[HN Gopher] Paperwall: Chinese websites posing as local news out...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Paperwall: Chinese websites posing as local news outlets target
       global audiences
        
       Author : kieto
       Score  : 218 points
       Date   : 2024-02-07 13:22 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (citizenlab.ca)
 (TXT) w3m dump (citizenlab.ca)
        
       | vdaea wrote:
       | I visited one of those sites, https://sevillatimes.com/ , and
       | absolutely none of the articles posted there talk about the city,
       | not even about the country where the city is in. So nobody would
       | think that website is a local news website.
       | 
       | Also this article offers little to no proof that the Chinese
       | government is behind these sites. They look more like a network
       | of crypto spam. https://sevillatimes.com/category/presionesoltar/
        
         | Maken wrote:
         | I think they are not trying to target Spain but rather some
         | country in Latin America, possibly Colombia. Weird enough, all
         | their news seem to be reposted from a Dominican newspaper but
         | there is no Sevilla there. Maybe they thought it was close
         | enough.
        
         | dash2 wrote:
         | I doubt if lots of websites all saying "[Chinese scientist who
         | made allegations about Covid] is a complete rumor maker" are
         | crypto spam. The Chinese government seems like a plausible
         | patron.
        
           | gs17 wrote:
           | It's also very likely that both are paying customers. The
           | article doesn't accuse it of being run by the government
           | directly, they specifically refer to it as a private firm.
        
         | dmonitor wrote:
         | The strategy would be to post the articles to facebook. Nobody
         | goes to a specific website to see the news anyway. The website
         | just exists to be linked to by facebook and look "legit enough"
        
       | feverzsj wrote:
       | It never worked. People behind these just want to make some quick
       | money from the supreme leader and buy mansions/yachts in rotten
       | capitalism countries.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Please don't post in the flamewar style to HN. It's not what
         | this site is for, and destroys what it is for.
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
       | sva_ wrote:
       | Seems bad, but tbh not terribly sophisticated. I imagine one
       | could do a lot worse in filler content generation using LLMs as
       | well as better obfuscation techniques for the servers.
       | 
       | Or perhaps those who do it better are just undetected.
        
       | CrazyStat wrote:
       | What is up with the font rendering on this website? It looks
       | terrible at default zoom (100%), looks fine if I change it to 90%
       | or 110%. Chrome 120.0.6099.200 on Windows 11.
       | 
       | Screenshot at 100% zoom: https://i.imgur.com/X7bN7hT.png
        
         | lolinder wrote:
         | > Please don't complain about tangential annoyances--e.g.
         | article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button
         | breakage. They're too common to be interesting.
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
           | CrazyStat wrote:
           | It's an earnest question, not a complaint. I looked at and
           | messed around with the CSS a bit but I'm not a web dev so I
           | don't know what the problem is.
        
         | aembleton wrote:
         | Looks OK for me. Its loading the font from
         | https://citizenlab.ca/wp-content/themes/citizenlab-wp-theme/...
         | 
         | Can you access that URL or is it being blocked for you?
        
           | CrazyStat wrote:
           | Not blocked, I'm able to access it fine.
        
       | netsharc wrote:
       | Seeing the screenshot of the headlines, "mimic" (HN title) is a
       | different to "posing as" (article title). If I can extrapolate
       | from 3 headlines screenshot there, the sites have generic boring
       | looks (maybe they're Wordpress sites), but they pose to be a news
       | site for Sevilla, Rome, or Milan. Whereas when "mimicking", I
       | would expect them to be copying the design of well-known news
       | sites (I've seen fake CNN-looking sites).
       | 
       | It's always amusing/depressing when people claim something,
       | usually something fake-news-ey or propaganda) and link to one of
       | these random Wordpress-looking sites as their "news source". I
       | remember someone linking to a page that claimed that a map of the
       | March 2011 Japanese tsunami effects measured throughout the
       | Pacific[1] was a map of the radiation from the nuclear accident,
       | so people do fall for it, because not everyone is as discerning
       | as us super-clever HN readers. ;)
       | 
       | [1] The map from https://www.pmel.noaa.gov/news-story/new-study-
       | shows-some-co..., but the original caption was under the map and
       | not superimposed on the map, and was cropped by the fake-news
       | peddler.
        
