Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: Censorship, Bias & Political Correctness on Twitter

  1. #11
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Nachtengel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Online
    1 Day Ago @ 01:45 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Gender
    Posts
    6,364
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    200
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,159
    Thanked in
    670 Posts
    Purported Internal Screenshots Reveal Twitter Has a ‘Search Blacklist’ and ‘Trends Blacklist’

    Twitter has “search blacklist” and “trends blacklist” tags on accounts, according to a purported image of an internal tool used by employees to moderate users, released via the blockbuster hack of prominent individuals yesterday.

    Hackers gained access to a Twitter employee’s account yesterday, reportedly bribing the employee $2,000 for his account according to a report by Vice. The employee account was then used to gain posting access to the accounts of a number of prominent individuals, including Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Michael Bloomberg, Elon Musk, Kanye West, and others. The accounts were then used to push a Bitcoin scam on their followers.

    A Twitter spokesperson confirmed that the hack was a result of “a coordinated social engineering attack by people who successfully targeted some of our employees with access to internal systems and tools.”

    Vice was able to obtain a screenshot of the internal tool used by the compromised Twitter employee’s account to access the users’ profiles. The console includes two tags that can apparently be applied to user accounts, “search blacklist” and “trends blacklist.”

    Twitter has yet to publicly acknowledge the existence of this console, despite the fact that it has been leaked by hackers. Nor has it responded to Breitbart News’ request for an explanation as to what the search and trends blacklists are, what their function is, and what accounts they have been applied to.

    If the tags are applied to users to suppress their content and keep their tweets from appearing, or appearing prominently in trends and search, it would appear to be yet another contradiction of the company’s longstanding claim that it does not “shadowban” — or covertly suppress — its users.

    However, in a comment, a Twitter spokesman said “we’ve always been clear that not all tweets or accounts can appear in trends or search.”

    The hack also reveals that Twitter employees have the ability to access the accounts of world leaders and post on their behalf. Twitter has not explained how many employees have this power.

    In 2017, a low-level Twitter employee was able to temporarily delete the account of President Donald Trump, an action that was widely celebrated by the mainstream media, although the former employee later said that it was a mistake.
    https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/...nds-blacklist/

  2. #12
    Senior Member Verđandi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 12th, 2018 @ 02:42 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Country
    Luxembourg Luxembourg
    Location
    Asgĺrd
    Gender
    Age
    36
    Family
    Two sisters
    Occupation
    Wyrd-weaver
    Posts
    3,274
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    386
    Thanked in
    253 Posts

    Twitter surveys users on their ethnicity when it warns them for wrongthink

    Combating so-called “hate speech” seems to have become a huge priority for social media platforms these days. In an Orwellian fashion, Twitter has started testing a feature that will notify users when they use any language that Twitter thinks they should think twice on.

    “When things get heated, you may say things you don’t mean. To let you rethink a reply, we’re running a limited experiment on iOS with a prompt that gives you the option to revise your reply before it’s published if it uses language that could be harmful,” said Twitter Support back when they announced the new feature.

    Here’s how this feature works: Whenever users type a reply and hit the send button, Twitter will quickly analyse the reply and look for phrases or words that were frequently reported in the past and would then generate a notification accordingly. If a reply does contain language that is considered “harmful” to the company, users would be asked to reconsider their tweet reply.

    While Twitter subtly refers to this as asking users to “rethink” their replies, it seems more like an effort to heavily moderate speech across the platform. With such practices in place, it isn’t an exaggeration if people would become even more closeted when it comes to expressing their views online.







    It’s been a few months since users started getting this dubious notification when they post a tweet that Twitter wants to correct their thinking on and Twitter has now annoyed users further by surveying them on their ethnicity when they make a statement that Twitter finds problematic.

    Twitter user @BadCrippIe shared what Twitter asked her when she tried to post a tweet Twitter objected to.

    For a long time now, Twitter has been pressured to address “hate speech.” A number of users as well as Twitter’s algorithm regularly flag posts across the platform. Having said that, it is worth noting that what’s deemed offensive by some may not be deemed offensive by all. What’s more, even technology can sometimes prematurely flag a reply as hate speech due to the lack of the ability to comprehend subtle nuances in human speech.

    Sunita Saligram, the global head of site policy for trust and safety at Twitter, said that the new rules were implemented to prevent people from being hateful on the platform but to not control repeat offenders from spreading hate speech.

    While some of Twitter’s more sensitive users will think this is a foot in the right direction, others feel it’s too intrusive and becoming rather sinister.

