Electoral Commission admits digital politics is a problem

The Electoral Commission has printed a report on the December General Election. It can be found here. (exact date of the report is not mentioned but is sometime in June). It is similar to the report given earlier. Election financial information is posted here but with no information on computer system costs.

The following are quotes from the report:

The election was generally well-run, but there is new evidence showing challenges for the future

The 2019 UK Parliamentary general election was held on Thursday 12 December. More than 40 million people were registered to vote, and the turnout of registered voters was 67%. There were high levels of satisfaction with the processes of registering to vote and voting. These were similar to other recent elections in the UK.

Beneath this generally positive picture, however, we have also seen evidence about concerns and problems at this election. Some people did not receive the service they should be able to expect, and many were not confident that the election was well run.

https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/who-we-are-and-what-we-do/elections-and-referendums/past-elections-and-referendums/uk-general-elections/report-overview-2019-uk-parliamentary-general-election

The concerns were as follows:

  • Misleading campaign techniques risk undermining voters’ trust
  • The rules for campaigners need modernising for the digital age
  • Tackling intimidation of candidates requires a holistic approach
  • Steps taken to secure the democratic processes must continue

These are quotes from the report:

People were concerned about misleading campaign techniques from across the political spectrum, and bias in the media. We received a large number of complaints raising concerns about the presentation, tone and content of election campaigns
Transparency about who is behind political campaigns online at elections is important for people in the UK. In our research after the election, nearly three quarters of people agreed that it was important for them to know who produced the political information they see online, but less than a third agreed that they can find out who has produced it

The UK Government and other bodies monitored digital campaigning during the election period for risks to democratic processes from foreign interference and organised disinformation. The UK Government has said that work to examine these aspects after the election is ongoing

The UK Government should also set out plans to modernise the rules for campaigners to keep pace with the digital age. The law should tell campaigners and digital platforms the amount and type of information they need to give to voters, the media, other campaigners and regulators, including to us.

At this election, Facebook, Google and Snapchat published libraries and reports of the political advertising run on their platforms and channels during the election. They also required political advertisers to put ‘Paid for by’ disclaimers on their political adverts.

These measures are a step in the right direction and they enabled us to see who is paying to place adverts. But they still don’t provide enough information about digital campaigning.

https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/who-we-are-and-what-we-do/elections-and-referendums/past-elections-and-referendums/uk-general-elections/report-overview-2019-uk-parliamentary-general-election

Quite a few problems here…

Whilst admitting a problem, the EC did not have any solution. Plus they are gaslighting you. Gaslighting by ommission. The EC report did not admit the full scope of the problem which have been known about since at least EU Referendum and 2016 Presidential Elections. We know this because Elizabeth Denham, the UK ICO Commissioner (that regulates data privacy) announced the problem with social media and data analytics in 2018!

Fact 1: The fact that the electoral registration system is broken. Local Council election management systems are out of date. Central Government systems (and no doubt Dominic Cummings’ Voter Intention Collection System) has far better demographic systems which could automatically update electoral rolls.

Fact 2: The EC do not even admit that the social media platforms collect “pyschographic” information – a more likely barometer of voter intentions than any sample survey. The EC is out of touch with the digital world. While the ICO recognises the problem (in part), they have no teeth to do anything about it.

Fact 3: The EC do not mention the true level of postal vote problem – only that there was some confusion. When some people apparently tried to register three times or so, and late into the election process, this is a warning that voter fraud is being undertaken! (The process is described here).

Fact 4: But worst of all is the online manipulation of voters and even mainstream media by fake news spread by bots and sockpuppets (fake accounts). This is not just a vague Trump-style throw away… but it was specifcally recorded, tracked and documented… even by the BBC! This event alone demonstrates the vast power that computers and automation (weilded by the Tories) can do to twart the democratic process. This issue is not addressed either by the EC or ICO.

I’ll leave the conclusion of this article as as a quote

“The invisible, ‘behind the scenes’ use of personal data to target political messages to individuals must be transparent and lawful if we are to preserve the integrity of our election process.”

Elizabeth Denham, the UK ICO Commissioner November 2018

June Gaslight

Ripped off from Facebook with Gaslighting Adjustments…

The odd nugget of journalistic genius and wisdom whereby Jeremy Corbyn is blamed for the loss of the election needs to be addressed. This is an attempt at covering-up the widespread PysOp against Corbyn. That’s why people supposedly “didn’t like him.”

The fact that he behaved less ruthlessly than your average politician DID NOT lose him the election at all. If it wasn’t for the illegal rigging of the result he won fair and square. The #antisemitism lies and #propaganda weren’t enough to do the hatchet job on their own. That’s why the Russian interference documents will never be published. Any document that goes anywhere near it will be swamped with redaction lines. This government is corrupt. Observe how the #jobsfortheboys #nepotism is ever present.