         | drewg123 wrote:
         | I'm not the submitter, but there is a length limit on post
         | titles. I've run into this before with articles whose titles
         | exceed that limit, and I've had to "edit" the titles to fit. I
         | imagine the submitter had the same issue, and didn't catch the
         | different connotation of "mimic" vs "posing as", which does
         | seem to change the meaning some.
         | 
         | Dang: Do you think you could raise the length limit by 50
         | characters or so? Most of the problems I've had with title
         | length limits seem to have been just a few words that I had to
         | squeeze down..
        
           | kieto wrote:
           | Submitter here, this is exactly what happened, I hit the
           | length limit with the non-editorialized title, so I tried to
           | reduce it the best I could :)
        
         | mistrial9 wrote:
         | meanwhile, a woman from Japan came to visit the David Brower
         | Center in Berkeley soon after the meltdown, because someone
         | there had been recording TEPCO and National Radiation Levels
         | info since the Fukishima events. Those recordings were in
         | dispute, they did not match. There was intense national
         | interest, international science poking in, and in fact the
         | public records were in dispute.
         | 
         | The anecdote here only says "I thought the website was this,
         | and it turned out to be that" .. so many ways that small bit
         | can fail. Very significant world event with actual conflicting
         | information..
        
       | boomboomsubban wrote:
       | So Chinese people are running some of the low quality spam
       | content farms that have been plaguing the internet for years,
       | seemingly primarily for financial reasons like the rest of them.
       | The only real difference is their Reuters is linked to China
       | rather than the West.
        
         | andsoitis wrote:
         | > their Reuters is linked to China rather than the West.
         | 
         | Reuters is a company in a regulatory and political framework
         | with high degree is freedom of the press and expression, rather
         | than an instrument controlled by a government for the purpose
         | of propaganda.
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | Reuters is an outlet completely captured by its owners, for
           | whatever purposes that benefit its owners, exactly like
           | whatever this is. UPI is owned by the Moonies. The Falun Gong
           | have multiple OTA television stations in the US that give no
           | indication that they are owned by the Falun Gong.
           | 
           | edit: I forgot that the Epoch Times is also owned by the
           | Falun Gong, an outlet that plays a significant part in US
           | politics. If you are familiar with the Epoch Times, did you
           | know it was owned by the Falun Gong?
           | 
           | Did you know that the Washington Times, another important
           | newspaper, is also Moonie-owned?
           | 
           | Or that the "International Business Times" and Newsweek are
           | likely controlled by the Korean Christian sect _The
           | Community_?
        
           | pphysch wrote:
           | Reuters has been linked to covert government influence
           | operations regarding Russia and Syria. Their "trust
           | principles" facade is just that. They are no more reliable
           | than any other serious news outlet, from China, Russia, or
           | America. They publish things that their owners find
           | acceptable.
        
       | stratigos wrote:
       | China makes war through deception and gaslighting, not through
       | tanks and bombs. They declared war on the entire world more than
       | two decades ago.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Please don't take HN threads into nationalistic flamewar,
         | regardless of which nation. It's not what this site is for, and
         | destroys what it is for.
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
       | mschuster91 wrote:
       | Nothing new, sadly. Before the 2016 and 2020 election, fake news
       | farms in Macedonia made the rounds [1] - these were in it for the
       | money, and in 2015 there were reports about Russian propaganda
       | farms targeting Serbia and the rest of Europe [2].
       | 
       | [1] https://money.cnn.com/interactive/media/the-macedonia-story/
       | 
       | [2] https://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/russische-
       | trollf...
        
         | ryandrake wrote:
         | Yes, back before You-Know-Who neutralized the phrase "fake
         | news" by turning it into a generic insult to disparage
         | legitimate news organizations, the big story was all these
         | _actual_ fake newspapers popping up, made to look legitimate,
         | but actually pumping out nonsense and political propaganda
         | instead. Suddenly the phenomenon just stopped getting reported
         | on, and we now mostly forget that these fake sites even exist.
        
           | lostlogin wrote:
           | As an aside 'You-Know-Who' is an immediate Harry Potter
           | reference for me.
        
             | ryandrake wrote:
             | Yea, I've made it my general practice on HN to not even say
             | the guy's name because whenever you do, your comment boards
             | the upvote-downvote roller coaster, and I'm not going for
             | controversy.
        