    Red Ice

  3. #13
    Senior Member Verđandi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 12th, 2018 @ 02:42 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Country
    Luxembourg Luxembourg
    Location
    Asgĺrd
    Gender
    Age
    36
    Family
    Two sisters
    Occupation
    Wyrd-weaver
    Posts
    3,274
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    386
    Thanked in
    253 Posts

    If ‘unreliable’ is the issue, why did social media never block anti-Trump stories?



    Source: NYpost

    This is what totalitarianism looks like in our century: not men in darkened cells driving screws under the fingernails of dissidents, but Silicon Valley dweebs removing from vast swaths of the Internet a damaging exposé on their preferred presidential candidate.

    That’s what Facebook and Twitter did to the New York Post’s bombshell report on Hunter Biden, revealing why the illustrious vice-presidential son was hired by a shady Ukrainian energy firm in exchange for at least $50,000 a month.

    According to e-mails obtained by The Post, Hunter introduced the firm’s executives to his father — just when Joe Biden was the second-most powerful man on earth, with outsize influence over the fate of the embattled Eastern European country.

    That information is squarely in the public interest as we head into an election, right? Yes, but it’s also extremely embarrassing for President Trump’s opponent, and so social-media executives went into action.

    Andy Stone, a member of Facebook’s p.r. team, said, “We are reducing [the Post story’s] distribution on our platform.” Before joining the social-media giant, Stone worked for Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, yet he insisted that Facebook’s action was “part of our standard process to reduce the spread of misinformation.” Right.

    Then, Twitter began blocking users from posting the story, with a spokesman telling a Washington Examiner scribe that the move was prompted by “the lack of authoritative reporting on the origins of the materials included” in the report.

    Misinformation? Lack of authoritative reporting? The story explained exactly The Post got the material, and the supporting evidence. Yet the past four years have seen left-of-center outlets devote millions of column inches to anti-Trump stories that turned out to be utter bunk — yet neither Facebook nor Twitter took similar action as part of any “standard process”:
    • Remember when four CNN reporters claimed, in June 2017, that James Comey was about to dispute in congressional testimony Trump’s claim that the FBI director had reassured the president he wasn’t under investigation? Comey did no such thing, but did Twitter and Facebook censor the story? Nope.
    •  Or recall when The Guardian newspaper concocted a story, seemingly out of thin air, about Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort and WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange meeting at Ecuador’s embassy in London? There was no such meeting, as the special counsel’s report confirmed. So did Facebook or Twitter block that story? Nope, you can still post the debunked nonsense on either platform.
    •  Or remember when The Atlantic published a several-thousand-word story suggesting that then-Sen. Jeff Sessions had lied when he said he didn’t meet the Russian ambassador as a Team Trump surrogate, but as a routine matter? The Mueller report debunked The Atlantic decisively with its finding that the meeting in question didn’t “include any more than a passing mention of the presidential campaign.” So is The Atlantic story blocked as misinformation? Nope.
    •  Or how about when the McClatchy news agency claimed that Trump attorney Michael Cohen had secretly traveled to Prague to meet with his Kremlin handlers? “Cohen had never traveled to Prague,” the Mueller report found. So is the McClatchy report blocked? You know the answer — of course it isn’t.
    •  Then there was BuzzFeed’s big bombshell that fizzled: a major story claiming that Trump had ordered Cohen to lie to Congress. The Mueller report’s verdict: “The president did not direct [Cohen] to provide false testimony. Cohen also said he did not tell the president about his planned testimony.” Did Facebook and Twitter block the link or otherwise “reduce distribution” pending fact-checking? Of course not. You can still post the lies freely.
    • Then there was the biggest of whopper of all: the salacious — and utterly discredited — Steele dossier, first reported by David Corn of Mother Jones and later published by BuzzFeed. Blocked by Big Tech? Ha!

    The Post will continue to chase the truth wherever it takes us. But this episode should alarm *every American. A very few people can unaccountably shape what you read.

    This is how freedom dies.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Verđandi For This Useful Post:


Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Censorship, Bias & Political Correctness on YouTube
    By Caledonian in forum Internet, Security, & Privacy
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: Sunday, August 16th, 2020, 03:28 PM
  2. Apple, Google, Twitter, Facebook Sued for Leftist Bias and Conservative Censorship
    By Nachtengel in forum Internet, Security, & Privacy
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Tuesday, May 7th, 2019, 11:30 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •