3 ms·

Interesting seeing this response from both Facebook and Twitter on the exact same day. Guessing from this: > Based on a tip shared by Twitter about activity t

Interesting seeing this response from both Facebook and Twitter on the exact same day. Guessing from this: > Based on a tip shared by Twitter about activity they found on their platform, we conducted an internal investigation into suspected coordinated inauthentic behavior in the region and identified this activity. We will continue monitoring and will take action if we find additional violations. We’ve shared our analysis with law enforcement and industry partners. that the simultaneous response was coordinated by both platforms... I'd go so far as to say that it was coordinated in order to demonstrate the capability to self-moderate ahead of the 2020 US elections.

Aperocky 7y ago
It's likely due to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Yi_Bar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Yi_Bar. Which organized a widely popular anti-protest campaign about 2 days ago, the online community had about 30 million members. Members proceeded to use VPN to spam anti-HK protest posts/comments on FB/instagram/twitter. This is consistent with the behavior of this community in the past (mass trolling, mostly apolitical but sometimes political, this community is pretty nationalist to begin with).
- justicezyx 7y ago
  No, Li Yi Bar is more of trolling group from self-organized netizens. They do share comfroming ideology as Chines government. What's banned here is government organized activity. If this is indeed from Li Yi Bar, then it should not be called government organized activity.
  - Aperocky 7y ago
    And the line is very blurred, how do you know there isn't Chinese government affiliated person acting on either government or their own behalf within the Li Yi Bar? The US government employs about 20% of US workers, the Chinese government employs slightly more, and when you say this individual is affiliated with Chinese government, that's not a small likelihood if you just picked up a random working Chinese person.
  - tareqak 7y ago
    What matters is whether or not Facebook or Twitter can make this distinction successfully 100% of the time, and whether or not they are perceived as doing so just as successfully.
  - lawnchair_larry 7y ago
    It does not really matter if one can prove that something is government directed, because “coordinated inauthentic” behavior is sufficient reasonable grounds to take action. An individual expressing their own pro-government views from their own account is fine. An individual pretending to be someone else, or multiple people, is not, regardless of the content.
    - pishpash 7y ago
      What about multiple people coordinating to express an unpopular opinion together, each of their own volition? You know, kind of like a protest. Just call this what it is, subjective censorship. Of course they give a different reason to skirt by on technicality. But if it were an extremely popular opinion being shared millions of times, it would just be called a viral meme and FB and Twitter wouldn't be making subjective judgements on authenticity.
      - lawnchair_larry 7y ago
        What about it? It’s allowed. Do you not see the distinction? Inauthentic activity. Fake accounts. So no, this isn’t subjective censorship at all, that’s the point.
spectramax 7y ago
> I'd go so far as to say that it was coordinated in order to demonstrate the capability to self-moderate ahead of the 2020 US elections. I don't understand how you go from "Guessing from Twitter tipping off Facebook" to "Probably flexing their self-moderating muscles ahead of US elections".
- eganist 7y ago
  Right, because they both posted detailed run-downs of their moderating activities against state actors on the same day. Edit for clarity: Twitter tipping off Facebook in and of itself isn't evidence of a coordinated response, but both parties posting detailed rundowns of their responses against the same actor on the same day is more likely to suggest a coordinated effort. One particularly good reason to publicize acting against state-sponsored agents is if you're trying to build goodwill among the targets of said state effort, which conspicuously are the people of Hong Kong and which, more inconspicuously, are probably people within certain demographics and locales in the United States and Europe. Edit 2: wordsalad
  - GauntletWizard 7y ago
    I would post this headline as "Twitter and Facebook coordinated today to post blog posts about removing coordinated inauthentic behavior from their platforms". There is no more confirmation from Twitter and Facebook that their actions are coordinated than confirmation from the Chinese government that it ran psyop, botnets, and the like, but the inference thereof is justified. Likewise, the leading inference that Facebook and Twitter are inauthentic in their efforts is just as justified.
    - awshepard 7y ago
      At least a few years ago, Facebook did publish about partnering with Twitter and Microsoft to build tools for sharing image/content hashes [1], presumably to better aid in removal or prevent dissemination of certain types of content. It's not outlandish to suggest the partnership runs deeper 2-3 years later to cover more vectors. [1] https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2016/12/partnering-to-help-curb-spread-of-online-terrorist-content/ https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2016/12/partnering-to-help-curb...
TomMckenny 7y ago
Maybe, but one thing is certain: For the US they have a unique challenge: they can freely attempt to mitigate propaganda and manipulation by the Chinese ruling party and it's backers because they are not physically in China.