Look at the huge areas of gaslighting currently happening in June 2020:

  • Continuing destruction of the environment and health standards. While eyes are on #COVID19 they are dismantling and overwriting all sorts of things such as food labelling and standards to allow the introduction of GMO foods, hormone injected beef and cholrinated chicken… or restarting fracking… or starting the planning process for a SECOND new Nuclear power station. HS2, the whitest elephant in the room, blunders on. We need rail investment, but honestly, it would be cheaper to build a tunnel from London to Birmingham than this nature-blighting, vanity project.
  • Human rights. The small print accompanying everything they do, but we, me, you, everyone, are not informed of the really awful bits. If you dig you’ll find them. Our rights are being eroded by the day, just play around with searches and you’ll find all sorts. #powergrabs
  • Funding for Overseas Aid will go, that was announced this week. Thinly veiled statements of intent to reduce funding for countries with black citizens in favour of white populations. So much for #blacklivesmatter
  • In your face embarassment. A £million for a paint job on an aeroplane for Presidential-style jaunts. Peanut money, I guess, but its return will be increasing British embarassment every time BJ steps out of it.
  • The Rich Getting Away With It. Prince Andrew will see no force applied for him to face old murdered Epstein’s antics. The rich are on holiday… A new royal yacht. Shame about the poor people.
  • Expect Austerity Measures. Austerity is no more a useful or necessary strategy than it ever was. #austerity #unnecessary What we need is a Jobs Guarentee, Modern Monetary Theory and a Green New Deal – the right wing agenda in UK and USA is unlikely to deliver us any change to the current capitalist foot stamping on the face of humanity. Triple lock on pensions is to go. They could also tax the rich! But they won’t of course.
  • The constant lies from the UK government! Lies about COVID death numbers, for instance. The total is at least 20,000 more than the “official” toll. Withholding the newer, higher R number. None of the “5 rules” satisfied. #science A 2nd wave of COVID19 is surely unavoidable; though they try to mould every detail on briefings to sound like all the stupid measures they’re about to take aren’t going to kill lots of people. They stopped “following the science” months ago but they lie about it. They blame Apple for the flop of the contact tracing app but that’s a lie too, they never even spoke to them. Hancock just stood there lying into the camera, not realising that Apple may be able to hear him. #idiot #liar
  • Brexit Disaster Imminent. A worldwide pandemic isn’t important enough to slow that runaway train down! Pile that on top of the #pandemic and see what a catastrophe we’ve got on our hands. A brilliant legacy for our kids and grandkids. All the Brexiteers will be dead, they won’t be the ones to feel the pain.
  • An Un-United Kingdom. #Scotland is likely to not only go Independent but rebuild Hadrian’s Wall!
  • No change in the mainstream media propaganda machine which includes not only the right-wing, billionaire-backed newspapers but also the BBC, all TV, all Hollywood output. Even social media platforms! It is all Gaslighting. If it was just shades of opinion it wouldn’t be so bad. But no the real facts are not even being discussed. Meanwhile, Julian Assange is slowly but surely dying, again where’s the media coverage and outrage? Another hero that should be celebrated, but he’ll die instead. He has committed no crime (that he hasn’t paid for) Unless you say publishing factually correct information on war crimes, a crime. #wikileaks

Welcome to the Brave New 1984 World Order.

Index to the The Daily GasLamp (TDG)

Some light reading for you… if you are still interested…

Covid-19

This TDG article considers the different theories for the sources of Covid-19 and comes up with a startling conclusion and taps into work that others have been working upon, including compelling analysis that Covid-19 is manmade!

About this site

This site was set up in the wake of the strange Tory victory in the 2019 General Election. Strange because it was won by the Tories by the precise margin predicted by Dominic Cummings – 80 seats – and confounding all other polls. See this post.

What magic was Dominic Cummings using? IT magic! Used in conjunction with standard methods of commercial marketting and Pyschological Operations. The novel use of technology to infulence elections was invented by Cambridge Analytic and has been proven worldwide…

The impact on Democracy of the use of Big Data – the combination of demographic data, pychographic data and social media – is described in the Daily Gaslamp’s first animated movie.

A collection of the evidence for the GE2019 Fraud is given here. Postal vote fraud is nothing new to UK politics as evidence here. The government itself admits the “system is under strain” – even without considering the impact of technology (particularly the use of bots, AI and Big Data).

What have they done?

Since January, the UK Prime Minister has busily been avoiding taking responsibility for anything…

Response by Election Commission and Infromation Commissioner Office is given here. They both admit to problems with “social media” and data analytics but have no solutions.

Gaslighting – there is nothing to see… 😉

Big Data and Covid-19

Big Data systems fed from the government’s new tracking app would definitely help track, manage and contain the Covid-19 pandemic. If Dominic Cummings had that idea then all credit to him. Cummings has for years maintained a blog documenting his enthusiasm for new technologies and artificial intelligence, as reported on the DailyGasLamp. However, with the introduction a new smart phone tracking app, there are two small problems:

Cronyism

Taken from this Guardian Article: One of the IT companies that was hired to work with Dominic Cummings on the Vote Leave campaign, Faculty aka Faculty Science, previous called Advanced Skills Initiative, has been awarded at least seven government contracts worth almost £1m in the space of 18 months.

