Conservative Twitter users are in an uproar over draconian new "behavioral filters" which will start hiding tweets that "detract from the conversation," and which CEO Jack Dorsey says are designed to "significantly reduce the ability to game and skew our systems" (less than six months before midterms, we might add).
Twitter will now use thousands of behavioral signals when filtering search, replies, and algorithmic recommendations. If it believes you are trying to game its system, or simply acting like a jerk, it will push your tweets lower down. It’s the biggest update so far in the company’s push to create healthier conversations, an initiative announced by its CEO Jack Dorsey in March.
Among the signals Twitter will use: whether you tweet at large numbers of accounts you don’t follow, how often you’re blocked by people you interact with, whether you created many accounts from a single IP address, and whether your account is closely related to others that have violated its terms of service. -BuzzFeed
“A lot of our past action has been content-based, and we have been shifting more and more toward conduct and behaviors on the system,” Dorsey said in a Monday briefing at the company’s San Francisco headquarters.
The push is meant to get out ahead of problems that might normally result in an abuse report under the existing system. In testing, Twitter said the changes led to an 8% drop in abuse reports on conversations (the discussions that happen in the replies to a tweet) and a 4% drop in abuse reports in search. These drops, the company believes, indicate that something is working.
“Directionally, it does point to probably our biggest impact change,” Dorsey said. “This is a step, but we can see this going quite far.”
lol, Twitter is going to start shadowbanning accounts who even follow/talk to people who violate their terms of service.
— DatNoFact (@datnofact) May 15, 2018
What a brilliant plan. pic.twitter.com/EI0T2J7FVn
Dorsey says he will do a periscope soon about the changes.
Will do a periscope about this soon.
— jack (@jack) May 15, 2018
Our ultimate goal is to encourage more free and open conversation. To do that we need to significantly reduce the ability to game and skew our systems. Looking at behavior, not content, is the best way to do that.https://t.co/r5mhES2riH
So now Twitter is planning to censor any tweets reported "for abuse?"
— Bill Mitchell (@mitchellvii) May 15, 2018
Really?
So armies of #Sorosbots can mass report any Trump supporter "for abuse," and just like that, we're gone?
No check to see if the tweet was actually "abusive," whatever that means?
No. The point of this is to stop such gaming of our systems.
— jack (@jack) May 15, 2018
Sounds great Jack!
Twitter:
— DatNoFact (@datnofact) May 15, 2018
"You get a shadowban, and you get a shadowban, and-" pic.twitter.com/4xgNI1aCSW
Facebook, meanwhile, is beefing up its reporting tools within the Messenger app.
An app update for Messenger includes enhanced reporting tools - allowing mobile users to report harassment or someone who isn't who they say they are (or jerk ex boyfriends). Users can find the new option in the Contact menu for each messenger conversation by tapping on the name of the person inside the chat, scrolling down to the "Something's Wrong" option, and choosing from a list of offenses to report.
“Providing more granular reporting options in Messenger makes it faster and easier to report things for our Community Operations team to review,” write Hadi Michel, Messenger product manager. “They review reports in over 50 languages. This means our community will see issues addressed faster so they can continue to have positive experiences on Messenger.”
One can imagine how much fun High Schoolers and your average Tinder users are going to have with this reporting feature every time they get dumped, doubled-crossed or otherwise made upset.
Comments
Is twitter relevant? I think not...
"Our ultimate goal is to encourage more free and open conversation."
(By censoring the speech of anyone who we deem to be guilty of "bad behavior")
Orwell would be proud.
In reply to Is twitter relevant? I… by Pol Pot
"We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.”
- George Orwell, 1984
Nothing to see here. Move along.
- Judas Sessions
In reply to "Our ultimate goal is to… by bowie28
FLASHBACK: Black Panthers at an ACTIVE polling place dressed in combat fatigues, openly pounding their nightsticks and intimidating profiled voters from entering...
nothing to see here, either.
-AG Eric Holder
Lesson: DOJ is INSTITUTIONALLY CORRUPT.
In reply to Nothing to see here. Move… by macholatte
Stop using Twitter.
In reply to FLASHBACK: Black Panthers… by onewayticket2
Then what, the problem will still persist as it is systemic in our society.
In reply to Stop using Twitter. by tmosley
The problem, as you say, started a while back, when people were forbidden to look into the Holohoax.
In Europe, you get jailed for revealing it was a hoax. So the same mindset is being spread all over to cover other so-called offenses.
In reply to Then what, the problem will… by bobcatz
Jack Dorsey: with a name like that he could have been a successful and sought after pornstar and director, the like of Marc Dorcel, alas dude has chosen the low road and is now a poor billionaire schmuck stuck in the pit of his idiotic decisions.
---
It's okay not to be a Jew.
In reply to The problem, as you say,… by revolla
Wonder if they'll ban the hate speech of this racist asshole: http://variety.com/2018/film/markets-festivals/spike-lee-trump-12028109…
In reply to N by chiburashka
The President, hangers on, and #narcissistic_fags still use twitter. Fortunately, I don't need to go there as new media outlets still monitor it and will relay to me important messages from the President.
In reply to Wonder if they'll ban the… by Bastiat
I am all for calling something Orwellian when people invert the truth completely. But I would prefer we call it what it is. Satanic.
Twitter, Facebook, Google, Reddit, numerous internet forums I have been participating on for close to a decade, ALL are ramping up their censorship, coincidentally at the same time as Israel is committing its latest round of crimes against humanity, and fomenting World War III, with warmongers like Nikki Haley and John Bolton in place, all while a mysterious 'Q Anon' tells us to 'trust the plan'!
LOL
In reply to The President, hangers on,… by King of Ruperts Land
I have been and am currently shadowbanned by little jack at twatter.
But this pedo account is ok and still up and running: @FuckBoiNgLaguna
Lil jack is desperate to shut us up.
His name was Seth Rich
In reply to I am all for calling… by Herd Redirecti…
Yup. There is good and evil.
If Israel gets accepted and feels safe will it stop being such a world prick?
The evil needs to be exorcised from the USA though. Why so much lies and deceit? That cannot be good.
I fear much cleansing with blood will be required.
Someone should throw holy water on Nikki Haley. Stand back though.
In reply to I am all for calling… by Herd Redirecti…
Fuck Twitter.
#GAB
In reply to Wonder if they'll ban the… by Bastiat
It is also OK not to be a fucking simpleton dipshit, asshole.
In reply to N by chiburashka
A new term for a cunt.
A Dorsey.
In reply to It is also OK not to be a… by City_Of_Champyinz
Guilt by association sounds like a title one FISA warrant.
In reply to A new term for a cunt. A… by CuttingEdge
An alternative definition of the word "Twitter" is the anatomical space on the female body that exists between the vaginal and anal orifices.
Figure it out.
In reply to A new term for a cunt. A… by CuttingEdge
Ike called you and your ilk a nasty name, revolla:
“Get it all on record now - get the films - get the witnesses -because somewhere down the road of history some bastard will get up and say that this never happened.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower
In reply to The problem, as you say,… by revolla
Then what? Talk to people ... like we all used to for hundreds and thousands of years before social media. Act as if your goal was to make them make it illegal not to communicate in a digital format where what was said and by whom can't be filed away permanently and then hauled out at any time to destroy you.
In reply to Then what, the problem will… by bobcatz
They've been doing this for years.
They're just being open about it now.
In reply to Stop using Twitter. by tmosley
Gee, wonder where Jack Dorsey lives? Does he have family? His top execs? How about them? Will he be keeping armed guards when the collapse comes? I wonder.
In reply to They've been doing this for… by Ghost of Porky
Yup, they most certainly have. I first realized I was shadow banned some time around 7 years ago. I stopped using twitter back then. This is in no way a new practice, it is however becoming the new normal.
In reply to They've been doing this for… by Ghost of Porky
I don't. But millions DO under the assumption that it's an accurate window on public sentiment.
it is not.
