And you know it's a multimillion dollar campaign how?

Anyway, knowing that no one is being paid to post on Twoplustwo.com is simply common logic. Again just think about what this would entail. If you were designing a PR campaign that involved hiring people to post on which sites would you target? Probably you'd devote a lot of resources the main British, Italian, and American news sites, then you'd obviously have wikipidea, Reddit.com, facebook, Twitter, and so on. Anyway, I'm sure you agree that twoplustwo would be somewhere way down the list, maybe on the same level as fishing forums, gay hookup sites, and the like. To cast a wide enough net to encompass all these sites and pay someone to respond to every single post would run into the tens of thousands of dollars a month (and remember, the case has been going on for over 7 years). And for what payoff? How would swaying the opinion of the poker community, or any other niche online community, influence the outcome of the case in any way, let alone be important enough to justify the enormous investment of resources it would require?

that there is a multimillion dollar campaign has been linked in this thread a number of times. I don't think AK even disputes the amount paid (or owed) to the PR firm.

Just pull your head out already.

I think you forget that in January 2014, Poker Reference linked to an Amanda Knox shill site (actual shills, not just a bone head poster like you) and they identified THIS thread, in THIS forum. About 7 or 8 shill accounts started posting within hours forcing the moderator to ban them.

Also 2+2 is a high traffic site that happens to have a thread on the AK case. That anyone would target this site prior to that would not make sense, but coming after the discussion had proven to have legs makes sense.

How many other unbiased sites have a thread of this volume on the AK case? I am sure it is not that many. However, I guess it is beyond your pea - brain to realize a P.R. campaign would not blanket sites that have nobody discussing the case - like the gay porn sites you talk about. I assume you are correct that this case is not being discussed on those sites. So, we don't need to discuss sites that do not discuss this case when comparing it to 2p2 which does.

As I stated before, why are you still posting here? I am not joking: You are exceptionally dimwitted and you add nothing to the thread.

Even in your scenario, you'd still have to pay someone to monitor thousands of sites, including fishing forums, gay porn sites, and so on to see if a thread appeared and have a team of posters on-call to respond if one did. That's not cheap.

How many newspapers have run articles on the case? How many of those have comment sections? It's not a small number.

And again, what's the payoff from doing this? Their objective was to get the Italian court to make the correct ruling of not guilty. How would influencing the opinion of the online poker community contribute to that?

I think I already responded to your allegations of being dimwitted, but just for a laugh I'll have another go: "No you are!" Pretty good comeback there, eh? I thought of that one myself, by the way.

lkasigh, you are really grasping at straws here; and completely failing. like, you're not even trying to make a coherent argument. just throwing **** against the wall and hoping something sticks. i'm embarrassed for you, dude.

no, their objective was to sway public opinion with lies and misinformation. and what better place to do that than one of the highest trafficked areas discussing the case, on the internet? it's funny you claim common logic above, yet you have none. sigh

Dude, I work in the field. I know how much these things cost. The company that I work for pays a couple of thousand dollars a month to monitor conventional media (newspapers, TV, radio) for articles relating to our industry. That's for a niche industry with a relatively low level of coverage. And we don't monitor the comments sections of every article, or every forum and subforum on every niche site, or every crackpot's facebook, or twitter, or youtube account - that's another order of magnitude in terms of cost. To do that AND deploy people to actively reply to every post would easily run into the millions of dollars a year. The Russian government has been accused of running this type of campaign over the situation in Ukraine - I could believe that there is truth to these allegations since they have the resources to pull it off some real incentive to manage public opinion. The Knox and Sollecito families have neither the resources to do it, nor any conceivable motivation.

Sway public opinion to what end? The case is being decided by judges in Italy. How would swaying opinions on an American poker site contribute to influencing the Italian judges' decision?

How is this a high-traffic area discussing the case? This thread has about a million views over 7 years. How many unique viewers do you think that represents? I'd be surprised if it reached into the 5 figures. Why would anyone go to that much effort to reach a few thousand people a year? If they cared that much about the poker community's opinion, why not just buy a banner ad on Twoplustwo and offer a deposit bonus on Pokerstars for liking the Friends of Amanda facebook page? It would be cheaper and more effective, no?

yeah, a corn field

you work in PR but don't understand how public opinion can change the outcome of events, even in other countries? you must be really good at your job!

I understand how public opinion can influence the outcome of events.

I don't understand how anyone can seriously believe that the opinion of the English-speaking poker playing community would influence the outcome of a murder trial in Italy.

I work in the energy industry. I'm pretty sure if I went to my boss suggesting that we pay a couple of million dollars a year to monitor every single forum on the Internet for threads relating to energy generation and hire an army of PR people to respond to each post with our party line his response would be "you're fired." Well, first he would likely burst out laughing, which is what any reasonable person would do when they hear your and the other guilters' insane theories about the Knox/ Sollecito case.

yeah, it's really hard to Google "Amanda Knox" and find out what sites have discussion of the case.

If your boss read your posts you'd be fired.