  • Faculty has links to senior Tory figures, and is rapidly expanding its reach into various corners of Whitehall.
  • Last year it was tasked with finding ways to apply artificial intelligence across government agencies. Faculty is run by Marc Warner, who has attended a meeting of the government’s scientific advisory group on emergencies (SAGE) and “behaved as Cummings’ deputy” as disclosed in an article in the Times.
  • Marc Warner’s brother, Ben Warner, is a data scientist, was reportedly recruited to Downing Street last year by Cummings after running the data modelling for the Conservative party’s general election campaign. Ben Warner worked on Vote Leave.
  • Faculty is working at the heart of the government’s response to the pandemic. It has been processing large volumes of confidential UK patient information in an “unprecedented” data-mining operation alongside Palantir, a US firm founded by the libertarian billionaire Peter Thiel. Faculty’s government work with Palantir on Covid-19 is based out of NHSX, the digital technology arm of the health service. This work was awarded to Faculty in March under the government’s fast-track procedures to respond to the pandemic, without any other firms being asked to bid for it.
  • Faculty’s work on the coronavirus response is only the latest government project it has secured under the Conservative administration. One early contract when called Advanced Skills Initiative, was for £32,000, funded fellowships in 2018 to place data scientists in city governments to help solve local challenges.
  • Last year Faculty was awarded a £250,000 contract from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport to run a cross-government review on the adoption of artificial intelligence.
  • Under the contract, Faculty worked with two government departments – the Office for Artificial Intelligence and Government Digital Service (GDS) – “to identify the most significant opportunities to introduce AI across government with the aim of increasing productivity and improving the quality of public services”.
  • Faculty has been awarded a £264,000 contract from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy to monitor the impact of the coronavirus on industry. (The DailyGasLamp analysis btw is free).
  • One of Faculty’s shareholders is Lord Agnew, a financier who has been a government minister since 2017. He has owned shares in the firm for the past four years. They are worth around £90,000, according to its most recent filings. In February this year it was announced that Agnew had become a minister in the Cabinet Office and Treasury and had taken ministerial responsibility for the GDS, which works with official bodies to use digital technology to improve public services. A government spokesperson said Agnew had had no role in awarding any contracts to Faculty while he had been a minister. However, Spotlight on Corruption, a watchdog group, has called on Agnew to sell his shareholding in Faculty, saying it raised questions over the government’s rules on managing conflicts of interests.

So just to reiterate, a Cabinet Office minister, Theodore Agnew, who is responsible for the government department that promotes the use of digital technology within public services, is resisting calls to sell a £90,000 shareholding in the company “amid claims of a conflict of interest” – yes, clear conflicts of interest are just “claims of a conflict of interest”. Hmm.

The government spokesperson replied that Agnew had followed the appropriate procedures by declaring his shareholding in House of Lords register of interests and under the ministerial code of conduct etc.

Holly Searle, Faculty’s head of PR and communications, said: “Faculty has strong governance procedures in place to guard against conflicts of interest when competing for new work. All of its contracts with the government are won through the proper processes and in line with procurement rules.”

In the meantime, some people are getting worried that the UK Government has handed over ALL NHS DATA to a consortium of companies which consists of Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Faculty and Plantir Technologies (a company named after an evil artefact that comminicates with far away places). So much so they are planning on sueing the UK Government.

Dominic Cummings has also been accused of conflicts of interest regarding the smart phone tracking app.

End of Democracy

This is a bit like who guards the guardians. There is no oversight either from crony corruption or it seems, the misuse of data. The control on data controllers should be applied by the Information Commisioner Office – see https://ico.org.uk/ – as discussed previously on the DailyGasLamp.

The privacy concerns have been highlighted by 177 cyber experts. They have written an open letter to the goverment to stop the app being used as a mass-surveillance tool. Why?

  • The UK government stated that it would not use Apple and Google’s built-in privacy protection systems to anonymise data collected from apps on iPhone and Android smartphones.
  • This allows the government to create a database that could then be used to de-anonymize users, and just like Cambridge Analystica and other AI/Big Data companies have proven, be used for other purposes.

And sure enough security concerns have now developed into security flaws.

Also discussed before on the DailyGasLamp, the “exhaust” from Covid-19 would be a significant boost to Dominic Cummings’ Voter Intention Collection System… no need to worry about going to the polls, there would be instant analysis of whether the Government Response to the pandemic is working… not working for you, but working for THEM… whether they and their cronies need to worry “politically” about any the decisions that are killing off the old and disabled. Big Data in the hands of this particular government means the End of Democracy, as explained here. Probably the end of many other things too (depending on your attiritude to spooks!).

