7 ms·
"Friday night one of the top trending tweets on Twitter was 'Hang Mike Pence.' But AWS has no plans nor has it made any threats to suspend Twitter’s account."
by drocer88 6y ago
"Friday night one of the top trending tweets on Twitter was 'Hang Mike Pence.' But AWS has no plans nor has it made any threats to suspend Twitter’s account."
Is this true?
- itamarst 6y ago> "We blocked the phrase and other variations of it from trending," a Twitter spokesperson said. "We want trends to promote healthy discussions on Twitter. This means that at times, we may prevent certain content from trending. As per our Help Center, there are rules for trends — if we identify accounts that violate these rules, we’ll take enforcement action." E.g. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/10/hang-mike-pence-twitter-stops-phrase-trending-capitol-breach https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/10/hang-mike-pe...
- sib301 6y agoIt is true. The difference is Twitter took action and removed offending posts, and removed it from the trending list.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- tbenst 6y agoFalse equivocation. This did happen but Twitter promptly banned this and variants [1]. Parler is failing / refusing to moderate. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/10/hang-mike-pence-twitter-stops-phrase-trending-capitol-breach https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/10/hang-mike-pe...
- charly187 6y agoEDIT: I see you changed your post from "Parler is refusing to moderate" to "Parler is refusing/failing to moderate". The post below is an answer to "Parler is refusing to moderate". This is false. Parler has also been banning accounts explicitly calling for violence. I encourage you all to read the complaint: > AWS knew its allegations contained in the letter it leaked to the press that Parler was not able to find and remove content that encouraged violence was false—because over the last few days Parler had removed everything AWS had brought to its attention and more. I know my word probably doesn't mean much to you, but I verified this personally - almost all of the "example" violent post I could find on the news were all deleted and the accounts were banned before Parler was taken down.
- tptacek 6y agoAmazon cited a long string of specific violent posts that they themselves reported to Parler and that Parler didn't remove.
- nullc 6y agoSo, Parler perjured themselves in the linked complaint when they stated that every example cited by amazon was removed?
- rmah 6y agoIt appears so. Is this surprising?
- nullc 6y agoDid they also perjure themselves when they stated the Amazon letter was published in buzzfeed before being provided to them?
- tptacek 6y agoI don't know, but again: does that matter? Is Amazon obliged to keep their communications with Parler private? Certainly Amazon's customers don't adhere to that norm. The controversy here seems very simple. When Amazon alerted Parler to specific violent posts, did Parler immediately remove them, or did it wait to remove them until shit blew up? I don't know that I need to care whether or when Amazon alerted BuzzFeed. Amazon says it's removing Parler because of Parler's behavior, not because of something Buzzfeed reported.
- cygx 6y agoFor reference, this is Parler's claim: > AWS knew its allegations contained in the letter it leaked to the press that Parler was not able to find and remove content that encouraged violence was false—because over the last few days Parler had removed everything AWS had brought to its attention and more. Yet AWS sought to defame Parler nonetheless. And because of AWS false claims, leaked to the public, Parler has not only lost current and future customers, but Parler has also been unable to find an alternative web hosting company. In short, AWS false claims have made Parler a pariah. My take will depend on the timeline: If Amazon indeed asked Parler to remove the content weeks ago (as stated in the letter), but Parler only did so "over the last few days" (ie after the shit had hit the fan?), then, I'd argue Amazon does have a point...
- cal5k 6y agoAlso false equivocation. Twitter failed/refused to moderate content for years throughout their meteoric growth, and only now are they barely getting a handle on it - and even then they seem to apply the rules in an uneven fashion. Expecting any potential competitor to instantly achieve perfect moderation seems like a perfect way to entrench FB, Twitter and others as the de-facto public square.
- ghayes 6y agoParler is not simply failing to "instantly achieve perfect moderation," and, I personally believe it is disingenuous to speculate the fact. The service's core principals include strict limits to moderation.
- uncledave 6y agoTwitter has a moderation policy and applied it. Parler didn’t and didn’t apply anything. Edit: also fuck everyone related to Parler. Read in detail: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/johnpaczkowski/amazon-parler-aws https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/johnpaczkowski/amazon-p...
