Wisden Cricket Monthly

Sohail Speaks Yasir's Blog Fazeer's Focus

User Tag List

View Poll Results: Should the powers/reach of social media platforms be curbed by governments?

Voters
5. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, social media platforms cannot be given a free pass to control information

    2 40.00%
  • No, let social media platforms regulate themselves without interference

    3 60.00%
Results 1 to 24 of 24
  1. #1
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)

    Donald Trump signs executive order targeting Twitter after fact-checking row

    US President Donald Trump has signed an executive order aimed at removing some of the legal protections given to social media platforms.

    It gives regulators the power to pursue legal actions against firms such as Facebook and Twitter for the way they police content on their platforms.

    President Trump accused social media platforms of having "unchecked power" while signing the order.

    The order is expected to face legal challenges.

    Legal experts says the US Congress or the court system must be involved to change the current legal understanding of protections for these platforms.

    Mr Trump has regularly accused social media platforms of stifling or censoring conservative voices.

    On Wednesday, Mr Trump accused Twitter of election interference, after it added fact-check links to two of his tweets.

    On Thursday, Twitter added "get the facts about Covid-19" tags to two tweets from a Chinese government spokesman who claimed the coronavirus had originated in the US.

    What does the executive order say?

    The order sets out to clarify the Communications Decency Act, a US law that offers online platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube legal protection in certain situations.

    Under Section 230 of the law, social networks are not generally held responsible for content posted by their users, but can engage in "good-Samaritan blocking", such as removing content that is obscene, harassing or violent.

    The executive order points out that this legal immunity does not apply if a social network edits content posted by its users, and calls for legislation from Congress to "remove or change" section 230. Mr Trump said Attorney General William Barr will "immediately" begin crafting a law for Congress to later vote on.

    It also says "deceptive" blocking of posts, including removing a post for reasons other than those described in a website's terms of service, should not be offered immunity.

    Republican senator Marco Rubio is among those arguing that the platforms take on the role of a "publisher" when they add fact-check labels to specific posts.

    "The law still protects social media companies like Twitter because they are considered forums not publishers," Mr Rubio said.

    "But if they have now decided to exercise an editorial role like a publisher, then they should no longer be shielded from liability and treated as publishers under the law."

    The executive order also calls for:

    the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to spell out what type of content blocking will be considered deceptive, pretextual or inconsistent with a service provider's terms and conditions
    a review of government advertising on social-media sites and whether those platforms impose viewpoint-based restrictions
    the re-establishment of the White House "tech bias reporting tool" that lets citizens report unfair treatment by social networks
    What effect will the order have?
    Donald Trump promised "big action" in response to Twitter's decision to append a fact-check message to two of his posts. While his announcement of an executive order was heavy on rhetoric - accusing social media companies of being monopolies that threaten free speech - it will be a long process before the talk turns into real action, big or otherwise.

    Independent government agencies will have to review federal law, promulgate new regulations, vote on them and then - in all likelihood - defend them in court. By the time it's all over, the November presidential election could have come and gone.

    That explains why Trump is also pushing for new congressional legislation - a more straightforward way of changing US policy toward social media companies.

    The real purpose of the president's order, however, may be symbolic. At the very least, the move will cause Twitter to think twice about attempting to moderate or fact-check his posts on their service.

    The president relies on Twitter to get his message out without filtering from the mainstream media. If Twitter itself start blunting one of his favourite communication tools, he is sending a message that he will push back - and make things, at a minimum, uncomfortable for the company.

    How have the social networks responded?

    Twitter called the order "a reactionary and politicized approach to a landmark law," adding that Section 230 "protects American innovation and freedom of expression, and it's underpinned by democratic values".

    Google, which owns YouTube, said changing Section 230 would "hurt America's economy and its global leadership on internet freedom."

    "We have clear content policies and we enforce them without regard to political viewpoint. Our platforms have empowered a wide range of people and organizations from across the political spectrum, giving them a voice and new ways to reach their audiences," the firm said in a statement to the BBC.

    In an interview with Fox News on Wednesday, Facebook's chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, said censoring a social media platform would not be the "right reflex" for a government concerned about censorship.

    "I just believe strongly that Facebook shouldn't be the arbiter of truth of everything that people say online," said Mr Zuckerberg.

    "I think in general private companies probably shouldn't be - especially these platform companies - shouldn't be in the position of doing that."

    One conservative think tank warned the executive order could have unintended consequences.

    "In the long run, this conservative campaign against social media companies could have a devastating effect on the freedom of speech," said Matthew Feeney of the Cato Institute.

    And changing the Communications Decency Act to "impose political neutrality on social media companies" could see the platforms filled with "legal content they'd otherwise like to remove" such as pornography, violent imagery and racism.

    "Or they would screen content to a degree that would kill the free flow of information on social media that we're used to today," he said.

    Mr Feeney said the draft of the executive order was a "mess" but could prove politically popular in the run-up to a presidential election.

    What sparked the latest row?

    The long-running dispute between Mr Trump and social media companies flared up again on Tuesday, when two of his posts were given a fact-check label by Twitter for the first time.

    He had tweeted, without providing evidence: "There is no way (zero) that mail-in ballots will be anything less than substantially fraudulent."

    Twitter added a warning label to the post and linked to a page describing the claims as "unsubstantiated".

    Then on Wednesday, Mr Trump threatened to "strongly regulate" social-media platforms.

    He tweeted to his more than 80 million followers that Republicans felt the platforms "totally silence conservatives", and that he would not allow this to happen.

    In an earlier tweet, he said Twitter was "completely stifling free speech".

    Twitter's chief executive, Jack Dorsey, responded to criticism of the platform's fact-checking policies in a series of posts, saying: "We'll continue to point out incorrect or disputed information about elections globally."

    Mr Trump wrote a similar post about mail-in ballots on Facebook on Tuesday, and no such warnings were applied.

    Twitter has tightened its policies in recent years, as it faced criticism that its hands-off approach allowed fake accounts and misinformation to thrive.


    https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-52843986


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  2. #2
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    Watch some other nations take the same line as well.

    Bad days ahead for social media now.


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  3. #3
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  4. #4
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    Last edited by MenInG; 29th May 2020 at 14:31.


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  5. #5
    Debut
    Mar 2015
    Runs
    1,957
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've seen so much outrage from Trump at things like Twitter blocking his lies and violence inciting tweets, and these "THUGS" who are rioting out of anger and desparation. Where's the outrage and executive orders and angry tweets about the racial inequality and police brutality that incited said riots? These rioters and looters are a REACTION. Without the stimulus, they don't riot. How can he not understand this?


    Arsenal all the way!! (and Pakistan, of course!)

  6. #6
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    For years, Twitter resisted calls to treat President Trump just like any other user. Then this week, everything changed.

    On Tech Tent, we examine the conflict between the president and his favourite social media platform.

    It began on Wednesday. Twitter had been under fire for allowing tweets in which the president shared a far-fetched conspiracy theory about an alleged crime involving a TV presenter and former Republican congressman.

    But instead of taking action on those tweets, it fact-checked two others - about postal voting under a new policy which seeks to deter content which might suppress voting.

    Social media expert Chris Stokel-Walker tells Tech Tent that if Twitter thought limiting action to the area of elections was a cautious first step, it was wrong.

    "As soon as you start engaging in any sort of moderation or comment on politics, you run the risk of potentially alienating 50% of your audience - and given our very politically fractious times, that is more of a risk than ever," he said.

    Having taken that first step, and seeing President Trump immediately go nuclear and threatening to go so far as to shut the social media platform down, Twitter might have been tempted to go quiet for a bit.

    Instead, it chose escalation.

    In the early hours of Friday morning, in a tweet about the protests in Minneapolis over the death of a black man, Mr Trump warned: "when the looting starts, the shooting starts".

    Twitter's moderation team swung into action - after consulting CEO Jack Dorsey - and obscured the tweet with a message saying that rules on glorifying violence had been broken.

    Users could still see the tweet by clicking through that message, but sharing it was made harder.

    A few hours later, as the president woke up, the official White House account simply repeated the offending tweet. We watched with bated breath to see what would happen and, sure enough, Twitter's moderators slapped the same warning on the tweet.

    It is difficult to see either side backing down now.

    The White House is busy scouring Twitter to find examples of other world leaders who have glorified violence without any comeback. Others are finding all sorts of old Trump tweets that appear to have broken the rules by, for instance, spreading misinformation about treatments for coronavirus.

    Jack Dorsey, who had appeared very reluctant to apply anything but the most light-touch regulation, now finds himself faced with the unappealing prospect of cracking down on world leaders far and wide.

    Meanwhile, there is not exactly much solidarity being shown by Facebook.

    In general, it has been a more tightly-moderated platform than Twitter, but Mark Zuckerberg has made it clear he has no intention of following Jack Dorsey's lead when it comes to fact checking politicians. Donald Trump's Facebook page has simply replicated the posts which fell foul of Twitter - with no sign of fact-checking or finger-wagging.

    "This is the kind of thing that Donald Trump revels in," says Chris Stokel-Walker, "an ex-reality TV star who likes to stir the pot. He's now managed to set Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey against each other."

    For all the rage about freedom of speech from the president - and remember Twitter as a private company can do what it likes in that area - he seems unlikely to kill what has become his main platform for getting his message out.

    Like the fighting couple in some dodgy romcom, Trump and Twitter need each other - though one suspects Jack Dorsey might be tempted to throw the President out and change the locks.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-52853168


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  7. #7
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Twitter Inc, Reddit and a group representing major internet firms backed two documentary film groups that have challenged the Trump Administration’s 2019 rules requiring nearly all U.S. visitors to disclose social media user information from the prior five years.

    In court papers filed on Thursday, the social media sites and the Internet Association, representing Facebook, Amazon.com, Alphabet and others, said the rules force foreign nationals “to surrender their anonymity in order to travel to the United States” and “chill a vast quantity of speech and associational activity.”

    The Doc Society and the International Documentary Association filed suit in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., in December. They said they regularly collaborate with non-U.S. filmmakers and warn that visitors must “consider the risk that a U.S. official will misinterpret their speech on social media, impute others’ speech to them, or subject them to additional scrutiny or delayed processing because of the views they or their contacts have expressed.”

    The latest filing comes amid an escalating feud between President Donald Trump and tech companies. Twitter on Friday hid a Trump tweet behind a warning for the first time. It came hours after Trump signed an executive order threatening Silicon Valley social media firms with new free speech regulations, after Twitter added a fact-checking tag to two previous tweets.

    The State Department rules require disclosure of all social media handles used over the prior five years by U.S. visa applicants, including ones under pseudonyms, on 20 platforms.

    Applicants must disclose accounts on Facebook, Instagram, Flickr, Google+, YouTube, LinkedIn, Myspace, Pinterest, Reddit, Tumblr, Twitter, Vine and Chinese sites Douban, QQ, Sina Weibo, Tencent Weibo, and Youku; Russian social network VK; Belgian site Twoo; and Latvian site Ask.fm.

    The Justice Department has argued in court papers that “information gleaned from social media profiles can be used to determine activity, ties, or intent that would be grounds for visa denial, including criminal acts.”

    The State Department says the rules were prompted by Trump’s 2017 order requiring heightened vetting of visa applications. It previously collected contact information, travel history, family information, and prior addresses.

    The department receives more than 14 million applicants annually. The only travelers exempted from the social media rules are diplomatic and official travelers.


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  8. #8
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    OAKLAND, Calif. — Jack Dorsey was up late Thursday at his home in San Francisco talking online with his executives when their conversation was interrupted: President Trump had just posted another inflammatory message on Twitter.

    Tensions between Twitter, where Mr. Dorsey is chief executive, and Mr. Trump had been running high for days over the president’s aggressive tweets and the company’s decision to begin labeling some of them. In his latest message, Mr. Trump weighed in on the clashes between the police and protesters in Minneapolis, saying, “when the looting starts, the shooting starts.”

