA 98133 enforce the transparency rules online. A Political add has the same purpose as any other add! They...must "not. be exempt from Joe Ross Springfield OH 45506 transparency rule." All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that James Perkins Los Angeles CA 90037 good men do nothing.― Amy glen Danvers MA 1923 Abide by transparency rules!! John Scarpa Holland IN 47541 About time ABSOLUTELY !!! ALL SOCIAL MEDIA NETWORKS MUST BE GOVERNED THE SAME AS STANDARD MEDIA MRS. PAT BRYANT Newark NJ 7101 NETWORKS AND NEWS OUTLETS !!! Don Smith Saint Johnsbury VT 5819 ABSOLUTELY !!!! Absolutely Americans have the right to know who is funding online political ads, with the Russians in bed with certain Republicans it is very CharlesannGarrett Lexington KY 40511 important that the people know! Absolutely needed to protect our Democracy from foreign meddling and Trump's own issuing Peter Mason null MA 1085 of "fake news". or "alternative facts". Craig Cass Saint Paul MN 55126 Absolutely NO exemption! Absolutely no question that we need to have transparency behind the money paying for ads. Even better would be public financing of Andrew Page BERKELEY CA 94703 elections. Absolutely should not be exempt from Janet Zehnal The Villages FL 32159 transparency rules! Toby Zabinski Milford CT 6460 Absolutely transparency must be the rule!!! Juli Hennessee Morganton NC 28655 Absolutely! Mona Hall Leominster MA 1453 Absolutely! Lesley Woodward Rocky River OH 44116 Absolutely! Saundra Schaub Columbus OH 43229 Absolutely! Absolutely! Online political ads do not need to be Sharon Daly Amherst NY 14226 exempt from transparency rules. Absolutely! The country was "suckered" once! Let it NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN! Let's face it, the Russians INFLUENCED the ELECTION, to what degree, we may never fully know... Fool me once, shame on you! Fool me twice, Cheryl nelson Las Cruces NM 88011 shame on me! Luana Rubin Boulder CO 80301 Absolutely! A no-brainer! Paul Bowe Milton MA 2186 ABSOLUTELY!!! John Cassidy Puyallup WA 98375 Absolutely!!!!! Absolutely, and the real money, not some cover name. Full disclosure on every ad: radio, tv, Leslie Spurling MARION TX 78124 newsmedia, online everything. Absolutely, there should be transparency. But I long for a time when private funding is banned Abigale Wool long beach CA 90805 from all campaigns.
Recommended publications
  • HARD, SOFT and DARK MONEY Introduction Early Political Scandals

    HARD, SOFT and DARK MONEY Introduction Early Political Scandals

    HARD, SOFT AND DARK MONEY Introduction Early political scandals involved money used for bribery or buying votes. Modern day scandals involve the appearances of corruption depending where gifts and campaign money came from. The U.S. Supreme Court has made a number of controversial decisions expanding the amounts of money in politics by characterizing political donations and expenditures to be exercises of freedom of speech. Among other results, those decisions have created a large and growing category of election related donations and contributions called “dark money.” Important Terms Defined Terms relating to money in politics that are used in this paper have definitions more exactly set out by law. These terms are fully addressed in the MIP paper Definitions for Money in Politics, Disclosure Requirements for PACs The relationships of PACs to their disclosure requirements are shown in the chart below. May Funding Disclosure Donations coordinate Corporations Sources required limited with can donate candidate Political parties PAC’s Super Pac’s 527’s 501(c)’s Dark Money Twenty-nine types of corporations are listed in §501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) as qualified for nonprofit status. Social Welfare Organizations under §501(c) (4), Labor Unions under §501(c)(5), and Trade Associations under §501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code are not required to report from whom they get their donations. Hence these donations are referred to as dark money. Since social welfare or business interests often intersect with political issues, these groups are allowed to use funds to influence elections, but there is otherwise no dollar limit on how much that can be, and they only need to report the majority of their expenditures in general terms.
  • Going Nuts in the Nutmeg State?

    Going Nuts in the Nutmeg State?

