Trolls Are Swarming Young Climate Activists Online (buzzfeednews.com) 626
A new movement of teenage climate activists -- most of whom are girls -- are getting dragged, doxed, hacked, and harassed online. Zahra Hirji, reporting for BuzzFeed News: On the morning of August 25, 11-year-old Lilly Platt tweeted a video clip of a Brazilian Amazon tribe speaking out against deforestation. Awareness of the Amazon wildfires was already at a fever pitch, and the tweet exploded. Then, within an hour, a swarm of troll accounts started flooding her mentions with porn. Shortly after the attack, her mom, Eleanor Platt, made an online plea for help: "Dear Friends of Lilly, this is Lillys mum she is being targeted by revolting trolls who are spamming her feed with pornography. There is only so much i can do to block this. Please if you see these posts report them." Over the course of the day, some of Lilly's nearly 10,000 followers did just that.
Young girls like Lilly, who has been striking in her hometown of Utrecht, Netherlands, every Friday for the last year, are overwhelmingly leading a growing global movement to draw attention to the climate crisis. They spurred an estimated 4 million people across seven continents to walk out of work and school on September 20 -- and they are getting attacked for it. They have faced a barrage of daily insults, seemingly coordinated attacks (like the one that targeted Lilly), creepy DMs, doxing, hacked accounts, and death threats. This is the new normal for young climate leaders online, according to BuzzFeed News interviews with nearly a dozen of the kids and their parents.
Personal attacks have always been a part of the climate denial playbook, even as fossil fuel companies secretly funded campaigns and researchers to question the scientific consensus on climate change. The most famous incident, 2009's Climategate, involved scientists getting their emails hacked and then facing death threats. And as the politics of climate change begins to mirror the broader dark trends of global politics, weaponized social media -- in the form of intimidation, memes, and disinformation -- has emerged as the dominant vehicle for climate denial. But the rise of a new climate movement means there's now a much more visible -- and especially vulnerable -- target: kids.
Young girls like Lilly, who has been striking in her hometown of Utrecht, Netherlands, every Friday for the last year, are overwhelmingly leading a growing global movement to draw attention to the climate crisis. They spurred an estimated 4 million people across seven continents to walk out of work and school on September 20 -- and they are getting attacked for it. They have faced a barrage of daily insults, seemingly coordinated attacks (like the one that targeted Lilly), creepy DMs, doxing, hacked accounts, and death threats. This is the new normal for young climate leaders online, according to BuzzFeed News interviews with nearly a dozen of the kids and their parents.
Personal attacks have always been a part of the climate denial playbook, even as fossil fuel companies secretly funded campaigns and researchers to question the scientific consensus on climate change. The most famous incident, 2009's Climategate, involved scientists getting their emails hacked and then facing death threats. And as the politics of climate change begins to mirror the broader dark trends of global politics, weaponized social media -- in the form of intimidation, memes, and disinformation -- has emerged as the dominant vehicle for climate denial. But the rise of a new climate movement means there's now a much more visible -- and especially vulnerable -- target: kids.
Climate change is inevitable (Score:3, Informative)
You lost your opportunity to stop climate change 25 years ago. It's now inevitable, and nothing you can do will stop it.
So the answer is to adapt to it as best you are able.
Re:Climate change is inevitable (Score:5, Insightful)
It's now inevitable, and nothing you can do will stop it.
That's correct, the best we can do at this point is slow it.
So the answer is to adapt to it as best you are able
Which is why we're trying to slow it. Adaptation doesn't happen overnight.
Re:Climate change is inevitable (Score:5, Interesting)
There are plans, but the people with money don't want the plans. We're at a stage where sacrifices must happen to make a dent, but suggesting people make sacrifices is political suicide. So we're stuck in a cycle of short term thinking.
It's also reminiscent of the cold war in many ways, where some people thought it was better to destroy the whole world than to let commies survive without any opposition. Except now it's "we refuse to do anything about climate change until China takes the first step!", as some are just so scared that China might get an economic upper hand. "Why should I pay for upkeep of the levee until my deadbeat neighbors pay their share?"