           | avgcorrection wrote:
           | Oh please. Your Voldemort never had the power to neutralize
           | that term. People who were clued-in enough to know about Fake
           | News before Trump wasn't swayed in their belief. And people
           | who were blissfully aware of it (of reality) would just think
           | that it was a new "Trump Thing" and then delude themselves
           | into thinking that getting rid Trump would be the same as
           | getting rid of Fake News (quotation marks may or may not
           | apply).
        
       | xbmcuser wrote:
       | This is the time of information warfare I guess they learned
       | something from India "Pro-Indian 'fake websites targeted decision
       | makers in Europe'" https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-
       | india-50749764
        
         | reaperducer wrote:
         | In the U.S., rich people and political organizations are
         | actually buying or setting up real newspapers in small towns so
         | that when they post fake news on social media, they can
         | reference a dead tree "news source" that is actually their own
         | P.R. machine.
         | 
         | There have been a few articles about it in the real press (NYT,
         | etc) over the last couple of years.
        
           | psunavy03 wrote:
           | This is no different from the majority of US history.
           | Partisan/slanted news outlets have been a thing in the US
           | going back to the Revolution, on both sides of the aisle.
           | It's often a reason why larger cities had multiple papers.
           | One for each side.
        
             | scarecrowbob wrote:
             | Well, one for each side that can field a media
             | organization. :D
        
               | kwhitefoot wrote:
               | As far as I can tell (from the other side of the
               | Atlantic) most Americans seem to think that the
               | Republican versus Democrat party system is provided for
               | by either the constitution or god, or perhaps both, and
               | that any deviation from two party politics is just that:
               | deviation.
        
             | wolverine876 wrote:
             | > This is no different from the majority of US history.
             | 
             | It is very different. I and many reading have been here for
             | the time when it didn't happen this way, when the world was
             | not drowning in disinformation.
             | 
             | Turning it into a binary question: 0) It doesn't exist at
             | all, or 1) It exists, makes the question meaningless (and
             | ironically is a common form of misinformation, and
             | technique of disinformation). By binary reasoning, murder
             | exists whether we have law enforcement or not, and cancer
             | always exists so you might as well smoke cigars and work in
             | a coal mine.
             | 
             | But what is the point of saying it's no different? Even if
             | it were true, what do you conclude from that? Why make this
             | argument?
        
           | reactordev wrote:
           | Not to mention the Sinclair Broadcast Group. Doing the same
           | thing with Radio and local TV.
        
       | somenameforme wrote:
       | So I decided to take the really sophisticated step of doing a
       | "link:www.milanomodaweekly.com" search on Google. It turned up
       | this [1] page, and pretty much only that page. But that seems to
       | explain what this probably is.
       | 
       | This looks like an amateur hour scam operation. Somebody sets up
       | some sites that look vaguely passable (targeted at an audience
       | who does not even speak the language on the site), auto-populates
       | them with auto-translated Chinese newswire and blog stuff, local
       | scraped stuff, etc. and then claims they're "major foreign media
       | outlets", which they then sell access to for the riveting price
       | of just 1.4 million won - about $1000. It looks like a modern
       | take on something like a 419 scam, except I expect they probably
       | do follow through on publishing whatever people submit!
       | 
       | Granted not as exciting a discovery as a shadowy influence
       | operation with a super sexy nickname, but probably more accurate.
       | 
       | [1] - https://kmong.com/gig/497744
        
         | imiric wrote:
         | Did you miss the part in the article where these sites contain
         | blatant pro-China propaganda, and ad hominem attacks on CCP
         | political dissidents?
         | 
         | I did the same cursory look as you. Go to
         | https://www[.]eiffelpost[.]com/?s=china with a VPN. It shows 24
         | pages of CGTN greatest hits. How you can interpret this to be
         | anything other than a CCP psyop is beyond me.
         | 
         | It's disappointing to see this kind of dismissal on a forum of
         | highly educated people. It's common knowledge that the Chinese
         | government has a history of censoring information that shows
         | them in a bad light, promoting largely false self-aggrandizing
         | narratives, and attacking anyone who challenges them. It
         | shouldn't be surprising at all that the internet outside of
         | their great firewall is a major focus of their operations.
         | Given a lack of direct sources to determine the truth of the
         | situation, I will always lean towards believing that this is
         | part of their established modus operandi, rather than
         | minimizing it by claiming it's just another "amateur hour scam
         | operation".
        
           | somenameforme wrote:
           | What do you think Chinese news and blogs are full of?
        