    Going Nuts in the Nutmeg State? A Thesis Presented to The Division of History and Social Sciences Reed College In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Bachelor of Arts Daniel Krantz Toffey May 2007 Approved for the Division (Political Science) Paul Gronke Acknowledgements Acknowledgements make me a bit uneasy, considering that nothing is done in isolation, and that there are no doubt dozens—perhaps hundreds—of people responsible for instilling within me the capability and fortitude to complete this thesis. Nonetheless, there are a few people that stand out as having a direct and substantial impact, and those few deserve to be acknowledged. First and foremost, I thank my parents for giving me the incredible opportunity to attend Reed, even in the face of staggering tuition, and an uncertain future—your generosity knows no bounds (I think this thesis comes out to about $1,000 a page.) I’d also like to thank my academic and thesis advisor, Paul Gronke, for orienting me towards new horizons of academic inquiry, and for the occasional swift kick in the pants when I needed it. In addition, my first reader, Tamara Metz was responsible for pulling my head out of the data, and helping me to consider the “big picture” of what I was attempting to accomplish. I also owe a debt of gratitude to the Charles McKinley Fund for providing access to the Cooperative Congressional Elections Study, which added considerable depth to my analyses, and to the Fautz-Ducey Public Policy fellowship, which made possible the opportunity that inspired this work.
  • Senator Whitehouse Re-Introduces DISCLOSE Act With

    Senator Whitehouse Re-Introduces DISCLOSE Act With

    Senator Whitehouse Re-introduces DISCLOSE Act with 49 Cosponsors, Reform Groups Urge Senate to Enact Bill to Close Gaping Disclosure Loopholes Used to Hide Donors from Voters Our organizations strongly support the DISCLOSE Act of 2014 introduced today by Senator Whitehouse (D-RI) with 49 cosponsors. Our organizations include Americans for Campaign Reform, the Brennan Center for Justice, the Campaign Legal Center, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, Common Cause, Democracy 21, Demos, the League of Women Voters, People For the American Way, Public Citizen and Sunlight Foundation. The legislation would ensure that voters know the identity of donors who have been secretly financing campaign expenditures in federal elections. Voters have a fundamental right to know this information. Donors funneled more than $300 million in secret contributions into the 2012 national elections through outside spending groups. National polls have shown that citizens overwhelmingly favor disclosure by outside groups of the donors financing their campaign expenditures. The basic right of citizens to know whose money is being spent to influence their votes has long been recognized by Congress in enacting campaign finance disclosure laws and by the Supreme Court in upholding these laws. The Supreme Court in the Citizens United case, by an overwhelming 8 to 1 vote, upheld the constitutionality of and need for disclosure requirements for outside groups making expenditures to influence federal elections. The Court stated: The First Amendment protects political speech; and disclosure permits citizens and shareholders to react to the speech of corporate entities in a proper way. This transparency enables the electorate to make informed decisions and give proper weight to different speakers and messages.
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 112 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION

    Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 112 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION

    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 112 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION Vol. 158 WASHINGTON, TUESDAY, JULY 17, 2012 No. 107 Senate The Senate met at 10 a.m., and was U.S. SENATE, THE DISCLOSE ACT called to order by the Honorable CHRIS- PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE, Mr. President, the corrosive effect of TOPHER A. COONS, a Senator from the Washington, DC, July 17, 2012. money on American politics isn’t a State of Delaware. To the Senate: product of the 21st century. More than Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, 100 years ago, moneyed special inter- of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby PRAYER appoint the Honorable CHRISTOPHER A. ests had already tested the integrity of The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, of- COONS, a Senator from the State of Dela- this country’s political system. fered the following prayer: ware, to perform the duties of the Chair. In 1899, copper billionaire William Let us pray. DANIEL K. INOUYE, Clark was elected to the U.S. Senate by God of grace and glory, You have al- President pro tempore. the Montana State legislature. The ready blessed us this day. We pause Mr. COONS thereupon assumed the contest was considered so blatantly now to acknowledge that we borrow chair as Acting President pro tempore. swayed by bribery the Senate refused to seat him. Here is how Clark fa- our heartbeats from You and that be- f cause of You we live and breathe and mously responded: RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY move and have our being.
  • Civic Organizations and Investor Groups Call Upon Congress to Approve the DISCLOSE Act

    Civic Organizations and Investor Groups Call Upon Congress to Approve the DISCLOSE Act

    April 23, 2012 Civic Organizations and Investor Groups Call Upon Congress to Approve the DISCLOSE Act Dear Representative, The undersigned organizations support H.R. 4010, the DISCLOSE 2012 Act, sponsored by Representative Chris Van Hollen. H.R. 4010 would provide the public with basic information about campaign expenditures made by outside groups to influence federal elections and the donors financing these expenditures. The legislation would also provide for timely disclosure by Super PACs, would require outside groups which make campaign expenditures to take responsibility for their campaign ads and would require corporations to inform their shareholders about their campaign expenditures. It is a cardinal rule of campaign finance laws that citizens are entitled to know the donors financing campaign expenditures to influence their votes, and the amounts they gave. This basic right to know has long been recognized by disclosure laws enacted by Congress and by Supreme Court decisions which upheld the constitutionality of these laws. In the Citizens United decision, the Supreme Court by an 8 to 1 vote upheld the constitutionality of disclosure requirements for outside groups making campaign expenditures. The Court stated: The First Amendment protects political speech; and disclosure permits citizens and shareholders to react to the speech of corporate entities in a proper way. This transparency enables the electorate to make informed decisions and give proper weight to different speakers and messages. Polls show citizens strongly support disclosure by outside spenders. According to a New York Times article on a New York Times/CBS News poll released on October 28, 2010, Americans overwhelmingly, "favor full disclosure of spending by both campaigns and outside groups." The DISCLOSE 2012 Act contains only disclosure requirements and does not contain special exceptions for any groups.
  • The DISCLOSE Act: Overview and Analysis

    The DISCLOSE Act: Overview and Analysis

    The DISCLOSE Act: Overview and Analysis -name redacted- Analyst in American National Government -name redacted- Legislative Attorney -name redacted- Legislative Attorney July 26, 2010 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov R41264 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress The DISCLOSE Act: Overview and Analysis Summary As it has periodically for decades, Congress is again considering how or whether to regulate campaign financing. The latest iteration of the debate over which kinds of groups should be permitted to spend funds on political advertisements, and how so, was renewed on January 21, 2010, when the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Following Citizens United, corporations and labor unions may now fund political advertisements explicitly calling for election or defeat of federal candidates— provided that the advertisements are not coordinated with the campaign. The legislative response receiving the most attention to date—and the emphasis of this report—is the DISCLOSE (“Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections”) Act. The House measure, H.R. 5175, sponsored by Representative Van Hollen, was reported, as amended, by the Committee on House Administration on May 25, 2010. The House of Representatives passed the bill, with additional amendments, on June 24, 2010, by a 219-206 vote. Senator Schumer’s companion legislation that was first introduced in the Senate, S. 3295, is generally similar to the bill passed by the House. The same is true for S. 3628, a second measure—apparently intended to supersede S. 3295—that Senator Schumer introduced on July 21, 2010.
  • Amicus Brief

    Amicus Brief

    No. 11-1179 In The Supreme Court of the United States American Tradition Partnership, Inc., f.k.a. Western Tradition Partnership, Inc., Petitioners, v. Steve Bullock, Attorney General of Montana, et al., Respondents. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA BRIEF FOR UNITED STATES REPRESENTATIVES ROBERT BRADY, CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, ZOE LOFGREN AND CHARLES GONZALEZ AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS James A. Ahlers John M. Devaney Jerica L. Peters Counsel of Record PERKINS COIE LLP Karl J. Sandstrom 2901 N. Central Avenue Brian G. Svoboda Suite 2000 Elisabeth C. Frost Phoenix, Arizona 85012 PERKINS COIE LLP (602) 351-8000 700 Thirteenth Street, NW [email protected] Suite 600 [email protected] Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 654-6200 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for Amici Curiae TABLE OF CONTENTS Page STATEMENT OF INTEREST................................... 1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ...................................................... 2 ARGUMENT .............................................................. 4 I. Citizens United Has Reduced Disclosure, Transparency and Accountability ……………...4 II. The Court Should Reaffirm That Citizens United Permits Congress And State Legislatures To Establish Disclosure Requirements For Corporate Independent Expenditures …………………………………….13 CONCLUSION......................................................... 18 i TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES Burroughs v. United States, 290 U.S. 534 (1934) .......................................... 13 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 130 S. CT. 876 (2010)............................... Passim Fed. Election Comm'n v. Mass. Citizens For Life, Inc., 479 U.S. 238 (1986) .......................................... 159 First Nat'l Bank of Bos. v. Bellotti, 435 U.S. 765 (1978) ....................................... 9,10 McConnell v. Fed. Election Comm'n, 540 U.S.
  • Liturgy and Landscape—Re-Activating Christian Funeral Rites Through Adaptive Reuse of a Rural Church and Its Surroundings As a Columbarium and Urn Cemetery