This is further described in a tweet from Carol Cadwalladr – linking terrorist surveillance and covid with the support Dominic Cummings and his chums…

Ultimately it is supposed to be the 4th Estate to keep the Government in check. The BBC is merely the Ministry of Truth. The newspapers are owned by billionaires. Social media is now corrupt. Suggestions on a postcard, please… (PS you cannot rely solely on Piers Morgan for all 4th Estate watch-dogging.)

Summary: the new smart phone app and the way it is likely to be applied, will be not only be measuring the spread of the virus but also (via Big Data) the political impact: the public reaction to the covid-19 response, allowing the Tories to persue the cheapest, eugenics-like policies at a level which will not remove them power.

GE2019: “system under strain”

A report in The London Economic by Jack Peat confirms DailyGasLamp reports. Throughout the article there are many euphemisms for “electoral fraud” and dodges the big issues of Big Data, Bots/Sock Puppets and only hints at postal fraud.

2019 election report finds widespread reports of abuse and system ‘under strain’
The festive timing made it harder to find polling venues and voters expressed concern about ‘misleading’ online campaigning.

Jack Peat April 21, 2020

Targetted Ads

It states “(about)… one in five people – told the commission they were “not confident” that it was well run, with concerns over the transparency of online campaigning…” going onto to reference online adverts and not the harvesting of social media data to obtain the TARGETTING of such adverts.

Bots and Sock Puppets

But the biggest ommission in Peat’s article is reference to (illegal) Cambridge Analystica and PysOp methods of sock puppets and artifical intelligent bots suckering people into revealing personal details, not just voting preferences not also voting intentions: the likelihood of people voting at all. This information is then suspected to be for widespread postal fraud in marginal seats – widespread but targetted and minimal – not too much, not too little but just right amount. Dominic Cummings’ Voter Intention Collection System would statistically be so accurate that it could determine not only voter’s politically preference but also how likely they are to vote at all. Thus providing exactly the right level of postal vote fraud to allow the Conservatives an 80 seat majority – just as Cummings promised a month before the election.

Postal delays

Peats article states there was “reported delays in issuing and returning postal votes in some areas” including “Voters overseas reported receiving their ballots too late to send back, meaning they missed out on having a say“. The latter could have been easily overcome by allowing local print out of ballot papers, but of course, people living abroad may have had the “wrong sort” of Brexit preferences… ie deliberate voter suppression. Please refer to earlier DailyGasLamp posts of how easy voter suppression is enabled towards postal voters.

Yeah, the system is “under strain”.

Control the Message

Old style mainstream media was out in force against Labour in GE2019 according to this article. It claims that the Mainstream Media was “Rigged” against Labour and for the Conservatives. But most people already know that the newspapers are owned by billionaires and are right wing. GE2019 was different becuase it was not just the newspapers but bias within the BBC, and TV in general, and also – probably for the first time – online through both search engine manipulation effect (SEME) and social media gaslighting. Not just Big Data analytics either…

Beyond SEME, is the use of intelligent Bot systems (where developers actually get help and support from the bot technology that they are using!)…

This seems to be a key tool in automating the Conservative GE2019 campaign, to control the message. How many people were fooled by disinformation, controlled messages, the dopamine hit of a “like” to right wing comment from a bot, or an AI message from a new “friend” that appeared to be taking interest in their opinions?

Botpress has a nice graphic interface and the developers get support from the bot, giving friendly advice on how to achieve particular goals. It can even autocomplete various functions. Botpress, or similar tools from Google or Pandora, adds more detail to the description in an earlier DailyGasLamp article here. In that article it described bots and sock puppets. Botpress would be the Bot component (while a “sock puppet” is just a person with multiple identities).

Interestingly, these systems are used by some major, major companies that supply the UK government with their systems… so this type of technology would be known to Dominic Cummings who from his blog post seems to have quite an interest in the subject.

Botpress also comes with a facebook connector (info here). How to use this tool is described here… the peak downloads for this software was June 2019 – plenty of time to ramp up development for GE2019. Botpress capabilities vs competiting products is described here.

The set up and running of this technology requires a huge amount of capital intensive investment – the rich are organised “few” – the 1%, less than 0.01% actually – and they outgun the poor, the disorganised “many”. So democracy is now a hidden war between people-powered electioneering (“the people”) against a limitless army of hidden robots controlled and funded by a few billionaires. Democracy vs oligarchy – we currently have the latter…

Too Much News

There is too much news and not enough analysis. CovId-19 is seriously changing the world. Who knew that a Cold Virus would cause so much mayhem? Besides Boris Johnson, of course…

The DailyGasLamp is hard at work on several stories… here is the heads up:

  • The relationship of the campaign of Anonymous Companies and Brexit – and the destruction of the planet – it’s hideous. Contributions to follow this up would be welcome.
  • Bernie Sanders getting the “Jeremy Corbyn treatment” by the USA media. This pandemic has turned up at exactly the time to disrupt Sanders’ presidential campaign…
  • DailyGasLamp is still following up the (illegal) use of AI for the GE2019 campaign. See new article here
  • Finally… (hold your breath)…
  • Stories that the CovId-19 virus itself is man-made. That statement is not made lightly, there is a good scientific source for this.