    A group of more than 10 Twitter officials, including lawyers and policymakers, quickly gathered virtually to review Mr. Trump’s post and debate over the messaging system Slack and Google Docs whether it pushed people toward violence.

    They soon came to a conclusion. And after midnight, Mr. Dorsey gave his go-ahead: Twitter would hide Mr. Trump’s tweet behind a warning label that said the message violated its policy against glorifying violence. It was the first time Twitter applied that specific warning to any public figure’s tweets.

    The action has prompted a broad fight over whether and how social media companies should be held responsible for what appears on their sites, and was the culmination of months of debate inside Twitter. For more than a year, the company had been building an infrastructure to limit the impact of objectionable messages from world leaders, creating rules on what would and would not be allowed and designing a plan for when Mr. Trump inevitably broke them.

    But the path to that point was not smooth. Inside Twitter, dealing with Mr. Trump’s tweets — which are the equivalent of a presidential megaphone — was a fitful and uneven process. Some executives repeatedly urged Mr. Dorsey to take action on the inflammatory posts while others insisted he hold back, staying hands-off as the company had done for years.

    Outside Twitter, the president’s critics urged the company to shut him down as he pushed the limits with insults and untruths, noting ordinary users were sometimes suspended for lesser transgressions. But Twitter argued that posts by Mr. Trump and other world leaders deserved special leeway because of their news value.

    The efforts were complicated by Mr. Dorsey, 43, who was sometimes absent on travels and meditative retreats before the coronavirus pandemic. He often delegated policy decisions, watching the debate from the sidelines so he would not dominate with his own views. And he frequently did not weigh in until the last minute.

    Now Twitter is at war with Mr. Trump over its treatment of his posts, which has implications for the future of speech on social media. In the past week, the company for the first time added fact-checking and other warning labels to three of Mr. Trump’s messages, refuting their accuracy or marking them as inappropriate.

    In response, an irate Mr. Trump issued an executive order designed to limit legal protections that tech companies enjoy and posted more angry messages.

    Twitter’s position is precarious. The company is grappling with charges of bias from the right over its labeling of Mr. Trump’s tweets; one of its executives has faced a sustained campaign of online harassment. Yet Twitter’s critics on the left said that by leaving Mr. Trump’s tweets up and not banning him from the site, it was enabling the president.

    “It really is about whether or not Twitter blinks,” said James Grimmelmann, a law professor at Cornell University. “You really have to stick to your guns and ensure you do it right.”

    Twitter is girding for a protracted battle with Mr. Trump. Some employees have locked down their social media accounts and deleted their professional affiliation to avoid being harassed. Executives, holed up at home, are meeting virtually to discuss next steps while also handling a surge of misinformation related to the pandemic.

    This account of how Twitter came to take action on Mr. Trump’s tweets was based on interviews with nine current and former company employees and others who work with Mr. Dorsey outside of Twitter. They declined to be identified because they were not authorized to speak publicly and because they feared being targeted by Mr. Trump’s supporters.

    A Twitter spokesman declined to comment. Mr. Dorsey tweeted on Friday that the fact-checking process should be open to the public so that the facts are “verifiable by everyone.”

    Mr. Trump said on Twitter that his recent statements were “very simple” and that “nobody should have any problem with this other than the haters, and those looking to cause trouble on social media.” The White House declined to comment.

    The confrontation between Mr. Trump and Twitter has raised questions about free speech. Under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, social media companies are shielded from most liability for the content posted on their platforms. Republican lawmakers have argued the companies are acting as publishers and not mere distributors of content and should be stripped of those protections.

    But a hands-off approach by the companies has allowed harassment and abuse to proliferate online, said Lee Bollinger, the president of Columbia University and a First Amendment scholar. So now the companies, he said, have to grapple with how to moderate content and take more responsibility, without losing their legal protections.

    “These platforms have achieved incredible power and influence,” Mr. Bollinger said, adding that moderation was a necessary response. “There’s a greater risk to American democracy in allowing unbridled speech on these private platforms.”

    For years, Twitter did not touch Mr. Trump’s messages. But as he continued using Twitter to deride rivals and spread falsehoods, the company faced mounting criticism.

    That set off internal debates. Mr. Dorsey observed the discussions, sometimes raising questions about who could be harmed by posts on Twitter or its moderation decisions, executives said.

    In 2018, two of the president’s tweets stood out to Twitter officials. In one, Mr. Trump discussed launching nuclear weapons at North Korea, which some employees believed violated company policy against violent threats. In the other, he called a former aide, Omarosa Manigault Newman, “a crazed, crying lowlife” and “that dog.”

    At the time, Twitter had rules against harassing messages like the tweet about Ms. Manigault Newman, but left the tweet up.

    The company began working on a specific solution to allow it to respond to violent and inaccurate posts from Mr. Trump and other world leaders without removing the messages. Mr. Dorsey had expressed interest in finding a middle ground, executives said. It also rolled out labels to denote that a tweet needed fact-checking or had videos and photos that had been altered to be misleading.

    The effort was overseen by Vijaya Gadde, who leads Twitter’s legal, policy, trust and safety teams. The labels for world leaders, unveiled last June, explained how a politician’s message had broken a Twitter policy and took away tools that could amplify it, like retweets and likes.

    “We want to elevate healthy conversations on Twitter and that may sometimes mean offering context,” Del Harvey, Twitter’s vice president of trust and safety, said in an interview this year.

    By the time the labels were introduced, Mr. Trump was not the only head of state testing Twitter’s boundaries. Shortly before Twitter released them, the president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, tweeted a sexually explicit video and the Iranian leader Ali Khamenei posted threatening remarks about Israel.

    Last month, Twitter used the labels on a tweet from the Brazilian politician Osmar Terra in which he falsely claimed that quarantine increased cases of the coronavirus.

    “This Tweet violated the Twitter Rules,” the label read. “However, Twitter has determined that it may be in the public’s interest for the Tweet to remain accessible.”