In reply to Stop using Twitter. by tmosley
As free markets do, alternatives are being created. Check out this one. I hope it takes FaceFuck down to zero.
https://mewe.com/
In reply to Stop using Twitter. by tmosley
Alternatives don't make the underlying problem go away, which is that when the "public square" is privately owned, your freedom of speech at the mercy of the owners and their unilateral terms of service.
In reply to As free markets do,… by boattrash
Maybe I'm just a bit "thick-headed" this morning, but I could stand some clarification on that one...
In reply to Alternatives don't make the… by rf80412
I get the concern, but I do see it a bit differently:
In a truly public space, everyone owns it, which means that nobody owns it. Imagine a public toilet that no one has an obligation to clean - a public square would end up in the same condition unless you had a small group of people who all recognize the same moral duties to the public space. Its possible, but not on a large scale.
In reality, "public" has been redefined to "government owned," which means that all decisions about a public space are political by nature. If that meant shutting up some people for the sake of some influential group... well, we've all heard about "hate speech" laws.
In a privately owned space, esp. a privately owned space where you are a non-paying guest, it is understood that the owners own the place, they make the rules, and you can abide or leave. Facebook and Twitter may have marketed themselves as a platform for everybody, but experience has shown that this is impossible. At some point, you would have malcontents that are running users off, and for that reason alone you would have to kick people. However, it might be that their definition of "malcontent" isn't the same as yours.
IMO, the underlying problem is not "the public square being privately owned." I would describe it more as "I suddenly realized that Amazon is not the only place to do business on the Internet or on the planet, and I'm going to start checking out the other options."
In reply to Alternatives don't make the… by rf80412
FWIW, classical “liberals” would also be in an “uproar” over any effort to censor speech. But I don’t think these type of liberals exist anymore.
In reply to Stop using Twitter. by tmosley
There is some outrage, but you could say it has been shadowbanned.
In reply to FWIW, classical “liberals”… by Give Me Some Truth
Remember it .. the polling station that had been segregated of to be blacks only allowed to vote.
In reply to FLASHBACK: Black Panthers… by onewayticket2
As simple as that, they cannot have that the people are slowly waking up. This is just the beginning. At you tube they start to ban a lot channels, that criticized our system of financial fraud, pedophiles and corruption. It seems more and more like at the end of the USSR. I remember how we were laughing at their press and lies. I never thought we will end up the same. Fuck the Rockefellers and Rothschilds
In reply to Nothing to see here. Move… by macholatte
The citizens of the Soviet Union knew that their media was lying.
In reality it was probably lying less than our legacy media does.
Here, majority of people believe what they read or hear from the infotainment propaganda machine.
In reply to As simple as that, they… by Rapunzal
That's the whole point. And they also had access to Western media which, bad and all as it was/is, did offer an alternative perspective. Today TPTB have almost full spectrum control.
In reply to The citizens of the Soviet… by BarkingCat
Its is the same in China. Something that surprises me about Americans is how trusting we are, collectively speaking, in our institutions. I also have to say that I've never seen things like "Back the Blue" anywhere else in the world I've been either.
The sooner we (collectively) gain a healthy skepticism, the better.
In reply to The citizens of the Soviet… by BarkingCat
Yeah, it's strange how all these polls show that only about 20% of people trust the MSM, and yet anytime they need validation for their point of view, liberals come running with an article from the MSM they supposedly don't trust much more than anyone else does.
In reply to The citizens of the Soviet… by BarkingCat
In this case, lies, damned lies, and statistics are involved. "MSM" means different things depending on how you phrase the question. For example, I remember one conservative who said "I hate the liberal media - that's why I only watch Fox News!" In the same vein are liberals who hate TV media but love NPR.
In reply to Yeah, it's strange how all… by jin187
Dorsey: "Our ultimate goal is to encourage more free and open conversation"
Double Speak at it's finest...
In reply to Nothing to see here. Move… by macholatte
Yes. Free speech through censorship!
In reply to Dorsey: "Our ultimate goal… by Yellow_Snow
Twitter exists to troll.
If they successfully prevent that, they'll have successfully destroyed their platform.