Hard to believe, but damaging the US economy now might be better than having it destroyed later along with lots of lives. Suck it up, get to the doctor and get your chemo while there's a chance slow or halt the cancer. And for climate change we don't even need stuff that drastic; just up the fuel efficiency standards, start deprecating fossil fuels, stop cutting down rain forests to make grazing land, and so forth. Sure the portfolio will take a hit but it's going to take a hit eventually anyway.
Re: (Score:3)
It doesn't have to be that bad.
Norway made the switch to EVs happen and it wasn't cripplingly expensive or anything. In fact it generated a lot of wealth for companies installing infrastructure and made Norway an EV tech hub.
Wind power is the cheapest option now, and building all those turbines could be a great jobs programme and help keep the steel and construction industries afloat.
The Green New Deal could really help a lot of Americans.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Climate change is inevitable (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Climate change is inevitable (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Wait... melting icebergs won't raise sea levels?
Not if they were floating, no.
Melting glaciers, on the other hand...
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Our bills are coming due and you want to pass them on to our children.
And you deny children a voice, deny them validity, deny the worth, rather listen and help. There is very little lower in my opinion.
Re: (Score:3)
Evidence they've been brainwashed?
Look at Greta's "How DARE You!" speech.
This reeks of Munchausen-by-proxy.
She's been convinced she's sick! SICK I SAY!
Her disease is "climate change".
And that every adult on the planet, even the ones who've been fighting for better environmental policy for DECADES, are at fault.
Re: (Score:3)
Sure, it occurred to me. BUT - that's not what's happening [youtube.com].
You can head down that rabbit hole [wrongkindofgreen.org] yourself, if you are really interested in the truth. But people like that are rare.
Re: (Score:3)
You know the sun has been getting hotter as it ages right?
Re: Climate change is inevitable (Score:3, Interesting)
What do plants do in high CO2 environments? They bloom and continue to absorb more CO2 hence diminishing the CO2 content of the Earth's atmosphere which perpetuated this cooling effect. Why doesn't that apply now? Because dinosaurs/animals of that time weren't pushing out disproportionate amounts of gas
Re: (Score:3)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Primates evolved DURING this time. The world is better, and people are freaking out because it means we're going to have to migrate and build new infrastructure to adapt to the improving world.
Re: (Score:3)
Back to the old "climate change is good" argument I see. You probably won't say that when your house is underwater and millions of other people are all clamouring for the good bits of land left.
We can't adapt to climate change at the speed it is going. We only have one planet and we can't afford to test your theory on it. I'm also assuming you don't want to pay the cost of adapting anyway.
Re: (Score:3)
As I understand it
You kiiiind of understand it but are missing some key facts. The big one is that the sun was much much dimmer 65 million years ago. This means it took more CO2 in the atmosphere to warm up the entire planet. So today, we need far less CO2 to reach those Eocene temperatures.
https://www.popsci.com/carbon-... [popsci.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Yup, I get it. You're so pissed off that Libertarianism doesn't scale under the pressure of resource constraints that you'd prefer to watch the world burn than be forced to cooperate.
LOL! Yea, I figured you'd just go off on some moronic ideological rant. Didn't even bother checking into it, huh?
Oh, well. I guess they're gonna win. You'll get to watch the world burn BECAUSE you're cooperating with the guys holding all the matches.
For the those unafraid of the truth: https://slashdot.org/comments.... [slashdot.org]
It's working, Greta! (Score:3, Insightful)
Keep up the good work! Greta Thunberg's activism has been so effective that the right is trying to pre-emptively stop the rise of any more like her!
THE TRIGGERING MEANS IT'S WORKING!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Effective at what? Have greenhouse emissions gone down or up?
Re: (Score:2)
Effective at what? Have greenhouse emissions gone down or up?
Perhaps effective at making them think anything will change.