Aperocky 7y ago

It's likely due to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Yi_Bar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Yi_Bar. Which organized a widely popular anti-protest campaign about 2 days ago, the online community had about 30 million members. Members proceeded to use VPN to spam anti-HK protest posts/comments on FB/instagram/twitter. This is consistent with the behavior of this community in the past (mass trolling, mostly apolitical but sometimes political, this community is pretty nationalist to begin with).

justicezyx 7y ago
No, Li Yi Bar is more of trolling group from self-organized netizens. They do share comfroming ideology as Chines government. What's banned here is government organized activity. If this is indeed from Li Yi Bar, then it should not be called government organized activity.
- Aperocky 7y ago
  And the line is very blurred, how do you know there isn't Chinese government affiliated person acting on either government or their own behalf within the Li Yi Bar? The US government employs about 20% of US workers, the Chinese government employs slightly more, and when you say this individual is affiliated with Chinese government, that's not a small likelihood if you just picked up a random working Chinese person.
- tareqak 7y ago
  What matters is whether or not Facebook or Twitter can make this distinction successfully 100% of the time, and whether or not they are perceived as doing so just as successfully.
- lawnchair_larry 7y ago
  It does not really matter if one can prove that something is government directed, because “coordinated inauthentic” behavior is sufficient reasonable grounds to take action. An individual expressing their own pro-government views from their own account is fine. An individual pretending to be someone else, or multiple people, is not, regardless of the content.
  - pishpash 7y ago
    What about multiple people coordinating to express an unpopular opinion together, each of their own volition? You know, kind of like a protest. Just call this what it is, subjective censorship. Of course they give a different reason to skirt by on technicality. But if it were an extremely popular opinion being shared millions of times, it would just be called a viral meme and FB and Twitter wouldn't be making subjective judgements on authenticity.
    - lawnchair_larry 7y ago
      What about it? It’s allowed. Do you not see the distinction? Inauthentic activity. Fake accounts. So no, this isn’t subjective censorship at all, that’s the point.

spectramax 7y ago

> I'd go so far as to say that it was coordinated in order to demonstrate the capability to self-moderate ahead of the 2020 US elections. I don't understand how you go from "Guessing from Twitter tipping off Facebook" to "Probably flexing their self-moderating muscles ahead of US elections".

eganist 7y ago
Right, because they both posted detailed run-downs of their moderating activities against state actors on the same day. Edit for clarity: Twitter tipping off Facebook in and of itself isn't evidence of a coordinated response, but both parties posting detailed rundowns of their responses against the same actor on the same day is more likely to suggest a coordinated effort. One particularly good reason to publicize acting against state-sponsored agents is if you're trying to build goodwill among the targets of said state effort, which conspicuously are the people of Hong Kong and which, more inconspicuously, are probably people within certain demographics and locales in the United States and Europe. Edit 2: wordsalad
- GauntletWizard 7y ago
  I would post this headline as "Twitter and Facebook coordinated today to post blog posts about removing coordinated inauthentic behavior from their platforms". There is no more confirmation from Twitter and Facebook that their actions are coordinated than confirmation from the Chinese government that it ran psyop, botnets, and the like, but the inference thereof is justified. Likewise, the leading inference that Facebook and Twitter are inauthentic in their efforts is just as justified.
  - awshepard 7y ago
    At least a few years ago, Facebook did publish about partnering with Twitter and Microsoft to build tools for sharing image/content hashes [1], presumably to better aid in removal or prevent dissemination of certain types of content. It's not outlandish to suggest the partnership runs deeper 2-3 years later to cover more vectors. [1] https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2016/12/partnering-to-help-curb-spread-of-online-terrorist-content/ https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2016/12/partnering-to-help-curb...

TomMckenny 7y ago

Maybe, but one thing is certain: For the US they have a unique challenge: they can freely attempt to mitigate propaganda and manipulation by the Chinese ruling party and it's backers because they are not physically in China.