    Liturgy and Landscape—Re-Activating Christian Funeral Rites Through Adaptive Reuse of a Rural Church and Its Surroundings As a Columbarium and Urn Cemetery

    religions Article Liturgy and Landscape—Re-Activating Christian Funeral Rites through Adaptive Reuse of a Rural Church and Its Surroundings as a Columbarium and Urn Cemetery Samuel Goyvaerts 1,* and Nikolaas Vande Keere 2,* 1 Department of Systematic Theology and Philosophy, Tilburg School of Catholic Theology, Tilburg University, 90153 Tilburg, The Netherlands 2 Faculty of Architecture and Arts, Hasselt University, 3500 Hasselt, Belgium * Correspondence: [email protected] (S.G.); [email protected] (N.V.K.) Received: 29 June 2020; Accepted: 17 July 2020; Published: 7 August 2020 Abstract: We present the design research for the adaptive reuse of the St. Odulphus church as a columbarium in the village of Booienhoven (BE). Surrounded by agriculture, the site is listed as a historic rural landscape. The small neoclassical church is no longer in use for traditional Catholic services and is abandoned. Positioned on an isolated “island”, it has the appropriate setting to become a place to remember and part from the dead. Instigated by the municipality, and taking into account the growing demand for cremation, we present topological research on three different liturgical and spatial levels: 1/the use of the church interior as a columbarium and for (funeral) celebration, 2/the transformation of the “island”, stressing the idea of “passage” and 3/the layering of the open landscape reactivating the well-spring and its spiritual origins. Based on the reform of the funeral rite after Vatican II, we propose a layered liturgy that can better suit the wide variety of funeral services in Flanders today, while at the same time respecting its Catholic roots.
  • Cyber Influence Operations: an Overview and Comparative Analysis

    Cyber Influence Operations: an Overview and Comparative Analysis

    CSS CYBER DEFENSE Cyber Influence Operations: An Overview and Comparative Analysis Zurich, October 2019 Cyber Defense Project (CDP) Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich Author: Sean Cordey © 2019 Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zurich Contact: Center for Security Studies Haldeneggsteig 4 ETH Zurich CH-8092 Zurich Switzerland Tel.: +41-44-632 40 25 [email protected] www.css.ethz.ch Analysis prepared by: Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zurich ETH-CSS project management: Tim Prior, Head of the Risk and Resilience Research Group; Myriam Dunn Cavelty, Deputy Head for Research and Teaching; Andreas Wenger, Director of the CSS Disclaimer: The opinions presented in this study exclusively reflect the authors’ views. Please cite as: Cordey, Sean. (2019). Cyber Influence Operations: An Overview and Comparative Analysis, Cyberdefense Trend Analysis, Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich. Table of Contents Executive Summary 4 1 Introduction 5 2 Summary of the Debate Around Influence Activities 6 2.1 Influence and Some Historical Examples 6 2.2 The Definition Conundrum of Influence Activities and Techniques 7 3 Cyber & Influence Operations 11 3.1 Definition and Scope of Cyber Influence Operations 11 3.2 Influence Operations and Cyber Influence Operations: Similarities and Differences 11 3.3 Potential & Strategic Implications 19 4 Comparative analysis: American and Russian Cyber Influence Operations 21 4.1 Methodology 21 4.2 Presentation of Results and Discussion 21 4.3 Additional Remarks 26 5 Conclusion 28 6 Glossary 30 7 List of Abbreviations 31 8 Bibliography 32 Cyber Influence Operations: An Overview and Comparative Analysis Executive Summary conflict, CIOs are increasingly also used in times of peace or in the context of mere rivalry.
  • Silver Alerts Help Locate Seniors Lost on the Road Or on Foot