On the other hand my coworkers, in California mind you, didn't really care about or discuss much of her display before the UN. Heck, some referred to her as that "shrieking crazed child" without knowing her name. I think most people believe that we need to do more about things like pollution and energy sourcing, but for the most part feel that climate change isn't quite the threat Greta's teachers have convinced her it represents.
Gotta start somewhere (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Convincing people climate change is real using personable human beings is the place to start. Al Gore did more damage to the cause than the Koch brothers ever did just by being about as likable as a rattlesnake wearing a Hilary Clinton mask.
Well, that's the rub. Al Gore is a real human being; minor is a cipher or a symbol ... A human shield that you can't argue with on the merits as you would an adult because they're not expected to have the same faculties as an adult. Take the bait by doing so and you're (arguably) seen as punching down. Fail to do so and their enablers hide their policy ideas behind them. It's a no-win scenario and "your only winning move is not to play."
Unfortunately, if human shields keep getting used, eventually the argum
Re:It's working, Greta! (Score:5, Insightful)
No wonder, when we have members of our species who act like that, that starfaring alien civilizations won't contact us openly; they're embarassed for us, no doubt, and likely rather disgusted by us. We need to do better.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I feel that the only thing Greta is doing is saying the exact things we've all known for decades: Stop polluting.
But she offers no solutions. No plans. No ideas. Just "I have realized something bad is happening and I want SOMEONE ELSE to fix it!"
And the problem with this whole mess is that even the private people who do something are constantly told it's not enough. Do more. Do better. Feel guilty. All while massive international corporations wrap watermelons individually in plastic and destroy any and all
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I feel that the only thing Greta is doing is saying the exact things we've all known for decades: Stop polluting.
I don't pollute. I've never thrown my trash on the ground. Certainly I've never dumped trash in a river or an ocean. I try not to waste water or electricity. I certainly don't consider myself rich enough to throw good food away. I don't live a life of excess. But wait - none of this seems to matter. So what people like Greta are really saying is "stop being alive". Fair enough. The fewer people we are, the smaller the environmental footprint of humanity. It's a valid point. But allow me to say: you first.
Re: (Score:3)
But she offers no solutions. No plans. No ideas.
She's 16 years old. She hasn't finished high school. Give her a few years to get an education before expecting plans from her. Anything she'd come up with now would be stupid anyway.
FWIW, here's my plan (please poke holes, I suspect there are plenty): A carbon tax based on the following assumptions:
1. The goal is to internalize the carbon emissions externality going forward. There's no reasonable way to assess fees for carbon already emitted, so we just assume that's water under the bridge and tha
Hysterical emotional appeals counterproductive (Score:2)
Keep up the good work! Greta Thunberg's activism has been so effective that the right is trying to pre-emptively stop the rise of any more like her! THE TRIGGERING MEANS IT'S WORKING!
Hysterical emotional appeals discredit the movement, undermine it, make it easier to dismiss outside the bubble. Stick to real scientists offering real science and real data. Hysterical celebrities and children won't make it happen. The scientists might.
Re: (Score:2)
Science without political action would amount to nothing but improving our understanding of our unimpeded demise.
Re: (Score:3)
I take your point, but it's misleading. Those are direct emissions, not indirect emissions. The reason we've been able to "decrease" our emissions is because we've offshored a lot of the pollution to China and SE Asia. A fairer counting would be to take the emissions from the goods we import abroad, subtract from the sending country and add to the receiving country.
A lot of that pollution wouldn't be happening if we weren't paying for it to happen.
Re: (Score:3)
Greta's little rant has done far more harm than good. People are focusing on the message and not the message. Plus her little rant was so far from the truth that it damages the whole environmental movement. The world isn't going to end in 10 years and nobody took her child hood away.
Crap like that destroys what little credibility we already have.
Re: (Score:3)
Scientific consensus is that she is right. The next ten years are critical and we need to do much more.
Re:It's working, Greta! (Score:4)
Wow. You downplay google then cite Wikipidea for facts. Just going to let you think about that for a moment.
Re:It's working, Greta! (Score:4)
It's not an attack sweet heart. Just a point. Because someone disagrees with you or points out a problem with one of your posts doesn't make it personal.