If you Google her name you get thousands upon thousands of articles about her case. Are you really going to pay someone to monitor the comments sections of each and every one? And the comments to every youtube video on the case? And every forum with a thread on the case?

Of course it's possible to do it, but it would be insanely expensive and have absolutely no impact on the outcome of her criminal case.

I honestly have no idea what the PR effort consisted of but I don't view it as nefarious or confusing in any way. Who wouldn't do everything they could to bring attention to the fact that their child was wrongly convicted of murder? At the end of the day it's the evidence in this case that tells the story and no amount of PR can change what the evidence is. Guede did it. End of story.

The PR campaign is hilarious. Some of you really think that people coming to this thread is anything more then people very interested in the case, learning about this thread and then coming here are stupid.

I mean, here we/you are all talking about it for years now, and yet none of these people assign the fact that maybe these were just people coming to this forum since they are interested in the case, just like you are, regardless if they were formed or talking about us here on another pro-Knox forum. Plenty of "guilters" have found their way here somehow and likely talked about this thread on other forums, but funny how that doesn't matter when they join and they aren't part of some stupid conspiracy.

The PR campaign was hired because Amanda was getting trashed in the papers and tabloids in Italy and UK alike, and the family was naive and willing to talk to any and everyone trying to clear Amanda's name in the beginning and had no idea wtf they were doing and thought they were helping. They weren't, and had to read the next day a journalist printing lies or out of context quotes they had given them which trashed their daughter as a slut/whore/murderer/whatever....all before a trial was done.

Since public opinion matters heavily in Italy regarding a trial like this based on their system, it was important to contain it as much as possible so the PR firm handled and set up all interviews with journalists, and reached out to any contacts they had in the media.

I don't blame them considering all the crap that was being printed over there about Satanic rituals, she-devil who orchestrated murders, Amanda showered in a pool of blood look at this photo, sex orgies with drugs and alcohol, sex on a trains, Amanda throwing parties which turn into riots and threw rocks at police before leaving the states etc.

Its embarrassing how stupid some of you people are to not get the bigger picture, really.

Nothing for nothing, but there are a ton of people accused of murder and I can't really think of any other examples of PR firms attempting to sway public opinion via the Internet before. Not saying it hasn't happened, here is another example of saying something is common that simply isn't.

What would be considered common is the doing anything for your child who is wrongly accused of murder, which is what 239 was alluding to. Congratulations on not being smart enough to understand that.

The P.R. campaign had been on the ground from the start. I have no idea why you need to twist the facts about it. It is what it is, but AK supporters getting so defensive over it is a strange take.

As far as the "shill" debate goes - do me a favor and find me ONE thread on this site besides this one where people just jump in from nowhere and post exclusively in that thread.

I will save you the time - zero (well, perhaps the werewolf thread in POG?).

You are purposely blind to P.R.'s posting of an AK message board identifying this thread and calling for "AK supporters" (shills) to get involved. If you believe the large import of AK supporters within hours of that post is a coincidence, then that speaks volumes about your bias. I am sure you recall because you were one of the accounts that was swept up in the mass bannings that came after.

You were posting under PFunk and were banned. You came back here as HiJack.

Anyhow, carry on with your "arguments" here, they are very amusing especially when they can be checked against hard facts (of which you seem completely unaware).

My belief is that if a person has to lie to win a debate, they know their side is wrong. Enough said.

How would Knox's parents know Amanda was falsely accused of murder?

They were not there. They were only going by what Amanda told them.

Of course, Amanda told her mother enough in her taped phone call that mom knew AK did it. Mom had to correct Amanda because she slipped up.

From the facts, the parents were not protecting their child from being wrongfully convicted, they were trying to prevent their child from being convicted.

There are maybe 2 or 3 other cases in history that have achieved anything close to this level of media attention, so who's to say whether hiring a PR firm is a common tactic in such cases? Certainly OJ Simpson did have people on his payroll handling media.

And there are plenty of Internet sites devoted to justice for the wrongfully convicted.

Lol.

Keep digging. I'll throw you a shovel to make it easier.

With the help of others. Any idea who they could be?

lol reading is fundamental

Right. You said that hiring a PR firm is not typical for people involved in a murder case. But this case is far from typical in terms of the amount of media attention it received.

Most murder cases don't attract significant international media attention that would make the services of a PR firm useful. Most murder accused don't have the resources to engage PR firms anyway.

What 239 said is that it is typical for parents to do whatever they can to help their children. Ergo, if your child is caught up in an atypical murder case where a PR firm could provide useful services, and you have the resources to engage one, it would absolutely be typical behaviour to do so.

Oski seems to think people coming from another message board here = they worked for a PR campaign.

Newflash: This would not be the first time in history people have organized on behalf of a person or cause on their own simply for believing in something, which is exactly what was going on. Many "guilters" have come from other sites to discuss this topic all the same, regardless if they organized cohesively and said "hey, lets go join that discussion".

On top of this type of terrible deduction you all make about the situation, a lot of you seem to think these are people who really think/know she is guilty and are knowingly/willingly lying and trying to prove she was innocent.

Really, this is just not how intelligent/sane/rational people think so ultimately I just feel sorry for you.