- charly187 6y agoThis just isn't true. We can argue whether or not Parler was not moderating correctly - but to imply they did not have a policy against violence is not true: 6. Threats of Violence, Advocacy of Imminent Lawless Action, Threats to Dox, Bribery or Criminal Solicitation So-called “fighting words” are not a violation of our Guidelines.2 6.1 However, reported parleys, comments, or messages sent using our service will be deemed a violation of these Guidelines if they contain: 6.1.1 a “serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to aparticular individual or group of individuals,” with either the intent or reckless disregard as to whether the communication will “place the victim in fear of bodily harm or death.” 6.1.2 an explicit or implicit encouragement to use violence, or to commit a lawless action,such that: (a) the Parleyer intends his or her speech to result in the use of violence orlawless action, and (b) the imminent use of violence or lawless action is the likelyresult of the parley, comment, or message 6.1.3 a threat to dox anyone for any reason. 6.1.4 an offer to give or receive money, or other goods or services, in exchange for (a) afavor from any public official, or (b) the commission of any illegal action by anyone
- tptacek 6y agoSince the previous comment where you said this is dead, I'll repeat my response here: Amazon presented Parler with a list of violent posts that they had reported to Parler and that Parler had refused to remove. The whole letter Amazon sent to Parler was reported out by Buzzfeed, including screenshots of the violent posts that Parler did not remove.
- Natsu 6y agoParler's complaint references here says that they did remove them and also that the article referenced was leaked before it was sent to Parler. We'll have to watch this play out in court, later.
- chapium 6y agoIf you google it, it depends on the bias of the sources. One side is saying twitter let it trend. But twitter also removed the hashtag once it started trending. Unsurprisingly, this goes unmentioned on sources claiming it was "allowed" to trend.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- tptacek 6y agoIt's worth noting that the "Hang Mike Pence" tweets were a reference to what the rioters were chanting when they stormed the Capitol.
- x0x0 6y agoI can affirm that at least part of the "hang mike pence" discussion on twitter it was a shocked discussion of the threats, not threats.
- tptacek 6y agoThere is video of a mass of rioters chanting it as they stormed the Capitol!
- oneeyedpigeon 6y agoFurther illustration of why Twitter's trending algorithm is so ridiculous. Half the time, when a phrase is trending, most of the tweets returned are along the lines of "Why is 'foo' trending?"
- Strs2FillMyDrms 6y agoAlso referencing the L. Lin Wood parler https://twitter.com/parlertakes/status/1347050705110986753?s=20 https://twitter.com/parlertakes/status/1347050705110986753?s...
- tptacek 6y agoSo much for Greenwald's case.
- vincentmarle 6y agoMost were probably referring to the videos of MAGA terrorists chanting "Hang Mike Pence"
- tylerhou 6y agoAccording to NYT, many of the tweets were discussing the fact that demonstrators were shouting the phrase. The tweets themselves allegedly were not directly inciting violence. > Mr. Matze pointed to the fact that Twitter had recently promoted the phrase “Hang Mike Pence” as a trending topic. (The majority of the discussion on Twitter was about rioters chanting the phrase about the vice president on Wednesday.) “I have seen no evidence Apple is going after them,” Mr. Matze said. “This would appear to be an unfair double standard as every other social media site has the same issues, arguably on a worse scale.” https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/09/technology/apple-google-parler.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/09/technology/apple-google-p...
- rtkwe 6y agoYeah I see weird trending things a lot on Twitter then go to see what happening and it's people talking about the weird Trend they saw.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- 101008 6y agoBy the other comments, it seems was true but Twtiter moderated it quickly. However, I remember when J.K. Rowling gave her opinion on transgender issues, RIP JK Rowling was trendin gtopic for hours, and she received a lot of hate and threats on Twitter. Not only that, a lot of people started replying to her tweets with dick pics, which was dangeours because she was in the middle of an activity with children (they could see those replies). So yeah, definitely Twitter chooses what to moderate and what not.
- meekmockmook 6y agoI strongly disagree with Rowling's bizarre obsession but she faced months of death threats while Twitter looked the other way.
- legostormtroopr 6y agoDeath threats from the right people that’s the difference. Twitter supports those people, so they can stay. That’s why this whole Parker debacle is hypocritical.
- Rapzid 6y agoShe was receiving death threats on Twitter and Twitter was not taking action against those users? Do you have any sources for that?
- tylerFowler 6y agoDidn't Twitter catch this & remove it from trending fairly quickly? Seems like an example of what AWS is claiming Parler _isn't_ doing.
- mhh__ 6y agoFirstly, it was but (apart from being discussion of the phrase rather than actually planning to kill him) it was swiftly taken down . Secondly, at risk of stating the obvious: Parler has self-selected its audience to consist of proportionally many more extremists, they still exist on twitter but not even close to as prevalently on Parler (not least because many extremists on Twitter are going to be on the left, where the dialogue is harder to police because it's much less obvious where the violence starts)
- inscionent 6y agoBy their own admission Parler does not have the moderation tools that Twitter have. The fact the content ever existed isn't what is at dispute.