By conservative men. (Score:5, Informative)
"A new movement of teenage climate activists -- most of whom are girls -- are getting dragged, doxed, hacked, and harassed online by conservative men".
Fixed it for you.
Hypocrite much. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
you haven't learned a lot of set theory have you?
Re: (Score:3)
Well they're not being attacked by people leaning left, now are they?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nick Sandman says Hello!
Twitter cannot die... (Score:5, Insightful)
....soon enough......may it burn up in the fiery pit of Hell.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't get how now half the online "news" you read is just some blogger posting shit they read on Twitter. It's insane.
Twitters problems would be solved by charging $5 a year for a twitter account, but gotta keep pimping those fake eyeball views on ads...
It's everywhere: even here (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think you're quite correct, but it used to be more technocratic utopian, and those folks have pretty much vanished. Remember Stallman's "Right to Read" being scoffed at?
Re: (Score:2)
In the last couple of years the science deniers have realized that they are not alone with their opinions. This makes the difference.
Mum said what? (Score:2)
There is only so much i can do to block this.
You can turn the phone/device off. Maybe teach her how to make cookies, or the like. Anything else is wrestling a pig.
Kids used as human shields (Score:2, Insightful)
Greta Thunberg is a younger, more vulnerable Cindy Sheehan, and like Sheehan will be discarded as soon as she’s no longer of use. In the meantime, her moral theatrics grow tedious [thesun.co.uk].
She's also the latest human shield the alarmists have found to champion their causes. Let's call it what it is: child exploitation and abuse
Protip: Children Shouldn't be on Social Media (Score:4, Insightful)
That mother is probably the same type of mother who also gave her kid a smartphone with full internet access.
Maybe she should be a better parent and keep your 11 year old off of social media, especially Twatter.
You know, because the internet is filled with trolls and porn and at 11 fucking years her kid is clearly not ready for all of the
crap that is out there.
16 at best, 13 at a minimum FFS. If they're smart enough to bypass your parental locks and filters, then let them on. Frankly, I doubt Lilly has the capabilities to do so and she should spend more time playing outside, with dolls, coding, or whatever the hell 11 year old are doing these days.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, you're right. It's the mother's fault. Not the jerks who are attacking children because of their beliefs.
Like another poster said, the mother should be teaching her to make cookies, not try to spread awareness that adults have F'ed up the world and are continuing to F up the world that she and others her age will have to live with.
Welcome to the Internet (Score:2, Insightful)
She is in breach of Twitters terms of service (Score:3, Insightful)
From https://twitter.com/en/tos [twitter.com]
"In any case, you must be at least 13 years old, or in the case of Periscope 16 years old, to use the Services."
Has twitter enforced its policy and closed her account yet?
Re: (Score:2)
From https://twitter.com/en/tos [twitter.com]
"In any case, you must be at least 13 years old, or in the case of Periscope 16 years old, to use the Services."
Has twitter enforced its policy and closed her account yet?
I don't know that she is using the service as defined in the TOS, how do you know? Her mother is quoted as saying that "There is only so much i can do to block this.", which entails that she has at least some control of the account.
Welcome to the Web 2.0 (Score:2)
Social media are neither social nor are they a media. It's just a huge nonsensical pile of crap. Get over it and protect your children from it. You wouldn't let an 11 years old go to the nearest bar full of drunkards, why would you let them go on the worst the web has to offer?
My guess would be paid shills (Score:2)
Yeah, yeah, tin foil hate and all that. But as Gore Vidal said, I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm a conspiracy analyst. It's not like it's hard to see this stuff, a little googling and you can find who funds who.
Good thing the left never doxxed / attacked anyone (Score:2)
Future therapy discussions (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Future therapy discussions (Score:4, Informative)
without parental supervision?
Actually given the mother is actively intervening it is quite clear that she IS under parental supervision.
