[M T]

One can think of "bots" as the message they promote (or suppress in the case of a denial of service attack), or as the service that provides the mechanism of promoting that message (perhaps for a price, or for a particular purpose).

As a message, bots aren't just commerce.  They can be used for purposes for/against your most loved/despised ideal or government.

As a service, bots aren't always just commerce.  For instance, it is alleged that some nation-states maintain or support bot nets.

I do agree that one of the dangers of bots is the anonymous, or even forged, multiple identities.   Democracy is built upon each person having a vote.  A misrepresentation of the number of supporters/detractors for a position has a potential to subvert the democratic process.

I do not consider bots to be like megaphones.  A megaphone has one person speaking into it.  Nor do I consider them like the pages of the NYT, which is also attributed to a particular entity.

[M T]

One can think of "bots" as the message they promote (or suppress in the case of a denial of service attack), or as the service that provides the mechanism of promoting that message (perhaps for a price, or for a particular purpose).

As a message, bots aren't just commerce.  They can be used for purposes for/against your most loved/despised ideal or government.

As a service, bots aren't always just commerce.  For instance, it is alleged that some nation-states maintain or support bot nets.

I do agree that one of the dangers of bots is the anonymous, or even forged, multiple identities.   Democracy is built upon each person having a vote.  A misrepresentation of the number of supporters/detractors for a position has a potential to subvert the democratic process.

I do not consider bots to be like megaphones.  A megaphone has one person speaking into it.  Nor do I consider them like the pages of the NYT, which is also attributed to a particular entity.