4 ms·
Will Reuters/AP news be able to includes photos of crowds or politicians in their tweets? Or will they have to get explicit permission of everyone. Does 'sharin
by runnerup 5y ago
Will Reuters/AP news be able to includes photos of crowds or politicians in their tweets? Or will they have to get explicit permission of everyone. Does 'sharing' include linking? I'm trying to figure out the impact on photojournalism.
Edit: Reading the fine print, it sounds like it's a "whatever twitter says it is" policy:
> This policy is not applicable to media featuring public figures or individuals when media and accompanying Tweet text are shared in the public interest or add value to public discourse.
> However, if the purpose of the dissemination of private images of public figures or individuals who are part of public conversations is to harass, intimidate, or use fear to silence them, we may remove the content in line with our policy against abusive behavior.. Similarly, private nude images of public individuals will continue to be actioned under our non-consensual nudity policy.
> We recognize that there are instances where account holders may share images or videos of private individuals in an effort to help someone involved in a crisis situation, such as in the aftermath of a violent event, or as part of a newsworthy event due to public interest value, and this might outweigh the safety risks to a person.
> We will always try to assess the context in which the content is shared and, in such cases, we may allow the images or videos to remain on the service. For instance, we would take into consideration whether the image is publicly available and/or is being covered by mainstream/traditional media (newspapers, TV channels, online news sites), or if a particular image and the accompanying tweet text adds value to the public discourse, is being shared in public interest, or is relevant to the community.
- derbOac 5y agoI think they're still opening themselves up to problems. Take these kinds of issues: https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/2021/08/10/lawsuit-takes-aim-at-iowas-newest-ag-gag-law/ https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/2021/08/10/lawsuit-takes-aim... I really wish they had just come down hard on the side of free speech to the extent they could. It would be better for everyone really.
- mindslight 5y ago> I really wish they had just come down hard on the side of free speech to the extent they could I think they did try, but ultimately any centralizing web service cannot succeed in this. For one, they need to follow government censorship laws (presumably what you mean by "extent they could"). But even deeper, their intrinsic profit motive destroys free speech through both negative distortions ("don't upset the sponsors") and positive ones ("drive engagement"). The effects of the latter are slower to take hold (eg online flash mobs rallying around centrally-promoted content). But once they do the company ends up stuck between a rock and a hard place - either hurt their core product by removing its centralizing features, or attempt to mitigate the ill effects through increasingly invasive policies.
- ddingus 5y agoSo, no Karens or Kens? Got it.