We built a chimeric virus encoding a novel, zoonotic CoV spike protein—from the RsSHC014-CoV sequence that was isolated from Chinese horseshoe bats—in the context of the SARS-CoV mouse-adapted backbone. The hybrid virus allowed us to evaluate the ability of the novel spike protein to cause disease independently of other necessary adaptive mutations in its natural backbone.

A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence
Vineet D Menachery et al

This information needs to be taken in the context of the earlier DailyGasLamp article regarding the smelly state of the US/UK response to this pandemic.

What is all the fuss about Cambridge Analytica? Part 3

So Part 1 described the background and origins of Cambridge Analytica (CA).

Part 2 described the objective of Robert Mercer and with Carole Cadwallar describing the impact on Vote Leave.

This part is about the methods and implications of CA on electoral processes.

Hitting the Headlines

In March 2018, multiple media outlets broke news of Cambridge Analytica’s business practices: The New York Times and The Observer reported that the company had used Facebook data for its campaign activities and shortly afterwards, Channel 4 News aired undercover investigative videos showing CA CEO Alexander Nix boasting about using prostitutes, bribery sting operations, and honey traps to discredit politicians on whom it conducted “opposition research”. CA claimed it had “ran all of (Donald Trump’s) digital campaign” in 2016 Presidential election. In response in the UK, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) issued a warrant to search the company’s servers. Meanwhile Facebook banned CA from advertising on its platform, saying that it had been deceived. On 23 March 2018, the ICO was granted a warrant to search Cambridge Analytica’s London offices.

Amazon said that they suspended CA from using their Cloud Hosting Services. The governments of India and Brazil demanded that CA report how their data was used in political campaigning.

In early July 2018, the United Kingdom’s Information Commissioner’s Office announced it intended to fine Facebook £500,000 ($663,000) over the data scandal, this being the maximum fine allowed at the time of the breach, saying Facebook “contravened the law by failing to safeguard people’s information”.

Also in July 2019, in the USA, Facebook was fined $5billion for its minor part in the data breach.

Rather too late… CA is now “gone” but their methods, their “genie” is now out of the bottle.

What did they do?

Wikipedia describes the method CA used to gain personal data. CA developed a Facebook app called “This Is Your Digital Life.” Aleksandr Kogan, a data scientist at Cambridge University, developed the app sometimes called “thisisyourdigitallife” and provided the app to CA who then posted it to Facebook. This third-party app then had permission to acquire data from Facebook users that not only entered data into a quiz-like game but also gave the app access to information on the user’s friends network; this resulted in the data of about 87 million users, the majority of whom had no idea their personal data was being collected for political ends. It goes without saying that the app breached Facebook’s terms of service but Facebook did not police any app particularly well (hence the reason for the $5b fine).

Follow this link to hear Alexander Nix describe the CA Big Data approach elections or this one to hear how big data helped Senator Ted Cruz in 2016. Nix claims that CA had 4000 parameters for every voter in the USA. From these parameters, not only demographics and location were uncovered but also psychographic profiles, the attitudes of each person distilled down to a few variables! This allowed, for any given political campaign, what kind of advertisement would be most effective to persuade a particular person for vote (or not vote) for any particular candidate or cause.

What CA has invented is the technology to subvert the traditional election processes to introduce:

  • Personalised messages – Nix claims top down broadcasting is dead. All future elections will be personalised messages based on a person’s psychographic profile.
  • Psychographic profiles are used to identify, and then reinforce, bias and prejudices.
  • Political promises are not on mainstream media, so not open to secutiny and debate, but are on social media. Fired up and forgotten with no follow up – reverting back to before Hansard when politicians were not held to account for any commitments.
  • Complete Situation Awareness of each individual’s motivations so that in all probability, each person can be manipulated using targeted messages to vote in the way expected (plus leaving the election to nefarious manipulation).

What are Psychographics?

Psychographic profiles can be valuable in the fields of marketing, demographics, opinion research, prediction, and social research in general.

All the research for political ends has already been established for marketing and advertising of products. Demographic information includes gender, age, income, marital status – the dry facts. In the past marketing was all about Demographics: making sure your advert went out to males or females of a partical age. Psychographics are kind of like demographics. Psychographic information might be your buyer’s habits, hobbies, spending habits and values. Demographics explain “who” the buyer is, while psychographics explain “why” they buy. Advertisers now reach their target audience both by demographics and psychographics. What does it say about you if you drive BMW and read the Telegraph… or if own an allotment and make jam? All this information has been condensed down into a set of number. This approach was proven in the commercial market, CA weaponised Psychographics for electioneering…

Psychographics gained prominence in the 2016 US presidential election since both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump used them extensively in microtargeting advertisements to narrow constituencies.