    On Tuesday, Twitter officials began discussing labeling Mr. Trump’s messages after he falsely asserted that mail-in ballots were illegally printed and implied they would lead to fraud in the November election. His tweets were flagged to Twitter through a portal it had opened specifically for nonprofit groups and local officials involved in election integrity to report content that could discourage or interfere with voting.

    Twitter quickly concluded that Mr. Trump had posted false information about mail-in ballots. The company then labeled two of his tweets, urging people to “get the facts” about voting by mail. An in-house team of fact checkers also assembled a list of what people should know about mail-in ballots.

    Mr. Trump struck back, drafting an executive order designed to chip away at Section 230. He and his allies also singled out a Twitter employee who had publicly criticized him and other Republicans, falsely suggesting that employee was responsible for the labels.

    Mr. Dorsey and his executives kept on alert. On Wednesday, Twitter labeled hundreds of other tweets, including those that falsely claimed to include images of Derek Chauvin, the white police officer who was charged with third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter in the death of George Floyd, an African-American man in Minnesota.

    Mr. Trump did not let up. Even after Twitter called out his shooting tweet for glorifying violence, he posted the same sentiment again.

    “Looting leads to shooting,” Mr. Trump wrote, adding that he did not want violence to occur. “It was spoken as a fact.”

    This time, Twitter did not label the tweet.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/30/t...e=articleShare


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  9. #9
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    Twitter is a private company - why should it kow tow to the govt?


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  10. #10
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    Facebook staff have spoken out against the tech giant's decision not to remove or flag a controversial post by US President Donald Trump last week.

    Mr Trump took to Facebook to repeat a tweet about the widespread protests in Minneapolis, following the death of George Floyd in police custody.

    Twitter had placed a warning over the content, which it said "glorified violence", but Facebook said it did not violate its company policy.

    Some staff said they were ‘ashamed’.

    The president said he would "send in the National Guard", and warned that "when the looting starts, the shooting starts."

    The post remains untouched on Facebook after founder Mark Zuckerberg said it did not violate the company’s policy around incitement of violence.

    “People can agree or disagree on where we should draw the line, but I hope they understand our overall philosophy is that it is better to have this discussion out in the open, especially when the stakes are so high,” Mr Zuckerberg wrote in a post on the platform.

    “I disagree strongly with how the President spoke about this, but I believe people should be able to see this for themselves because ultimately accountability for those in positions of power can only happen when their speech is scrutinized out in the open.”

    "Silence is complicity"
    Several employees expressed their frustration at the decision, on social media.

    “Facebook's inaction in taking down Trump's post inciting violence makes me ashamed to work here,” Lauren Tan, a software engineer wrote.

    Others suggested that Facebook should have made an exception to the policy, given its context.

    “We need to strive harder as a company, and industry, to have our Black colleagues’ and fellow citizens’ backs so that they are not having to face down institutionalised societal violence and systemic oppression alone,” added David Gillis, a director in product design at Facebook.

    Other employees used the company’s internal messaging system to try to raise their concerns, The Verge reports.

    Facebook said it "recognised the pain" many staff were feeling.

    "We encourage employees to speak openly when they disagree with leadership. As we face additional difficult decisions around content ahead, we'll continue seeking their honest feedback," a spokesperson said.

    Joseph Evans, head of tech at Enders Analysis said that staff at tech firms do speak out against their employers' decisions on occasion; in 2018 Google staff walked out in protest against the firm's treatment of women."Part of the appeal of working for these companies is that the employees feel they're changing the world, and hopefully for the better," he said.

    "So the tech giants have to balance avoiding regulatory crackdowns, keeping profits high, and attracting and retaining their highly-skilled workforce."

    Donald Trump and Mark Zuckerberg spoke on the phone on Friday.

    It’s unknown what was discussed, but both sides called the conversation productive, according to Axios news website.

    "We stand against racism"

    Today, Facebook announced that it will donate $10m (8m) to “efforts committed to ending racial injustice.”

    “We hear you, we see you and we are with you,” the company said on social media.

    "We stand against racism. We stand with our Black community - and all those working toward justice in honour of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery and far too many others whose names will not be forgotten.⁣”

    It is unclear where the $10m will go, or how it will be distributed.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-52880151


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  11. #11
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    Snapchat says it has stopped promoting President Donald Trump's account.

    As a result, it will no longer feature in the app's Discover section. The firm said it would "not amplify voices who incite racial violence and injustice".

    The decision follows Mr Trump saying that "vicious dogs" and "ominous weapons" would have been used on protesters if they had breached the White House fence.

    It follows Twitter's decision to hide some of the president's posts.

    Snapchat's parent company Snap said: "Racial violence and injustice have no place in our society and we stand together with all who seek peace, love, equality, and justice in America."

    The move is likely to feed into tensions between the White House and social media, which escalated when Twitter added fact-checking tags to some of the President's tweets last week.

    The president subsequently signed an executive order seeking to curb legal protections offered to the industry.

    Twitter later hid one of the president's tweets for breaking its rules on "glorifying violence".

    Snapchat's action will also put further pressure on Facebook.

    Its chief executive Mark Zuckerberg has resisted internal and external calls to intervene in regard to posts on its platform. Mr Zuckerberg has said the firm's free speech principles mean the president's posts should be left up unaltered.

    President Trump has more than one million followers on Snapchat, according to the Bloomberg news agency. It said the app is seen as being a "key battleground" by Mr Trump's re-election campaign because it offers a way to reach first-time voters.

    The president's account will not be suspended or deleted.

    However, the fact it will not feature in Discover means that his posts will only be seen by people who subscribe to or search for his account directly.

    Snapchat based its decision on remarks Mr Trump had posted to Twitter rather than its own platform.

    On Monday, Snap's chief executive Evan Speigel had sent a memo to staff in which he detailed his views on the civil unrest sparked by the killing of George Floyd.

    "Every minute we are silent in the face of evil and wrongdoing we are acting in support of evildoers," Mr Speigel wrote.

