Did Fake Facebook Likes Help Free Tom Randall?
The “Free Tom Randall” page on Facebook collected 25,000 likes the first week it was up.
Supposedly, these were “organic”…meaning real people had really chosen to like the page.
Then, according to this source, something “interesting” happened…
“Without warning and apparently for no reason, Likes started happening again – even faster than before, about 20 per MINUTE. But this time, in looking at a majority of the new profiles, they had no substance to them – very few updates, little to no history, just a pro-pic, a cover pic, a few more photos, and a few recent updates. However, these profiles had THOUSANDS of Page Likes and were predominantly from Turkey (approx 30,000) plus Azerbijan and Georgia, the country. Fortunately, one of our admin’s is a techie and created a bot to eat what we think were many tens of thousands of fake Likes – seriously.”
“Facebook then told us that someone “may have” paid for Likes to the page. We didn’t, but someone else might have?”
Now, that’s a good question…maybe we have clues to the answer.
Lenz-Heiselman and Coffey are seen interacting on Twitter with Lenz-Heiselman taking an activist position on behalf of Randall.
Let’s follow the Twitter trail.
On Jan 14-15, Lori and Joe converse…and Biscuit Media engages as well.
On Jan 19th, The “Free Tom Randall” Facebook page has 20,000 likes…
From there the page ended up with over 65,000 likes, even after many were deleted as fraudulent by the friend of the ministry.
Why does this matter?
I’ll let one of the whistleblowers explain it.
” The huge number of likes was an influence on celebrities and political figures asked to intervene. Although Tom’s charges were quite minor compared to the actual accused perpetrators of child abuse, he was allowed to leave the country without trial and the abusers granted bail in a routinely non-bailable situation. Further there were no follow-up arrests of at least two other former staff accused of abuse by the young people themselves. Yes social media has power.”
This is dishonest and unethical no matter who did it.
To dishonestly influence the public in a case where children have been abused is the very definition of corruption and sin.
The questions never end in this case and no answers have been forthcoming.
We need more voices, asking loudly.