Harassment not new, but visibility is (Score:4, Interesting)
That said, what is new is that the Internet and social media have made it easier for newer, younger activists to emerge, especially teenagers, driven even more visibly by individuals who have gone viral. Perhaps those teenagers, and their parents, didn't initially appreciate just how sharp the responses would be or how slowly providers could respond to them. These same technology tools have also enabled mobilization of the same harassment to a whole new level.
Yet most notably, social media and the Internet has enabled the broader public to better see upfront how ugly the clashes truly are. In the past, you'd have to get lucky with a journalist snapping the right photo or video, but even then, you may not fully grasp the level of vitriol in these kind of clashes. Social media also allows that vitriol to be captured and spread virally as well, feeding the outrage machine on all sides.
Re:Trolls? (Score:4, Insightful)
The bit that's news is that those trolls have now weaponized social media and are willing to gleefully attack children.
There have always been trolls on the internet. But now they're serving some deeply-entrenched corporate power centers and are willing to endanger children to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
How is it any different than people using social media to coordinate attacks on... anyone? There are obsessive people that will dig through everything you have done to show you are a bad person. That's been happening for a while now. It is a brave new world out there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just try writing a /. post criticizing Windows 10.
That seems to be as sure a way to get lost in the crowd here as any I have seen.
Re: (Score:3)
How is it any different than people using social media to coordinate attacks on... anyone?
Gee, I don't know. Maybe if you read the comment you replied to you would see:
But now they're serving some deeply-entrenched corporate power centers and are willing to endanger children to do so.
I thought that was pretty clear. You don't for some reason.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
What should happen: Reasoned, tboughtful discussion.
What actually is happening: There is a constant push to publically shame those who don't think AGW justifies doing much of anything, shout at them in resturants, etc.
But kids, that's going too oh wait they shit all over that stupd kid with the MAGA hat.
This is your world. You have introduced these weapons and chosen to use them. "Oh no, more of the right learning to weaponize our own attacks against us," you lament, shocked, shocked.
The topic is disgust
Re: (Score:2)
So you're saying that there are good people on both sides.
Re: (Score:2)
So you're saying that there are good people on both sides.
I think he's saying the opposite. Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Brave isn't the term I'd use, and I don't think society is going to stand for this kind of thing forever. If Twitter continues to facilitate porn to be sent to children, they will be prosecuted by existing laws and attract undesirable government regulation that I'm sure none of us welcome.
Re: (Score:2)
they will be prosecuted by existing laws
You're adorable.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry Potsy, this is not new. The internet has been around longer than fucking twitter and children have been victims for as long of on-line predators.
Take you head out of your ass.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Little bit of a difference (Score:3)
Re:Trolls? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why are children on the Internet unshielded by their parents? If the parents are willing to use their children as human shields and climate hysteria trolls, then turnaround's a bitch. I don't know how you raise your children, but mine don't have access to Twitter and Facebook etc.
Re:Trolls? (Score:4, Funny)
I don't know how you raise your children, but mine don't have access to Twitter and Facebook etc.
Don't use children as props (Score:3, Insightful)
The bit that's news is that those trolls have now weaponized social media and are willing to gleefully attack children.
That is why until recently most people had the common sense not to use children as political props in highly controversial topics. Children are not your paid PR spokespeople available to read your organization's script on video.
Children are not your political props (Score:2, Insightful)
And by this, the true character of the climate deniers is revealed. (At least a significant faction of them).
And so is the true character the climate change activist, to use children as political props to read your "script" for the video camera.
When you go the hysterical emotional appeal route it hurts your credibility. Stick to real scientists offering real science and real data.
Re: (Score:3)
Because climate deniers are so easily swayed by real science?
So you think a screaming hysterical emotional child will work? LOL.
Re: (Score:3)
Stick to real scientists offering real science and real data.
We did. For decades.
And progress was made. They activists made it political and hysterical and progress was slowed. So now activists decide to double down on hysteria, but this time it will be different.
What do you think happens to political props? (Score:3)
Children are stakeholders, not props by any means.
Politics is war by other means - and often as damaging to the participants as actual shooting war. It is where decisions are made that are imposed on others by force.