    "As for Snapchat, we simply cannot promote accounts in America that are linked to people who incite racial violence, whether they do so on or off our platform."

    "Our Discover content platform is a curated platform, where we decide what we promote," he added.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-52912884


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  12. #12
    Debut
    Sep 2018
    Runs
    4,641
    Mentioned
    423 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Twitter accuses President Trump of making 'false claims'


    Twitter has accused the US president of making false claims, in one of the app's own articles covering the news.

    The move - which effectively accuses the leader of lying - refers to a tweet by Donald Trump about his first defence secretary.

    Mr Trump had tweeted that he had given James Mattis the nickname "Mad Dog" and later fired him.

    But Twitter's article says that the former general resigned, and his nickname preceded Trump's presidency.

    It follows last week's explosive confrontation, which saw Twitter fact-check two of President Trump's tweets and label another as glorifying violence.

    The latest confrontation was prompted by a strongly-worded statement issued by General Mattis last night, in which he criticised the president's handling of the protests that followed the killing of George Floyd.

    Gen Mattis described Donald Trump as "the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people - does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us."

    The president fired back quickly in a tweet saying that the one thing he and predecessor Barack Obama had in common was "we both had the honour of firing Jim Mattis, the world's most overrated general. I asked for his letter of resignation and felt good about it".

    "His nickname was 'Chaos', which I didn't like, and changed it to 'Mad Dog'," he added.

    Twitter later published what it calls a Moment, a summary of a news story that you can see when you press the platform's search button. It has also been promoted within the What's Happening box that appears on Twitter's website.

    The article says that "Mattis resigned from the position... after the administration decided to withdraw US troops from Syria", and attributes the fact to a report by the Associated Press news agency.

    It then refers to journalists at CNN, the National Review, the Washington Post and The Dispatch as having written that the nickname 'Mad Dog' had been used before Trump's presidency, with published references dating back to 2004.

    Moments are curated by an internal team at Twitter. They provide a summary of a recent development before presenting some related tweets.

    This is not the first time the tool has been used to call out Donald Trump.

    In March 2019, it said the president had misidentified a co-founder of Greenpeace, and in April 2020 it said he had falsely claimed he could force states to reopen during the Covid-19 pandemic.

    But what is interesting here is that Twitter has chosen to raise the temperature of its clash with the president over what could be seen as a relatively minor issue.

    It was on 20 December 2018 that Gen Mattis announced his resignation, effective from 28 February 2019.

    A furious Mr Trump then announced his defence secretary was going from 1 January and stated he'd essentially fired him. So you could at least argue that, as in many cases, there is a blurry line between a resignation and a firing.

    Perhaps Twitter's chief executive Jack Dorsey is looking on, with a degree of schadenfreude, at what has happened in recent days at Facebook.

    There, Mark Zuckerberg's determination not to follow Twitter's lead and take some kind of action over the president's posts has sparked open revolt.

    Facebook staff, who previously would only grumble anonymously about the company's practices, have put their names to statements deploring Mr Zuckerberg's failure to act.

    This morning, nearly three dozen former employees, including some who had helped write the original guidelines on what can and cannot be posted, published an open letter accusing Mr Zuckerberg of a "betrayal" of Facebook's ideals.

    Last week, it felt as though Twitter might be putting its future in danger by taking on the president.

    This week, it feels as though Mr Zuckerberg's failure to act might leave him facing an even bigger crisis than the Cambridge Analytica scandal.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52923022

  13. #13
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    Twitter pulls down Trump video tribute to Floyd over copyright

    Twitter has disabled President Donald Trump's campaign tribute video to George Floyd on its platform, citing a copyright complaint.

    The clip, which is a collation of photos and videos of protest marches and instances of violence in the aftermath of Floyd's death, has Trump speaking in the background.

    "We respond to valid copyright complaints sent to us by a copyright owner or their authorized representatives," a Twitter representative said.

    The three-minute 45-second video uploaded on Trump's YouTube channel was tweeted by his campaign on June 3.

    The clip, which is still on YouTube, had garnered more than 60,000 views and 13,000 likes.


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  14. #14
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MenInG View Post
    Twitter pulls down Trump video tribute to Floyd over copyright

    Twitter has disabled President Donald Trump's campaign tribute video to George Floyd on its platform, citing a copyright complaint.

    The clip, which is a collation of photos and videos of protest marches and instances of violence in the aftermath of Floyd's death, has Trump speaking in the background.

    "We respond to valid copyright complaints sent to us by a copyright owner or their authorized representatives," a Twitter representative said.

    The three-minute 45-second video uploaded on Trump's YouTube channel was tweeted by his campaign on June 3.

    The clip, which is still on YouTube, had garnered more than 60,000 views and 13,000 likes.


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  15. #15
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    Zuckerberg promises Facebook policy review

    Mark Zuckerberg, chief executive of Facebook, promised to review the social network's policies that led to its decision to not moderate controversial messages posted by the US president that appeared to encourage violence against those protesting police racism.

    In a letter to employees, Zuckerberg wrote: "We're going to review our policies allowing discussion and threats of state use of force to see if there are any amendments we should adopt."

    This, he said, includes "excessive use of police or state force. Given the sensitive history in the US, this deserves special consideration."


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  16. #16
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    More than 140 scientists funded by Mark Zuckerberg have said Facebook should not be letting Donald Trump use the social media platform to “spread both misinformation and incendiary statements”.

    The researchers, who include more than 60 professors at leading US research institutions and one Nobel laureate, sent the Facebook CEO a letter on Saturday asking him to “consider stricter policies on misinformation and incendiary language that harms people”, especially during the current turmoil over racial injustice.

    The letter calls the spread of “deliberate misinformation and divisive language” contrary to the researchers’ goals of using technology to prevent and eradicate disease, improve childhood education and reform the criminal justice system.

    Their mission “is antithetical to some of the stances that Facebook has been taking, so we’re encouraging them to be more on the side of truth and on the right side of history, as we’ve said in the letter”, said Debora Marks of Harvard Medical School, one of three professors who organized it.