    Silver Alerts Help Locate Seniors Lost on the Road Or on Foot

    INSIDE WEEK OF APRIL 28-MAY 5, 2016 www.FloridaWeekly.com Vol. VI, No. 28 • FREE NNEWSE ANALYSIS Why every contending candidate has booby traps leading to the presidency. SunFest continues Alabama Shakes closes out the annual festival. B1 IT’S A Society Polo, authors and other events. TRAP 8 pages inside BY BILL CORNWELL bcornwell@fl oridaweekly.com HE TREACHEROUS PATH TO A PRESIDENTIAL nomination, and ultimately to the White House, is mined with surprises, scandals, missteps and ill-conceived Behind the Wheel deeds. Long-forgotten utterances of the The new Jaguar XF holds the T regrettable and embarrassing variety road. A16 and previously concealed lapses in pru- dence and decorum invariably fly back to their originators like deftly deployed boomerangs. As the process unfolds and the accumula- tion of policy contradictions and personal foibles mount, candidates scramble to explain the unexplainable. Little wonder, then, that a presidential campaign resembles Paul’s trek to Damascus. Epiphanies abound, profound per- sonal transformations emerge from the ether SEE TRAP, A10 EDITORIAL IMAGES BY SHUTTERSTOCK/ ILLUSTRATION ERIC RADDATZ / FLORIDA WEEKLY / FLORIDA WEEKLY ERIC RADDATZ EDITORIAL IMAGES BY SHUTTERSTOCK/ ILLUSTRATION Silver Alerts help locate seniors Look What I Found lost on the road or on foot Scott Simmons finds a 19th-century Wedgwood BY EVAN WILLIAMS Amber Alerts (which help find missing chil- Capriware pitcher. B2 ewilliams@fl oridaweekly.com dren). But they are specifically for people 60 and older who have memory impairments You’ve probably seen the electronic mes- or cognitive diseases such as Alzheimer’s sage signs on the interstate lighting up with and other forms of dementia, and who go Download a “Silver Alert,” displaying the characteris- missing while driving.
  • It's Getting Ugly out There

    It's Getting Ugly out There

    It’s Getting Ugly Out There The Frauds, Bunglers, Liars, and Losers Who Are Hurting America JACK CAFFERTY John Wiley & Sons, Inc. It’s Getting Ugly Out There It’s Getting Ugly Out There The Frauds, Bunglers, Liars, and Losers Who Are Hurting America JACK CAFFERTY John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Copyright © 2007 by Jack Cafferty. All rights reserved Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey Published simultaneously in Canada Design and composition by Navta Associates, Inc. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copy- right Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, (978) 750-8400, fax (978) 646-8600, or on the web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, (201) 748-6011, fax (201) 748-6008, or online at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions. Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and the author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically dis- claim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.
  • How We Feel About Politics Professor Tom Miller, Dept

    How We Feel About Politics Professor Tom Miller, Dept

    How We Feel about Politics Professor Tom Miller, Dept. of English [email protected] and 626-0202 Bookmarks to weekly assignments in this document Links to online sources o Sources only available on line How a Socialist and a Populist Crashed the Parties Page 3 Campaign Exposes Divisions Over Issues, Values and How Life Has Changed in the U.S. (3/31/16). Voters’ Perceptions of the Candidates: Traits, Ideology and Impact on Issues, (7/14/16) How do the political parties make you feel?, (6/22/16) Donald J. Trump’s Nomination Speech Clinton’s Nomination Speech Democratic Party Platform Republican Party Platform “Unconscious Reactions Separate Liberals and Conservatives” “How Politics Breaks Our Brains” Trumping Conservativism Page 37 “The Appeal of Donald Trump” “The Fact That You’re Going To Die Is Donald Trump’s Biggest Asset” “95,000 Words, Many of Them Ominous, From Donald Trump’s Tongue” “How Should Conservatives Respond to the Age of Trump?” “The GOP’s Ideological Earthquake and the Aftermath” Videos not included here: o The Debates between Lincoln and Douglas o CNN Make or Break Moments in Presidential Debates o 1960 Kennedy and Nixon Debate with commentary by Walter Cronkite o 1980 Debate of Reagan and Carter o 1992 Bush and Clinton Debate o 2012 Obama and Romney Debate How Much of It is Because She’s a Woman? Page 47 “Hey Hillary, Here’s Why People Don’t Trust You” “Hillary Clinton's Trust Gap Is Killing Her with Millennials” “Donald Trump Says Hillary Clinton is Corrupt—Is He Right?” “Americans’ views