The following are all very clear signs of fake social media activity designed specifically to sow the seeds of division or fan the flames, and further polarize hyper-partisan public opinion.
A freshly created account with little to no prior history of posting activity.
No profile picture of the individual.
And not even a handful of friends on the contact list.
Oh, and an unhealthy dose of spelling and grammatical errors in their provocative comments that any student who passed English class would not make.
All of these indicators combined amount to the quintessential definition of trolling activity or behaviour.
Without naming names, I was somewhat surprised to see pop up in our social media comment threads unsubstantiated and inflammatory comments directed at me by a user whose account was created barely a month ago, who hides behind anonymity without a profile photo, has only three friends on their contacts list, practically zero prior posts, and seems unable to compose a coherent paragraph not plagued by a plethora of spelling mistakes.
Free from the burden of providing a shred of proof — because hey, in the post truth alternative facts era of Trumpism, who needs to bother with evidence?! — the user makes up a litany of claims or accusations.
The ringer? Labelling me a communist propagandist.
Which would in its stunning disconnect from reality actually be quite hilarious if it was not so depressingly sad.
To be clear, I welcome constructive criticism — as in to say, well founded and thought-out arguments backed by reasonable, evidence-based and logical positions grounded in respectful exchange.
But I’m admittedly not particularly fond of ad hominem and personal attacks. The last resort of those who are unable to muster up a reasonable rebuttal is to insult a person presenting a point, rather than staying focused on the issue being discussed.
Anyone who equates communism with socialism, for the record, probably failed social studies, or barely passed. They more than likely run around claiming the Nazis — who largely built their ideology around the godfather of fascism, Benito Mussolini — were socialists because the party was called “National Socialist German Workers’ Party.”
Of course this not-so-clever nomenclature was nothing more than a ploy to manipulate public opinion by presenting something more palatable; it worked.
Yet by this woefully underdeveloped logic that would not impress a single history professor, China and North Korea are thriving democracies just because those autocratic regimes threw “republic” into their names.
Democratic socialists such as myself unashamedly support taking action to stem unfettered greed and address soaring wealth inequality.
That our nation’s success should not be measured by the number of billionaires, but by how well we treat our society’s least fortunate. That the economy should be restructured to benefit everybody, not just the 0.01 per cent and multinational corporations.
If the government scrutinized society’s wealthiest as closely as they do all of the struggling people seeking to navigate the daunting bureaucratic labyrinth of social assistance programs, many problems would be resolved nearly overnight.
But just because social democrats condemn the glorification of greed that has allowed unscrupulous individuals like the Bezoses and the Waltons to accumulate unprecedented and ever-growing fortunes on the backs of people who don't even receive good wages or benefits, does not mean we advocate for or even condone -- in any way, shape or form -- Stalinist soviet-style iron-fisted rule that ruthlessly suppresses free expression or dissent.
I recognize none of this will even remotely hamper the growing onslaught of social media misinformation and deeply entrenched identity politics that has solidified a global reach as legislators around the world struggle to get a grip on the situation.
Nevertheless, I can still hold out the all but hopelessly idealistic notion that just one or two readers who frequent social media take away a few handy tips to realize when they’re being trolled. Remember, if a post or comment elicits a strong emotional response, that should be the first indication of potential trolling behaviour that should be ignored.
Naturally, any of the aforementioned red flags alone do not necessarily mean an account should be treated with suspicion — some people choose not to display a picture of themselves, others prefer to keep many settings including their friends’ list private, and of course social media just keeps growing so there are bound to be new accounts with little to no prior posting history.
But an account that raises all of those red flags at the same time should definitely be regarded with scrutiny and subsequently dismissed as less than credible.
Simon Ducatel is the editor of the Sundre Round Up.
