I've been getting questions on the Kurdistan takedown, and am happy to help clarify the context.
First, as some pointed out already and as our report makes clear, the investigation of this network was initiated and conducted by Facebook, based on an earlier investigation.
First, as some pointed out already and as our report makes clear, the investigation of this network was initiated and conducted by Facebook, based on an earlier investigation.
Facebook then shared information about this network with Graphika for an independent analysis. We detailed the behaviour, content and tactics used by this operation.
Facebook attributed the activity to “individuals associated with” the Zanyari Agency: about.fb.com/news/2020/06/m…
Facebook attributed the activity to “individuals associated with” the Zanyari Agency: about.fb.com/news/2020/06/m…
People are also asking what the reason for the takedown was.
Takedowns like this are based on behaviour, rather than content: it’s the use of coordinated fake accounts that is key.
More about the Coordinated Inauthentic Behaviour policy here: about.fb.com/news/2018/12/i…
Takedowns like this are based on behaviour, rather than content: it’s the use of coordinated fake accounts that is key.
More about the Coordinated Inauthentic Behaviour policy here: about.fb.com/news/2018/12/i…
We've seen takedowns of many inauthentic operations in many parts of the world over the last couple of years, and seen them using fake accounts and deceptive tactics to build audience.
To read some more examples, see @Graphika_NYC graphika.com/reports.
To read some more examples, see @Graphika_NYC graphika.com/reports.
And to be clear, neither Graphika nor Facebook has attributed this Kurdistan takedown set to any named individual.
