I don't think I got it right. They are investing
money, so does that actually mean 'buying influence'? I assume they are spending the amount for the workforce.
... respond "quickly and forcefully to negative attacks and false narratives found online," in addition to thanking major supporters and "committed superdelegates" directly.
Hillary Clinton's supporters appear to be quieter ... that they [the supporters] were often afraid to speak up about their choice because they fear harassment.
The task force says it will attempt to sway the internet's legion of Sanders supporters to Hillary's side as the election draws closer.
It is just campaigning via social media, and they claim that they are trying to counter the negatives. Unless they use the power to start spreading false information (which we won't know) or start turning their so-called 'counter arguments' into hate speech, we can't rate the website for any negative reason. A warning comment can be left in the scorecard.
The thing is, we've never seen much of campaigning on the Social Media. The supporters are smart enough to take it to the Internet, and start getting more closer to the public. Let's not forget that even Sanders has invested money in the Social Media campaigning.
I assume we wait until one of the WOT members finds few of the 'workforce members' posting hate speech, to actually rate the website negatively. And I guess, if we rate the website negatively, they will be creating fake accounts to post on the scorecard.
Because, it is a part of 'countering negatives', you know.