So CA’s “This Is Your Digital Life” basically provided a mainline feed into pyschographic data. But CA also collected data on voters using sources such as consumer behaviourinternet activity, and other public and private sources. According to The Guardian, CA used psychological data derived from millions of Facebook users, largely without users’ permission or knowledge. Another source of information was the “Cruz Crew” mobile app that “gamified” election campaigning by giving points for the number of political social media messages circulated by the player. But more than that it tracked physical movements and contacts on the player’s smart phone and so invaded personal data more than any previous electioneering method.

Alexander Nix, chief executive of Cambridge Analytica, October 2016, said “Today in the United States we have somewhere close to four or five thousand data points on every individual … So we model the personality of every adult across the United States, some 230 million people.”

CA’s data analysis methods were to a large degree based on the academic work of Michal Kosinski. In 2008, Kosinski had joined the Psychometrics Centre of Cambridge University where he then developed with his colleagues a profiling system using general online data, Facebook-likes, and smartphone data. He showed that with a limited number of “likes”, people can be analysed better than friends or relatives can do and that individual psychological targeting is a powerful tool to influence people.

This aspect of facebook-likes is absolutely key and – as far as I can tell – is missed in most write-ups of the Presidential Election 2016 and GE2019 Fraud.

Facebook “Likes”

Most, but not all. It was discussed extensively in 2018 by CBS which states “Facebook ‘likes’ can signal a lot about a person. Maybe even enough to fuel a voter-manipulation effort like the one a Trump-affiliated data-mining firm stands accused of — and which Facebook may have enabled. The social network is under fire after The New York Times and The Guardian newspaper reported that former Trump campaign consultant Cambridge Analytica used data, including user likes, inappropriately obtained from roughly 50 million Facebook users to try to influence elections.

The issue of the addictive nature of facebook and the dopamine hit when someone “likes” your post is well known. So how important is that “like” if it just came from a bot? Can they even do that? Yes.

Technology to Support CA

If the data collected by CA was all performed by party workers then would it all be bad? Probably not: doorstepping in elections trys to collect similar type of data. But CA introduced the mechanism to do this quite automatically, without permission, by impersonation and by the the “backdoor”. Besides the (illegal) aggregation of data from a various sources, this is the type of technology that CA used in order to recognise and give facebook “likes”:

  • Artificial Intelligence (AI) – Sentiment Analysis – this sort of AI can read thousands of posts and determine whether any particular post supports the camapign, against it or whether it is just another cat video.
  • Robot Process Automation (RPA) This allows a series of automatic actions to occur online, for instance: read a facebook message, work out if the sentiment supports the camapign, clicks the “like” button.
  • Bots and Sock Puppets – basically fake accounts – either a Bot which is a fake account which performs a repetative RPA action, for example, “liking” a facebook message; or a sock puppet, a human controlled fake account, that can enter into hundreds of discussions online dissing the opponents and/or talking up the camapign with prepared slogans.

The set up and running of this technology requires a huge amount of capital intensive investment (this is where the rich, organised “few” outgun the poor, disorganised “many”). So democracy is now a hidden war between people-powered electioneering (“the people”) against a limitless army of hidden robots controlled and funded by a few billionaires. This technological army is not even in party headquarters but can be outsourced to friendly front organisations, commercial organisations or even foriegn powers.

The Hub

The only thing needed for any political HQ is the data collection hub. HQ will ensure the right campaign messages are being fed in a way that is compelling… to a “plan”. That requires technology again but it is cheaper and readily available off the shelf in the form of a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system. This a tool to manage an organisations interaction with current and potential customers – everytime you phone up a major corporation nowadays you are being managed by a CRM system such as Microsoft Dynamics CRM, Salesforce or SugarCRM. Now replace the word “customers” with “voters” and the tool works just as well. Just look at the (proven) results of CRM and see how they apply to election campaigns.

  1. Enhanced ability to target profitable customers. (Replace “profitable customers” with “likely voters”)
  2. Integrated assistance across channels. (Use of Bots, Sock Puppets, Newspapers or leaflets to promote your propaganda)
  3. Enhanced sales force efficiency and effectiveness. (Replace “salesforce” with “campaign staff”)
  4. Improved pricing. (Instead of pricing, think “extract donations”)
  5. Customized products and services. (Tailor message for particular poltical concern: health, environment, business etc)
  6. Improved customer service efficiency and effectiveness. (Improve approval ratings)
  7. Individualized marketing messages (also called plans). (A set of messages just to engage each individual voter, there can be multiple plans depending on the voter’s concern)
  8. Connect customers and all channels on a single platform. (A complete view of Voter Intentions).

Architect of the Vote Leave and Conservative GE2019, Dominic Cummings, called his central database of voters, the Voter Intention Collection System (VICS). It is described in his blog. He describes how he developed ads for social media, trialed them and targetted them. The data feeding VICS was both “conventional and unconventional” – from that we can assume conventional = demographic data – freely available to political parties – and unconventional = psychographic… as described above – illegal. Illegal to the price of $5billion just to facebook alone for allowing a loophole in its software. How much more illegal is it for people to deliberately exploit that loophole?

