This folder shows effects, risks, and origins around this independent Public Research Study on the operations harming Amber Heard online. Multiple private companies and services in layers are clearly being used against Amber Heard to this extreme of volume.
Social effects clearly show in these files and should be correlated to the data science. Mitigate the effects in your own case studies.
Not only did we do this study thinking we can try to save a life, but we can also use this study to help other victims.
Anyone with enough motive and resources can obtain these technologies to harm someone today, even though usually studies on operations with bots are in the public rather than private sector. As these services and experiences of harm increase, so do the volumes and capabilities from these operations.
- See "Other Cases Private Sector" under OSINT Private Sector Operations to see some growing examples of other women, often actresses, models, partners of figures, and socialites due to the similar language, high motives, and strategies, harmed from online and in-person operations.
- Notice initial files on Private Sector Disinformation Operations from Recorded Future and Devumi bots - where public figures had millions of false followers.
Use this "Study Case - Effects, Risks, Origins" folder to understand how to connect social network analysis, data analysis, and the warning signs of a situation with timelines, suspicious traits, and activities to create cases.
- Combined with the mathmatical and statistical anomalies, we can connect it to then the traits, origins, and signs of disinformation operations and coercive control.
- Through this folder, there can be an understanding of how multiple layers and companies are used in the private sector for social media and online, escalating and originating to in-person disinformation/influence operations. Athough online operations can be difficult to catch, leads can be found to the predictable human sources.
- We provide this research for further benefit without needing to start from scratch.
It's automated, and 2021 to present was high volume as well, effectively destroying Amber Heard. The Data Void on her was exploited, where there were comparatively low amounts of data about her until these operations, effectively flooding it.
- It's our interpretation that social media companies need to be encouraged through trusted sources to remove the operations, and that the high volume of abuse, coordination, bots, and influence operations to destroy Amber Heard will never end without connecting cybersecurity, advocacy, data science, 3rd parties, decision-makers, and social network analysis together.
We circle back to this after our analysis of 6 social media platforms, of which demonstrate bot activities and high threats. We further left this out until more completion due to the issues that could have harmed the data scientists doing their work.
- However, we provided articles for understanding for the researchers to see the importance of studying a real-life case example.
It needs to be investigated by proper parties and stopped or the crimes will continue to threaten her life, as well as the many other lives these companies and sevices ravage.
Far more can be interpreted from these folders and files. We are still researching, looking for reverse engineering of origins.
- To understand the devestating effect of disinformation/influence operations, see the "Amber Heard Book Background Study & Bots Story Case" file to see what she used to represent, her causes, image, humanitarianism, as well as the situation now where you cannot see that anymore, since she's been destroyed and threatened.
- Note - The description of the summary changes due to trying to confront, investigate, and interfere with the influence operation 2020/2021 onward.
This case example and study can be used with its texts for other studies on disinformation/influence, bots, domestic abuse, and private sector operations against women and those around them, often including their partners, businesses, nonprofits, and acquaintances.
Multiple private companies and services in layers are clearly being used against Amber Heard to this extreme of volume.
The motivations behind these operations often come from the coercive control to take down these women, their witnesses, and their support for decades, only now moved mostly online to avoid data analysis and oversight. The higher skill, natural language, and volume stems from the amounts of funds, specialties, and layers of companies used.
- E.g., attacking the partners of these figures has been happening for decades, e.g, with 'fixers,' but not publicly researched before. It truly requires gamifying and deflecting with your own data, analysis, intelligence, and power. It can ruin, destroy, and destruct.
- At higher income levels, private security can be used against women in domestic abuse. At any level, software and accounts can be used against women.
- For the first time, we're confronting these issues harming these types of women/targets and establishing precedents of technologies which can be used. We can save lives by causing chain reactions of finally caring about these situations to prevent harms earlier.
-
We see traits of private sector manipulation with Sports accounts, fake detectives, fake devils/monsters, and fake agencies. Intimidation with state is a decoy from the multiple layers of private services.
-
Preliminary research was conducted on the risks by asking multiple organizations in summer of 2021. IOSI.global - a global intelligence and security agency with a network of over 40K - called it a "high risk" case and saw money-laundering investigations of Depp's people. They said high levels of cyber crime are around Amber Heard's accounts. We continued despite risks and many researchers did so knowing that it's a deadly case study to instead help life.
- The importance of Threat Analysis and connecting it to cybercrime, cybersecurity is to show the urgency to remove the operations. As shown, it's difficult for social media companies to remove operations unless they're internally notified. Our study was fragile at first. It no longer is with high data and analysis amounts, but it's still fragile to get them to know to notify to finally remove it. -
In November 2018, an account is against Amber Heard's "sweet, loving girl" image and attacks her, Warner Bros, others. It claims bots promote her beauty. Then it currently today is a mentions-bot.
- In Subjective Preliminary Claims, there's an ex-staff partner leaking in March/April 2019 which not only said the operations were pre-planned for years, but numerous other timeline issues showing in AH's exhibit files in 2022.
- YouTube is the most obvious in many ways. E.g., a Michael Keaton bot sounding like JD named channels praise with exact same texts thousands of times, which shows social media community building companies.