    The others are Martin Kampmann of the University of California, San Francisco, and Jason Shepherd of the University of Utah. All have grants from a Chan Zuckerberg Initiative program working to prevent, cure and treat neurodegenerative disorders including Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease.

    They said the letter had more than 160 signatories. Shepherd said about 10% were employees of foundations run by Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan.

    The letter objects specifically to Zuckerberg’s decision not to act on a post by Trump that stated “when the looting starts, the shooting starts”. The letter’s authors called the post “a clear statement of inciting violence”.

    Zuckerberg has faced significant backlash, including from Facebook staff, over the choice not to remove Trump’s post this week amid nationwide protests over police brutality. Twitter had both flagged and demoted a Trump tweet using the same language.

    In a statement, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative noted that the philanthropic organization was separate from Facebook and said “we are grateful for our staff, partners and grantees” and “respect their right to voice their opinions, including on Facebook policies”.

    Some Facebook employees have publicly objected to Zuckerberg’s refusal to take down or label misleading or incendiary posts by Trump and other politicians. But Zuckerberg has so far refused.

    On Friday, Zuckerberg said in a post that he would review “potential options for handling violating or partially-violating content aside from the binary leave-it-up or take-it-down decisions”.

    https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...ump-scientists


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  17. #17
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    Facebook Inc has fired an employee who had criticised Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg's decision not to take action against inflammatory posts by US President Donald Trump earlier this month, citing the software engineer's tweet challenging a colleague's silence on the issue.

    Brandon Dail, a user interface engineer in Seattle, said in a tweet on Friday that he was dismissed for publicly scolding a colleague who had refused to include a statement of support for the Black Lives Matter movement on developer documents he was publishing.


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  18. #18
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    Facebook says it has removed adverts for US President Donald Trump's re-election campaign that featured a symbol used in Nazi Germany.

    The company said the offending ad contained an inverted red triangle similar to that used by the Nazis to label opponents such as communists.

    Mr Trump's campaign team said they were aimed at the far-left activist group antifa, which it said uses the symbol.

    Facebook said the ads violated its policy against organised hate.

    "We don't allow symbols that represent hateful organisations or hateful ideologies unless they are put up with context or condemnation," the social network's head of security policy, Nathaniel Gleicher, said on Thursday.

    He added: "That's what we saw in this case with this ad, and anywhere that that symbol is used we would take the same actions."

    The ads, which were posted on the site on pages belonging to President Trump and Vice-President Mike Pence, were online for about 24 hours and had received hundreds of thousands of views before they were taken down.

    "The inverted red triangle is a symbol used by antifa, so it was included in an ad about antifa," Tim Murtaugh, a spokesman for the Trump campaign, said in a statement.

    "We would note that Facebook still has an inverted red triangle emoji in use, which looks exactly the same," he added.

    Mr Trump has recently accused antifa of starting riots at street protests across the US over the death in police custody of African American George Floyd.

    Who are Boogaloo Bois, antifa and Proud Boys?

    The president said last month that he would designate the anti-fascist group a "domestic terrorist organisation", although legal experts have questioned his authority to do so.

    Antifa is a far left protest movement that opposes neo-Nazis, fascism, white supremacists and racism. It is considered to be a loosely organised group of activists with no leaders.

    Most members decry what they see as the nationalistic, anti-immigration and anti-Muslim policies of Mr Trump.

    A move likely to infuriate the president
    By James Clayton, Technology Reporter, BBC North America

    This is the latest salvo in an increasingly fraught relationship between the technology giants and the White House.

    Last month, Twitter put a warning on one of the president's tweets about rioting in Minneapolis - saying it had "glorified violence".

    Mr Trump hit back by talking about the "unchecked power" of big tech. He said that Section 230 - a law that protects social media companies from being legally responsible for the online content of users - should be revoked.

    But forget Twitter for now, Facebook is the platform that Mr Trump really cares about. The social network is where a majority of his online political advertising budget goes. The move will likely infuriate the president. It also acts as a warning that Facebook does - and will - moderate some political content.

    As the 2020 election draws nearer, it's likely more and more focus will be placed on what it does - and does not - take down.

    Earlier this month, Facebook employees spoke out against the tech giant's decision not to remove or flag a controversial post by Mr Trump relating to the protests over Mr Floyd's death.

    The president posted a comment on the social network saying that he would "send in the National Guard" and warned that "when the looting starts, the shooting starts". But Facebook said it did not violate its company policy.

    Mr Trump had tweeted the same comments, but Twitter placed a warning over the content, which it said "glorified violence".

    Some Facebook staff said they were "ashamed".

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53098439


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  19. #19
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    Twitter has flagged a video tweeted by Donald Trump, which contained a fake CNN news segment about a “racist baby”, adding a warning label that the post contained manipulated media.

    The video, which had been doctored to make it appear as if were a CNN broadcast, features two toddlers running and includes a fake chyron that reads “Terrified todler (sic) runs from racist baby”. The clip later accuses “fake news” of spreading misinformation.

    Twitter added a label to the video, which was tweeted out by Trump late on Thursday evening, marking it as manipulated. Earlier in the day, Facebook removed Trump campaign ads that prominently featured a Nazi symbol.

    This latest move from Twitter comes after Trump signed an executive order last month is designed to narrow protections for social media companies over the content posted on their platforms.

    Although Twitter had taken a largely hands-off approach to the president’s controversial tweets, in recent weeks the company began adding a label that fact-checked misinformation amplified by the US president, as well as a note cautioning that a post glorified violence.

    The company’s policy prohibits sharing videos that have been “deceptively altered”, which is what earned the video sourced from a pro-Trump meme creator a warning label. The platform previously enforced the policy when the White House social media director, Dan Scavino, posted a manipulated video that made it appear as if Joe Biden had endorsed Trump.

    Later on Thursday night, the president posted another video, which included another apparently manipulated CNN clip. The video again accuses journalists of amplifying fake news, and misconstruing what happened when a white Trump supporter chased after an Uber driver. It features CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta speaking to the camera, with a fake chyron that reads: “Trumps Fault? White Man in MAGA Hat Attacks Black Uber Driver.”