But wait there’s more…

Just consider the power now available to the rich elites with such technology at their disposal:

  • A list of every voter.
  • With social media data then the on-line accounts can be linked to voters in the electoral register probably in 80% of all cases.
  • This enables the identification of all people strongly aligned with campaign messages and will vote.
  • And the identification of all people strongly opposing the campaign.
  • This identifies the battle ground! The non-aligned people.

Pyschographics help sort out the battleground. Since the social network shows who is friends with whom, then the probability of voter intentions can be calculated with different levels of certainity… until you have complete and utter situation awareness of how people will vote. People do respond to the information they’ve received but if all the information is biased and plays into pre-set grooves enabled by the mainstream media then, people respond collectively in herd like behaviour. Dominic Cummings tested his “messaging” in carefully selected groups. When the message had the right effect, he sent out targeted political ads and using the AI and Big Data analysis re-calculated the expected voter intentions so that he could predict an 80 seat majority for the Tories. And he got an 80 seat majority for the Tories. This level of estimation precision requires computers. And probably coercion (see below). The Conservative Party was able to deliver an astonishing efficiency at delivering seats in 2019: One seat for every 38264 votes (a 10% efficiency improvement over 2017) while the LibDems were amazingly less efficient: one each seat for every 300,000 votes, a 50% decrease in efficency. And, unlike Jo Swinson travelling the country in a bus (and even losing her seat), Boris Johnson never really needed to go out and campaign or even do many TV interviews.

Minimum Fraud / Maximum Outcome

There are further tools in the toolchest. Having complete situation awareness allows other useful things:

  • it identifies marginal consistencies.
  • it identifies people that are unlikly to vote
  • it identifies people that will be using a postal vote
  • it identifies people that are misaligned with the electoral registers

We know postal voting fraud exists and is widespread. Complete situation awareness of voter intentions now allows two useful forms of election fraud, which can be set at the minimum level that arouses the least suspicion:

  • Voter Suppression for those people of the wrong demographics and pyschometrics that are misaligned with the electoral register and/or registered for postal votes. (eg postal votes not delivered, arrive late or invalidated). Voter suppression is regarded as a non-crime – the voter is always blamed for any administrative error.
  • Ballot Box Stuffing, by postal votes, impersonating people that are unlikely to vote. A virtually undetectable crime!

What’s all the fuss?

Now do you see what the fuss is all about?

  • No need to campaign
  • Lower campaign costs (as long the computer system costs can be hidden)
  • No need to be held to account for any promises or policies
  • Set up the perfect way to secure a seat with the minimum level of fraud – so small that it is hardly detectable.
  • Confidence of predicting the election result nationally (100% accuracy)
  • Confidence of securing any particular local seat (as long as there is a high level of postal votes!)

Election Fraud 2019 – Scope

This post is a selected summary of the range of election fraud during GE2019. Ranging from bribes, bias, to global conspiracies. With this width we can’t go into much depth and by definition will not capture everything… but depth is recorded in links.

Brexit Party Bribes

The Metropolitan Police Service are assessing two allegations of electoral fraud, following claims made by Brexit party leader Nigel Farage that the Conservative Party had offered peerages to himself and other Brexit Party election candidates in exchange for their withdrawal from constituency seats. News article here

Mainstream Media Bias

The newspapers have a known bias (recently reinforced by Boris Johnson). But the BBC is supposedly impartial and in “purdah” during elections, but they went out of its way to edit video to make Johnson look good and not following up the Jennifer Arcuri scandal, or critical of his withholding of the “Russia Report” while also rigging the Question Time audiences.

Boris Johnson is compromised, full article here. The BBC is deliberately not reporting this and much else: see John Sweeney’s whistleblower report here. Follow twitter #BBCbias and #BBCLiesandBias for more details.

Confidence, No Ground Campaign and Surprise Win

Conservatives had no “ground game” in the north of England. BBC Newsnight clip here. On Twitter the campaign was muted with a few photo ops – but nothing like the hundreds turning out for Labour and the tens of thousands of tweets/photos on #labourdoorstep.

There were large queues of young people at polling stations. Tweet here

The Tories were confident in winning despite drop in support. Tweet here. Brexit Party thought Tories had no chance in South Wales and North. Video here

Shock win. Tweet here. Exactly as the Tories predicted: an 80 seat majority! Confounding all other political polls.

Huge swing in Bishop Auckland, for instance, (Slim Labour majority of 500 in 2017) Conservative majority of 8000 in 2019 despite large Labour ground campaign. Tweet here

The general opinion that Labour Voters were persuaded not to vote, voted LibDem or Brexity Party while the Conservative vote held up. Tweet here and here. There’s lots of analysis of why supposedly Labour Lost: not honoring the referendum, Corbyn untrusted, Marxist policies, too many policies(!) and cost.

