I wish the site explained better what it was doing. When it said that only "suspicious anti-net neutrality comments" would be reported, I wondered why it was giving information only about comments opposing the Obama-era regulations, when content analysis is a hard task. The article linked to said that all the sock puppet comments were identical, so I assume it's filtering only for exact-match comments. But unless all the forged comments stem from one bot that's so inept it can't vary the message, it would make more sense just to let people check for whether their name is on a comment at all.
The site has other problems. It implies that Comcast is behind the forgeries, calling them "comcastroturf," without mentioning any evidence for this. Also, the "Submit a real comment to the FCC" link doesn't link to the FCC, but to a blatantly non-neutral site.
The FCC's inept response adds to the case that it shouldn't be trusted with Internet regulation.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2017-11-23 10:44 am (UTC)I wish the site explained better what it was doing. When it said that only "suspicious anti-net neutrality comments" would be reported, I wondered why it was giving information only about comments opposing the Obama-era regulations, when content analysis is a hard task. The article linked to said that all the sock puppet comments were identical, so I assume it's filtering only for exact-match comments. But unless all the forged comments stem from one bot that's so inept it can't vary the message, it would make more sense just to let people check for whether their name is on a comment at all.
The site has other problems. It implies that Comcast is behind the forgeries, calling them "comcastroturf," without mentioning any evidence for this. Also, the "Submit a real comment to the FCC" link doesn't link to the FCC, but to a blatantly non-neutral site.
The FCC's inept response adds to the case that it shouldn't be trusted with Internet regulation.