    The manipulated toddler video shared by the president remained unlabelled on Facebook. Earlier this month, Facebook employees staged a virtual “walkout” over CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s decision to leave up a post from Trump that appeared to encourage violence against demonstrators protesting police brutality. Trump invoked the phrase, “when the looting starts, the shooting starts”, which dates back to the civil rights era, when it was used by a segregationist politician and white police chief justifying a crackdown against protestors. Twitter hid the message behind a grey box.

    Twitter previously labeled a Trump post about fraudulent mail-in ballots with a message that reads, “Get the facts about mail-in ballots”, and redirected the public to news articles fact-checking Trump’s false claims.

    The social network has also removed Trump tweets for copyright infringement after Trump used unlicensed music in an advert featuring music from the film Dark Knight Rises and in a video set to the song Photograph by the band Nickelback.

    https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...ipulated-media


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  20. #20
    Debut
    Sep 2018
    Runs
    4,641
    Mentioned
    423 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Twitter again slaps warning on Trump tweet threatening force against protesters

    Twitter Inc (TWTR.N) on Tuesday placed a warning notice on a tweet by President Donald Trump threatening “serious force” against protesters in the U.S. capital, the second time it has used the label since it began challenging Trump’s tweets in May.

    “There will never be an ‘Autonomous Zone’ in Washington, D.C., as long as I’m your President. If they try they will be met with serious force!” the president said in his tweet, which Twitter said violated its policy against abusive behavior.

    Trump posted the message after anti-racism protesters on Monday declared a “Black House Autonomous Zone” - referencing a Seattle area taken over by activists known as the Capitol Hill Organized Protest (CHOP) or Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone - in front of St. John’s Episcopal Church near the White House.

    Police cleared the White House area on Tuesday and blocked access to the site, where law enforcement had used violence to disperse protesters earlier this month.

    Twitter said it hid Trump’s tweet behind its “public interest” notice because it included a threat of harm against an identifiable group. The label restricts distribution of tweets by public officials which violate Twitter’s rules, while leaving them online to allow for scrutiny.

    A Twitter spokeswoman said teams within the company’s safety division informed Chief Executive Jack Dorsey of the decision before applying the notice.

    Facebook, which has taken a more hands-off approach to speech by political leaders, left the same post untouched.

    At least 150,000 people had liked Trump’s tweet and 33,000 retweeted it before Twitter restricted engagement, according to the most recent image captured by the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine. His post on Facebook received 12,000 comments.

    The warning escalated Twitter’s challenge to Trump, who has used the platform unimpeded for years to rally supporters and deride opponents.

    After the company last month started applying labels to his messages, Trump announced plans to scrap or weaken a law that has protected internet companies in order to regulate social media platforms more aggressively.

    Twitter’s first public interest notice against Trump also involved a threat of force against protesters, who have been demonstrating against racial injustice since the May 25 death of George Floyd, a Black man, in police custody.

    Trump had used the phrase “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” to threaten deadly force against protesters in Minneapolis, where Floyd died.

    Twitter said that message violated its rules against “glorifying violence.” It has also appended fact-checking and manipulated media labels to Trump’s tweets in the last month.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-us...KBN23U33V?il=0


  21. #21
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    Facebook has said it will start to label potentially harmful posts that it leaves up because of their news value.

    The more hands-on approach comes as the social media firm is under pressure to improve how it moderates the content on its platform, including posts by US President Donald Trump.

    More than 90 advertisers have joined a boycott of the site.

    Consumer goods giant Unilever on Friday added its name to the list, citing a "polarized election period" in the US.

    The maker of Dove soap and Ben & Jerry's ice cream said it would halt Twitter, Facebook and Instagram advertising in the US "at least" through 2020.

    "Continuing to advertise on these platforms at this time would not add value to people and society," it said. "We will revisit our current position if necessary."

    In a speech on Friday, Facebook boss Mark Zuckerberg defended the firm's record of taking down hate speech.

    He pointed to a European Commission report this month that found Facebook removed 86% of hate speech last year, up from 82.6%.

    What did Mark Zuckerberg say?

    But he said the firm was tightening its policies to "address the reality of the challenges our country is facing and how they're showing up across our community".

    He said the firm would ban ads that describe different groups, based on descriptors such as race or immigration status, as a threat. It will also remove content - even from a politician - if it determines that it incites violence or suppresses voting.

    Mr Zuckerberg also said the firm will attach a label to "problematic" content that falls outside of those categories.

    "A handful of times a year, we leave up content that would otherwise violate our policies if the public interest value outweighs the risk of harm," he said. "Often, seeing speech from politicians is in the public interest, and in the same way that news outlets will report what a politician says, we think people should generally be able to see it for themselves on our platforms.

    "We will soon start labelling some of the content we leave up because it is deemed newsworthy, so people can know when this is the case," he said.

    Twitter has already taken some similar steps, including banning advertisements from politicians and adding labels and warnings to some kinds of content,including tweets by Mr Trump.

    "We have developed policies and platform capabilities designed to protect and serve the public conversation, and as always, are committed to amplifying voices from under-represented communities and marginalized groups," said Twitter executive Sarah Personette.

    Shares of Facebook and Twitter both fell more than 7% on Friday.

    Some boycott organisers said Mr Zuckerberg's promises did not go far enough.

    "What we've seen in today's address from Mark Zuckerberg is a failure to wrestle with the harms [Facebook] has caused on our democracy & civil rights" said Color of Change president Rashad Robinson said.

    "If this is the response he's giving to major advertisers withdrawing millions of dollars from the company, we can't trust his leadership," he wrote on Twitter.

    Why are companies boycotting Facebook?

    The "Stop Hate for Profit" campaign was started by US civil rights groups after the death of George Floyd in May while in police custody. It has focused on Facebook, which also owns Instagram; and WhatsApp and last year attracted advertising revenue of almost $70bn (56.7bn).

    The organisers, which include Color of Change and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, have said Facebook allows "racist, violent and verifiably false content to run rampant on its platform".