Ian Isaac’s analysis on a DailyGasLamp comment stated “The average swing away from Labour in 2019 compared to 2017 was 8%. 1 in 8 voted Tory. 3 in 8 voted Lib Dems. 4 in 8 voted for Greens and Brexit Party and others: clearly a protest vote [with voters saying] “I’m not voting Labour this time nor will I ever vote Tory”. This was enough for 52 out of 54 Midlands and northern seats to be lost by Labour.”

Clearly the MSM condemnation of Labour and Corbyn had worked on a percentage of the population. But was it 8%? And why did the Tory vote hold up so well when many of the Tory grandees were saying “don’t vote Conservative”?

Why didn’t the Tory vote also fall (as expected by the Brexit Party and LibDems)? Was there something else?

Electoral Roll Errors and Delays

Expected voter suppression known about before the election. News article here

Cardiff students protest about Electoral Roll errors. Video here News article here

Polling cards but not on electoral roll. News article here. Tweet here

In Swindon, Civica wrongly informed 3,000 voters they were not eligible to vote. Thousands of postal votes in Waltham Forest having to be hand delivered because of the software errors. Tweet here

Postal Vote arrives 2 months late. Tweet here

Security of Ballot Concerns

Envelopes being insecure. News article here

BBC appeared to have knowledge of postal vote intentions. News article here

IDOX systems is an Election Management System Software and Service provider. Their systems are used to used to manage Postal Votes in around 80% of UK constituencies. It does not count votes but managing the requests, sending out voter packs, verifying the packs and managing the electoral rolls. Conservative Peter Lilly was a former director of IDOX – he could have passed on details to people that could then easily hack the IDOX systems. Article here. Could IDOX software be hacked to delay the postal ballot papers being sent out or suppress postal votes by selective vetting? An example of an individual case. PV arrived “too late”. Tweet here. Tweet here

IDOX could certainly provide “profile data” but why bother when UK Council websites already provide data to data collective services such as LiveRamp whose business is to “profile” people sell it to Cambridge Analytica or similar to predict voter intentions? News article here

Postal Vote Fraud

Suspected postal vote fraud in the Scottish Referendum.

Problem with postal ballots earlier in 2019 with “Lessons learned”… to ensure fraud not detected in GE? Article here

50 cases of voter impersonation. News article here “Police across the UK have been asked to investigate more than 50 allegations of electoral fraud related to Thursday’s elections in areas previously identified as vulnerable to vote-rigging…. Officers in Manchester, Bradford, London and Birmingham have begun inquiries after receiving complaints about “ghost” voters, false statements by candidates and multiple attempts to vote by a single person…. (also) Blackburn with Darwen, Burnley, Calderdale, Coventry, Derby, Hyndburn, Kirklees, Oldham, Pendle, Peterborough, Slough, Tower Hamlets, Walsall and Woking… (and) 14 investigations across Greater London… Police have also been asked to investigate allegations of intimidation and tampering with postal votes.”

The “Postal Vote Investigation” has collected many cases. See tweet here

Global Conspiracy

Managing a rigged election on this scale is hugely complicated. Surely it can’t be done? Only Conspiracy Theorists could possibly think that known liar and cheat, Boris Johnson, could lie, cheat and defraud his party to victory?

Well, the information associated with a global right wing conspiracy is all mainstream. See TV documentary on how total situation awareness was achieved using Big Data Analytics. Article here. Having achieved situation awareness, the options for manipulation are endless. How much of this is legal and how much is fraud? Consider the following uses for Dominic Cummings’ Voter Intention Collection System (VICS) if connected to Social Media data feeds, AI and bots:

  • Situation awareness could gauge the accuracy of polls
  • Artifical Intelligence systems could determine whether attack-ads worked and for whom
  • Determination of voter intentions direct from social media feeds. If not-one-of-us, can we stop them voting? Or if maybe one-of-us (judged by social circle), can we encourage them to vote… use of sock puppets and bots on social media can be used to encourage or discourage voter behaviour.
  • Can we delay sending postal votes here?
  • Can we impersonate voters who are not likely to vote at all?

Relationship between VL, Cummings, Mercer and Cambridge Analytica. Tweet here

Evidence for social media manipulations and the immense social media capability available to the Tories, particularly sock puppet accounts, is provided in the response to the boy-on-the-floor in Leeds Hospital fake news twitter storm.

Helped by friendly nations? Claiming credit for damaging reputations… Article here. Article on PysOps here

Over Spending

Since the Conservatives own camapign admits to breaking spending limits in the past, we have to assume that spending limits were also broken this time too. The 100,000 strong Conservative Party raised funds more the 500,000 Labour party by at least a factor of ten mainly from donations from millionaires and billionaires. Funding for elections is supposed to be strictly controlled… but will the cost of Dominic Cummings VICS system be recorded as a campaign cost? Or the cost of all the third party Corbyn attacks ads included? Unlikely.

So, was this a Rigged Election? University of Loughborough just reviewing the Mainstream Media bias says “yes“. Now add in everything else… nothing was left to chance.