If we can train scientists to care about Amber Heard, they can train in the same way against these women to claim anything positive about Amber Heard somehow harms his image, to effectively destroy any true depictions of her or her with other men, e.g., Never Back Down and her sweet image, known by WB when first hiring her.
-
The Abusive Accounts, Threats, and Images folder shows graphic imagery and danger in these online operations. Folders are there with preliminary screenshots and data on like-bots - accounts only used to 'like' without any statuses, mentions-bots, and violent threat escalations.
-
"Adapt and Survive" Amber Heard on YouTube - This simulation in December 2020 was too outrageous, threatening, voluminous of Hundreds of Thousands of accounts, and obvious. It immediately led to strong dedication to doing this study thoroughly and reporting. However, an AI Lead thought that others must be advocating for Amber Heard which was not true. The psy-op of operations online is intense.
Adapt and Survive then claiming with switching texts of 'a/the' of 'not a victim' is clearly to threaten her with inability to survive, but, we had to go in and find the timings and data ourselves.
The low share counts of this video further shows that it's a bot simulation.
A year after reporting the video, YouTube removed dislikes on their entire platform. The comments remain even today, and even a year later, 'dislike' was still being posted. -
InformationTracer using CrowdTangle API and showing the share counts of the Anti-Amber Heard in Aquaman Petition did not match their interactions and share counts with the number of signatures it was obtaining.
In fact, our data from an ex-google research intern from the GraphQL endpoint shows nearly 5,000 comments still created on that petition up to a year after Change.org removed the comments page. When logging in, accounts can still comment when signing which is unusual for people's lack of patience.
From this observation, Si Aguilara from the Change.org comments on the large petition and SiActually from the NLU files of deleted Twitter accounts were looked into.... then we see the same texts from a 2015 and 2016 accounts which slight variations, similar to the "Adapt and Survive" simulation.- Amber Heard showed up to 14 violent incidents in the cases with torture, pain and suffering. It is very dangerous to continue harming the victim by making them re-live the pain they experienced over and over again through online operations that are inescapable. "Survival" becomes difficult and requires resilience.
Most people and women who die from online cyberabuse do so at far less volume and time. From the perspective of being hired once as as a content review agent to Facebook's civic division on AI/ML training (see classaction lawsuit), it requires looking at it in the 3rd person and dissociating.
It's very important to stop the abuse, and we can use this case example to reduce the threshold. Files here show distress signals and harms. She's been trivialized by insider threats as well.
- Amber Heard showed up to 14 violent incidents in the cases with torture, pain and suffering. It is very dangerous to continue harming the victim by making them re-live the pain they experienced over and over again through online operations that are inescapable. "Survival" becomes difficult and requires resilience.
-
Using 'Timeline Comparisons - Events,' it can be seen that the operations online do not correlate correctly to events, that the data continues despite in-person activities, with the exception that threat analysis clearly shows correlation. There is abuse of process with the courtcases and some leaks.
Try to correlate the intensity of the data and traits to how it changes in-person to be more restrictive, isolated, and difficult.
In Data Science, Social Network Analysis, and Technology/Social Media Companies in general, there is a high burden of evidence. They wanted verifiable data and analysis of high volume, which we obtained. However, there are also the issues of responsibility and the lack of advocacy for Amber Heard's wellbeing online.
When we're trying to analyze with an in-progress influence operation at the same time, it can be highly stressful and challenging.
Although reporters in early 2020 were looking and interested in interviewing, there was no data analysis or investigations at that point. Secondly, reporters over then the 3-4 years of operations now do not report on Amber Heard or ask her supporters.
- By moving it online, stopping investigative reporters and forensic new research, using insider threats, and only escalating to send 'fixers' to be interviewed when sensing reporters or media contacts - which we tested - it moves previously reported operations into a harder space, requiring adaptation.
One of our articles shows mainly reporting on in-person agents sent - "The film executive hired private investigators, including ex-Mossad agents, to track actresses and journalists" - without going into the technology thoroughly. - Although in-person handfuls of suspicious accounts are sent (see OSINT_data_suspicious accounts), online studies are fragile without collections and analysis. They're also fragile if the victim doesn't have proper advocacy for them and they're given false information. A new modus operendi is to use insider threats early and crush high level research without thinking there would be any 3rd parties or independent researchers. Along with this is the constant online barrage and abuse of process. That effectively 'catches and kills' reporters and ruins the pitch.
- However, if reviewing Hollywood fixers or seeing sources from rivals stopping them, we can see softwares used even decades ago. The issues attacking these women are essentially repeating each generation, unfortuneately without this generation forwarned, or it referenced.
There is a 'Studying Technologies' folder explaining more about how the technology behind this works, and initial (not focused on maliciousness, disinformation) initial social network graph files that are available for anyone.
- It's difficult to be the first to establish a precedence, but it's thrilling too.
Can you think of any services currently that stop, prevent, or mitigate these types of situations for profiles similar to this?
We did this study independently and had to. With numerous insider threats and the difficulty of studying private sector vs the norms of research, we had to study this globally and with agility.
Now, we can use this study for other examples, but we are not yet complete.