4 ms·
- Transparent and consistent moderation policies. Bans are inconsistently applied for reasons that are often hard to figure out. This is one of those things th
by runako 5y ago
- Transparent and consistent moderation policies. Bans are inconsistently applied for reasons that are often hard to figure out.
This is one of those things that sounds great in theory. But in reality, it likely functions much more like any other adjudication system. People can break rules an infinite number of ways, so there are an infinite number of reasons to ban an account. Understanding many of them will require context that may be problematic to share (for ex: if it happens in DMs). So in practice, the shorthand public reason for bans will pretty much always reduce to "violated site policies."
- stjohnswarts 5y agoThat's why you set vague site policies like "no personal attacks or tweets inciting violence in public or against individuals"
- runako 5y agoExactly. Unfortunately, so much of the misunderstanding about Twitter's enforcement actions boils down to disagreements at the adjudication stage. Where Twitter may think X activity was inciting violence, other people may disagree. Making all the data more transparent won't change the fact that Twitter may interpret a given fact pattern in a different way than a critic.
- EricE 5y agoWhen 90% of the "content moderation" decisions lean towards one end of the political spectrum that's hardly a mere disagreement at the adjudication stage. The day Parlor was deplatformed - by all of big tech in an obviously coordinated action - the flimsy pretext was they weren't doing enough to curb hateful speach. Yet on Twitter you had the president of Iran shouting more death to America and China congratulating itself for repressing minorities within its boarders. Yet twitter didn't get booted in the same way. The hypocrisy is beyond blatant. And that's the real reason for the outrage that Musk might force Twitter to actually move back towards a neutral balance and cease being part of the coordinated propaganda machine - the other services shenanigans are going to stand out even more starkly in contrast. Twitter is big enough and casts enough of a shadow that there is going to be some significant contrast. So much so that those filthy casuals are going to start noticing something different. They might actually start paying attention to everything else going on in tech and the media. Real horror of horrors - they might start asking questions! Uh oh! And if you think all of what I wrote above is conspiracy theory BS - great! Then what does it matter if Musk owns Twitter or not? The gate swings both ways. If everyone else is normal and he starts to bend twitter to his will, that will stick out like a sore thumb in contrast. Nothing to worry about, eh?
- runako 5y agoI think you may be responding to a different comment? May want to re-post in the desired thread.
- selimthegrim 5y agoParleur acted against local laws. President of Iran and China are not actually transgressing local laws in their countries.
- galvin 5y ago> When 90% of the "content moderation" decisions lean towards one end of the political spectrum that's hardly a mere disagreement at the adjudication stage. Which end of the political spectrum do you mean? I've often heard of them being criticized for leaning too far to the liberal-left but the examples you gave are a little confusing. The Chinese government is authoritarian left-wing so that kind of aligns with the anti-right sentiment but it goes against liberalism. Parler is conservative/authoritarian right-wing, so that holds up but the Iran example is also conservative/authoritarian right-wing which contradicts that? The biggest bias I see for the English language with foreign languages being poorly moderated. It is a business after all, so they probably only invest as much in moderation as they need to to keep their advertisers.
- wwweston 5y agoFirst off — how do you have stats regarding the volumes of content adjudication much less broken down by political leanings? Is this something with a methodology and data we could actually all review? Second: let’s say it’s true. How would we know whether it’s because 90% of problem content is generated from participants with one political leaning vs a policy designed to discriminate politically?
- Tetriste 5y agoThe problem though, is that instead of trying to do more, Musk proposes to do less. Instead of having one Iran president shouting more death to America, you'll have even more of that, all for the sake of equity. I understand your point about being unfair. But wouldn't this solution just lead to people simply leaving the platform because of the increased toxicity?
- nathanaldensr 5y agoVery recently (and probably still today), people have redefined the word violence to be staying silent on issues I care about. It's all relative.
- schleck8 5y agoGive me one person who has been banned on Twitter for not saying something.
- Cheezewheel 5y agoWell you can't, can you? They can just point to another violation or, more plausibly, vague "violated site wide rules". That is kind of the point.