In reply to "Our ultimate goal is to… by bowie28
Correct. And you nailed the basics of this issue.
These are all private platforms. Somebody owns them. They provide them for "free," which means they're making money some other way. Selling the information of everyone who uses the platform, mainly. And the owners are responsible for what happens on their platform.
The internet is still in its childhood. It's no longer the wild-and-wooly toddler it was, but it's far from reaching its developed form. As a tantrum-throwing toddler, it's creating highly annoying problems which may or may not be serious. Right now the owners of these platforms are dealing with problems caused by anonymous bullies and fraudsters. Anything that will be effective in cleaning up discourse will inconvenience well-meaning individuals. The internet as it currently operates has been a godsend for charlatans, demagogues, grifters and social vandals. It's also been great for people of good intentions, but the downsides are serious.
It's hard to foresee the next step. I imagine there will be a lot more user controls to filter out the sewage, making it user-optional to see the trolls and vandals. Those of us who enjoy the brutal language can still see it. Getting rid of some of the more tiresome grifters wouldn't bother me much.
Every other new medium has gone through this process, including print and broadcast.
In reply to Twitter exists to troll. If… by css1971
Good post. If a bakery can refuse service to anyone they want, why can't Twitter (a private company) establish rules? Disgruntled users (trolls?) are free to move elsewhere ....
In reply to Correct. And you nailed the… by swmnguy
My own thought is that the open source community could take something like Minds.com, but make it more straightforward to create your own version of it. An app or personal page could navigate every platform you are plugged into, and you could join or leave platforms at will.
Think of this type of social media as a bar street. Each bar has a different theme, aimed at different people, and you come or go as you wish. Also, you can have a different identity at each location, so that when your employer asks about your social media presence, you don't have to worry about your public and semi-private (nothing on social media is private) life being on the same profile.
In reply to Correct. And you nailed the… by swmnguy
"Our ultimate goal is to encourage more free and open conversation."
Isn't that along the same line as it was the Palestinians fault for being in the path of our bullets?
In reply to "Our ultimate goal is to… by bowie28
Uh...stop using Twitter?
In reply to "Our ultimate goal is to… by bowie28
It’s long been obvious to me that twitter is willing and eager to “play ball” with Big Brother. The sad irony is that this platform could be used to fight Big Brother.
They too have been co-opted.
In reply to "Our ultimate goal is to… by bowie28
They have a plan to eliminate all the Hate Truth out there...
In reply to "Our ultimate goal is to… by bowie28
Fuck that guy.
If you don't have free speech, you don't have freedom.
In reply to Is twitter relevant? I… by Pol Pot
The CEO has made a bargain with the Devil. He has clearly decided that if he doesn’t play ball with Big Brother, there will be no Twitter. Facebook, Google and many others have reached the same conclusion.
Instead of allowing brave contrarians a great potential platform to “speak truth to power,” they instead suck-up to and acquiesce to The Powers that Be.
Twitter could have been a real threat to Big Brother. Instead they join forces with Big Brother, all in a bid to stay in business and make money by agreeing to play ball and promote the boss’s agenda.
In reply to Dorsey? Fuck that guy. by Killtruck
Expecting Facebook, Twitter or whatever to facilitate free speech is as naive as expecting a custom cell phone cover to give someone personality.
Sorry, but a web service is a corporate product. It is a piece of software running on servers, maintained by system administrators, coded by programmers and financed by investors. Where does "free speech" fit into all of this? There is no such thing as the right to spread your message though the use of someone else's infrastructure. That's not what free speech is.
You want free speech - don't expect someone else's platform to facilitate your desires. Buy a domain, code a web page and speak anything your mind desires. Make videos, encode them, upload them. Pay for hardware, pay for space, pay for traffic.
Now if someone comes along and decides to take all of that away from you, then we're talking infringement upon your personal rights, and if you're lucky to live in a country where free speech is respected, you can fight back.
Corporate products are not free. They are designed to appeal to people who are willing to lie to themselves.
In reply to Dorsey? Fuck that guy. by Killtruck
Pagination