Just as those who attempt to dictate and suppress others' behavior by force have to accept the risk of damage if they fight back, those who attempt to influence lawmaking by their public speech have to accept the risk of being discredited or maligned by the speech of others who oppose them.
When
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Reminds me of the CA drought / water crisis: we had talking heads telling us we should be shitting in a bucket and showering once a week while something like 80% of our water usage was allocated to cash crop farming.
We should be tackling the biggest violators first before telling everyone to stop eating meat or driving to work.
No, but it is climate denial pinning it on meat (Score:3)
And that's not even going to matter all that much. The problem is about 100 companies are responsible for 70% of the emissions that cause global warming. We need to tackle that with regulation. You giving up hamburgers isn't going to be a drop in the ocean next to that. The same goes for your drive to work.
All of this is meant to be a signal to the w
Re: (Score:3)
The actual measurements suggest we have an actual problem.
Re: (Score:2)
But are these really trolls? Or are they rather astroturfers? I don't think there's any reliable way to tell the difference, and this is an instance where there is economic incentive to hire people.
Re:Climate activists? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's already been more than a year. They're still trying to secure some sort of decent future for themselves. Can you honestly blame them?
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't heard anyone saying that was OK either.
Horse shit (Score:3, Informative)
Horse shit. Science reached consensus on climate change decades ago.
Signed, a scientist
Re: (Score:2)
These ding dongs think it's a vast global conspiracy, so "consensus" to them just means they must be more right because who wants to go along with the mainstream? They are basically hipster contrarians, the more evidence you bring forward the less they will believe.
Some form of reverse psychology might work best on them.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree that there is overwhelming scientific evidence for man made global warming.
But there is also near consensus among economists that the benefits of a drastic reduction of the emissions will be much, much smaller than the benefits. In other words: If we spend all our money combating climate change there will be less money left for other purposes (like health care, sanitation and so on).
And when one of the most prominent figures in the fight against climate change yells out that we are stealing her chil
Re:This is part bullshit! (Score:5, Informative)
Today the word troll means anyone not buying your brand of bullshit.
No, it refers to people sending pornography to an 11yo on twitter, it's in the first quoted paragraph.
Re: (Score:2)
That is not trolling.
"a troll is a person who starts quarrels or upsets people on the Internet to distract and sow discord"
How does sending someone porn do this? They are just being hostile morons which add nothing to the debate. It would be nice if that kind of stuff could be stopped but the only thing it would result in is bad actors gaining control over freedom of speech.
Re:This is part bullshit! (Score:5, Insightful)
11 year olds are not supposed to be on Twitter. Twitter should instantly and permanently ban the account.
Re: (Score:3)
So you are saying that we should all just accept creepy DMs, doxing, hacked accounts, and death threats. Without telling anyone that it's happening.
Re: (Score:2)
How exactly do you kick the asses of those who dox you and send death threats?
The only way to win against them is to get them sent to jail. The first step towards that is reporting them. The government has the monopoly on violence, so going to them and kicking their asses is not a legitimate way of dealing with them.
What does deal with it mean to you?
Re: (Score:2)
Even stipulating that no sane person would hold that opinion, that doesn't mean the opinion won't be seen. However, at first glance your statement could be interpreted as "boys are taught to shut up and deal, and I wish girls were too." I realize that's not what you mean, but I'm not surprised that someone does think you meant it that way.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, they might well have a hard time doing a worse job than the current governments are doing.
That said, this is an extremely important issue that is being swept under the rug until there's a big hump in the middle of the passageway.
OTOH, India and Pakistan are engaged in what may turn into a nuclear war, and if so this may well solve global warming. But it's being largely ignored. (Well, the study that said it would solve global warming is now a few decades old. Whether it's still true isn't clear. T
Re: (Score:2)
and what about when children have opinions and put themselves on the front line? What does that indicate? Or is that simply not possible?
Re: (Score:3)
Not only was there a medieval warm period, it was so warm that horses could not be used anymore and people had to resort to using coconuts instead.