             | imiric wrote:
             | These are not Chinese news and blogs. These sites are
             | created in the language and region of other countries,
             | sometimes by scraping the content of other local sites, and
             | then filling them with the usual Chinese propaganda.
             | Chinese people are not the target audience.
        
               | somenameforme wrote:
               | The target audience seems to be Koreans who want to
               | market their [whatever] in e.g. France, but neither know
               | French nor anything at all about France. I found the link
               | where you can buy access to the EiffelPost site you
               | mentioned here: https://kmong.com/gig/399972
               | 
               | I assume you didn't check out the link earlier. Basically
               | it's some sort of a Korean craigslist/ebay type site. The
               | site itself is complete legit - Amazon did a case study
               | of them here. [1] The seller/scammer, "Excelsior
               | Partners" claims to be affiliated with governments,
               | advertising agencies, and so on. And they guarantee
               | publication in more than 10 "major French media outlets."
               | They even offer to take care of translation for you, with
               | their "direct partnership with a professional translation
               | agency." Heh. Of course those "major media sites" are all
               | the ones the article from this thread is talking about.
               | 
               | They're just trying to fill out the site with enough junk
               | that somebody who doesn't know the language, doesn't know
               | the locale, and is naive enough to think you can buy
               | guaranteed article placement in multiple major Western
               | publications for $1k, might think it's real.
               | 
               | [1] - https://aws.amazon.com/solutions/case-
               | studies/kmong/
        
               | imiric wrote:
               | Alright. So the CCP is even lazier and doesn't bother
               | with creating their own sites, but buys access to these
               | branded localized sites, and posts their content that
               | way. Or "Excelsior Partners" is just another CCP front,
               | and those kmong listings are a scam in itself.
               | 
               | Otherwise, how would you explain 24 pages of CGTN
               | propaganda?
               | 
               | In either case, it's a clear link to the CCP. This is no
               | different to what they do on social media as well. They
               | use all established platforms to broaden their reach.
        
               | somenameforme wrote:
               | The same way I'd explain all the other stuff. It's just
               | lots of filler to try to make the site look, from the
               | scammer's perspective, legit. And you have to keep in
               | mind this issue of perspectives. What you see as
               | propaganda, is what somebody else would just see as the
               | equivalent as a stream from e.g. Reuters. And the scammer
               | is probably Chinese or Korean. Since the target victims
               | are Korean, he probably wouldn't want to use e.g. Korean
               | news sources that might be more readily recognizable.
               | 
               | If you want to see this as some sort of a state influence
               | operation, you run into a million issues. The sites are
               | poorly done (template boilerplate is even left up in many
               | places!) and no native would likely consider them "real",
               | there has been exactly 0 effort to advertise or share the
               | sites, the sites seem to be regularly taken down which
               | ruins ranking/viral possibilities, what "propaganda" that
               | does exist on the sites has to be actively searched for,
               | the sites seemingly allow anybody to publish on them, the
               | sites are loaded with stuff that's going to push people
               | away like shady crypto spam (and I say that as a huge fan
               | of crypto!), so forth and so on.
               | 
               | Especially for things like this, I think Occam's Razor is
               | quite sharp.
        
               | imiric wrote:
               | > It's just lots of filler to try to make the site look,
               | from the scammer's perspective, legit.
               | 
               | And they just happen to have mostly political propaganda
               | from CGTN, a CCP mouthpiece? If the intent was only to
               | scam, there are thousands of ways of doing that with
               | better results, without involving propaganda.
               | 
               | > What you see as propaganda, is what somebody else would
               | just see as the equivalent as a stream from e.g. Reuters.
               | 
               | C'mon. If you search for "china" on any of these sites
               | you'll only see pro-China narratives, promoting the One
               | China policy, etc. Western media has its own agenda,
               | sure, but this type of blatant propaganda is only found
               | on fringe publications.
               | 
               | > If you want to see this as some sort of a state
               | influence operation, you run into a million issues.
               | 
               | State run psyops don't need to be sophisticated. Their
               | only goal is to flood the web with their narratives, and
               | lower the signal to noise ratio, so that when people
               | search for specific topics, theirs will hopefully come
               | up. For every attempt that does this right, there are
               | millions more that do a half-assed job at it.
               | 
               | > Especially for things like this, I think Occam's Razor
               | is quite sharp.
               | 
               | Precisely. The CCP runs a well-oiled machine built to
               | pump out disinformation via every public channel
               | available. It takes them no effort to create sites like
               | these, and all steps of the process are likely fully
               | automated. I find the simplest explanation to be that
               | this is just another variant of this, rather than a scam
               | operation that builds dozens of sites with pages upon
               | pages of content just to get people to click on some
               | links, or whatever type of scam this might be. If it
               | quacks like a duck...
               | 
               | I don't think we'll know for sure either way, or convince
               | each other, but cheers for the discussion.
        
           | dang wrote:
           | Please make your substantive points without swipes, as the
           | site guidelines ask:
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html.
           | 
           | This is particularly important when the topic is divisive.
           | That's in the guidelines too btw.
        
             | imiric wrote:
             | Noted. I toned it down a bit.
        
           | avgcorrection wrote:
           | > Did you miss the part in the article where these sites
           | contain blatant pro-China propaganda, and ad hominem attacks
           | on CCP political dissidents?
           | 
           | What does the irrelevant adjective "blatant" have to do with
           | anything? And why is "ad hominem" significant when 95% of
           | politics is about technically fallacious argumentation such
           | as that?
           | 
           | Oh, a 10KUSD FB ad campaign bought by Kremlin and targeted at
           | the US population? Obvious psyop, yes. Also completely
           | irrelevant noise in the scheme of things, just like this
           | apparent "amateur hour" operation.
           | 
           | It's about having an appropriate response to "bad things".
           | There is no need to freak out about a few ants in the
           | backyard.
           | 
           | > It's disappointing to see this kind of dismissal on a forum
           | of highly educated people.
           | 
           | Of course. As "highly educated people" we are supposed to
           | circle the wagons and irrationally blow apparent low-effort
           | (again according to the OP) psyops out of proportion because
           | it's an enemy regime. That's after all the primary
           | ideological role of the "highly educated people" (loose
           | source: Chomsky).
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | This is the key to many scams these days - you're not the
         | person being scammed, you're a byproduct or accident.
         | 
         | E.g., all that pointless spam that doesn't even have a way to
         | buy anything whatsoever? Spammers selling services to people
         | who don't know what they're doing.
        
       | whoswho wrote:
       | Is there a Chinese equivalent of HN (niche tech forum, not the Y
       | combinator front)? How do we get access?
        
       | dvfjsdhgfv wrote:
       | Putin's folks have been doing this for decades; I'm surprised
       | China waited for so long.
        
       | wolverine876 wrote:
       | The Internet is an absolute disaster; disinformation campaigns
       | are everywhere, drowning people, with endless horrible
       | consequences. Freedom, peace, prosperity, democracy, human
       | rights, health, etc. are all at risk.
       | 
       | Why are we putting up with it? We really need a solution. At this
       | point, I'd love a walled garden where I know I'd get quality
       | information. It doesn't have to be perfect, but not
       | misinformation or disinformation. I'd love a search engine that
       | restricted itself to quality sources.
       | 
       | Even from a purely immediate self-interest perspective, why are
       | all these intelligent people accepting such a trash product?
        
         | Mountain_Skies wrote:
         | Who do you trust to provide that solution who is above using it
         | to control narratives for their own benefit? And do you think
         | they will forever be trustworthy and/or agree with your world
         | view?
        
           | wolverine876 wrote:
           | It's a theoretical problem, but it's a commonplace practical
           | function. Everything you read was chosen and written by other
           | people. There's no getting around it unless you are doing
           | primary research. I'll have to choose carefully.
           | 
           | For example, if DuckDuckGo offered a 'quality sources'
           | search, I'd pay for it. I don't want to search the entire
           | Internet - that's madness if you think about it. Why are we
           | doing that?
        
         | Dig1t wrote:
         | misinformation is "false or inaccurate information"
         | 
         | Isn't this the same as asking for a source of information that
         | is always correct? Has that ever actually existed in any form?
         | 
         | What about lying by omission?
         | 
         | It seems like we're all freaking out about something that has
         | always been true: people lie, say half-truths, distort facts.
         | It's pretty hard to convey only information that is 100%
         | provably true and also tells a complete picture.
        
           | wolverine876 wrote:
           | > misinformation is "false or inaccurate information" / Isn't
           | this the same as asking for a source of information that is
           | always correct? Has that ever actually existed in any form?
           | 
           | That's really taking that definition (if that's the precise
           | definition) to a theoretical extreme! And then you say your
           | extreme is impossible. Yes, I agree!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-02-07 23:01 UTC)