    Nicole Perrin, analyst at eMarketer, said it will be difficult to determine the financial impact of the boycott on Facebook, given the significant changes in advertising amid the pandemic.

    But she said Unilever's announcement was significant, noting that the firm was dropping the ads for longer than called for, and on more platforms.

    "That suggests a deeper problem with user-generated content platforms, as divisiveness is to be expected on any such platform that allows political expression," she said.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53196487


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  22. #22
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    Coca-Cola will suspend advertising on social media globally for at least 30 days, as pressure builds on platforms to crack down on hate speech.

    "There is no place for racism in the world and there is no place for racism on social media," the drinks maker's chairman and CEO James Quincey said.

    He demanded "greater accountability and transparency" from social media firms.

    It came after Facebook said it would label potentially harmful or misleading posts left up for their news value.

    Founder Mark Zuckerberg said Facebook would also ban advertising containing claims "that people of a specific race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, caste, sexual orientation, gender identity or immigration status" are a threat to others.

    The organisers of the #StopHateforProfit campaign, which accuses Facebook of not doing enough to stop hate speech and disinformation, said the "small number of small changes" would not "make a dent in the problem".

    More than 90 companies have paused advertising in support of #StopHateforProfit.

    As a result of the boycott, shares in Facebook fell 8.3% on Friday, eliminating $56bn (45bn) from the company's market value and knocking $7.2bn off Mr Zuckerberg's personal net worth, Bloomberg reported. As a result of the loss, Louis Vuitton boss Bernard Arnault replaced the Facebook founder as the world's third richest individual.

    Coca-Cola told CNBC its advertising suspension did not mean it was joining the campaign, despite being listed as a "participating business".

    Mr Quincey said the company would use the global "social media platform pause" to "reassess our advertising policies to determine whether revisions are needed".

    Clothes maker Levi Strauss & Co also said it would be pausing advertising on Facebook following Mr Zuckerberg's announcement. Unlike Coca-Cola, it accused the social media firm of not going far enough.

    "We are asking Facebook to commit to decisive change," CMO Jen Say said.

    "We want to see meaningful progress towards ending the amplification of misinformation and hate speech and better addressing of political advertisements and content that contributes to voter suppression. While we appreciate that Facebook announced some steps in this direction today - it's simply not enough."

    The #StopHateforProfit coalition - which includes the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) - said none of the changes would be vetted or verified.

    "We have been down this road before with Facebook. They have made apologies in the past. They have taken meagre steps after each catastrophe where their platform played a part. But this has to end now," it added.

    The campaign called on Mr Zuckerberg to take further steps, including establishing permanent civil rights infrastructure within his company; submitting to independent audits of identity-based hate and misinformation; finding and removing public and private groups publishing such content; and creating expert teams to review complaints.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53204072


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  23. #23
    Debut
    Oct 2004
    Runs
    130,856
    Mentioned
    2545 Post(s)
    Tagged
    21 Thread(s)
    Starbucks has announced it will suspend advertising on some social media platforms in response to hate speech.

    The coffee giant joins global brands including Coca-Cola, Diageo and Unilever which have recently removed advertising from social platforms.

    A Starbucks spokesperson told the BBC the social media "pause" would not include YouTube, owned by Google.

    "We believe in bringing communities together, both in person and online," Starbucks said in a statement.

    The brand said it would "have discussions internally and with media partners and civil rights organizations to stop the spread of hate speech". But it will continue to post on social media without paid promotion, it said.

    The announcement came after Coca-Cola called for "greater accountability" from social media firms.

    Coca Cola said it would pause advertising on all social media platforms globally, while Unilever, owner of Ben & Jerry's ice cream, said it would halt Twitter, Facebook and Instagram advertising in the US "at least" through 2020.

    The announcements follow controversy over Facebook's approach to moderating content on its platform - seen by many as too hands off. It came after Facebook said on Friday it would begin to label potentially harmful or misleading posts which have been left up for their news value.

    Founder Mark Zuckerberg said Facebook would also ban advertising containing claims "that people of a specific race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, caste, sexual orientation, gender identity or immigration status" are a threat to others.

    The organisers of the #StopHateforProfit campaign, which has accused Facebook of not doing enough to stop hate speech and disinformation, said the "small number of small changes" would not "make a dent in the problem".

    Starbucks said that while it was suspending advertising on some social platforms, it would not join the #StopHateForProfit campaign. More than 90 companies have paused advertising in support of #StopHateforProfit.

    Coca-Cola also told CNBC its advertising suspension did not mean it was joining the campaign, despite being listed as a "participating business".

    The campaign has called on Mr Zuckerberg to take further steps, including establishing permanent civil rights "infrastructure" within Facebook; submitting to independent audits of identity-based hate and misinformation; finding and removing public and private groups publishing such content; and creating expert teams to review complaints.

    Last year, Facebook's saw a 27% increase in advertising revenue on the previous year.


    For the latest updates on Cricket, follow @PakPassion on Twitter

  24. #24
    Debut
    Sep 2018
    Runs
    4,641
    Mentioned
    423 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Facebook takes down accounts and pages of Trump ally Roger Stone


    Facebook Inc (FB.O) on Wednesday removed 50 personal and professional pages connected to U.S. President Donald Trump’s longtime adviser Roger Stone, who is due to report to prison next week.

    The social media platform said Stone and his associates, including a prominent supporter of the right-wing Proud Boys group in Stone’s home state of Florida, had used fake accounts and followers to promote Stone’s books and posts.

    Facebook moved against Stone on the same day it took down accounts tied to employees of the family of Brazilian leader Jair Bolsonaro and two other networks connected to domestic political operations in Ecuador and Ukraine.

    Nathaniel Gleicher, Facebook’s head of cybersecurity policy, said the removals were meant to show that artificially inflating engagement for political impact would be stopped, no matter how well connected the practitioners.

    “It doesn’t matter what they’re saying, and it doesn’t matter who they are,” Gleicher told Reuters before the announcement on the company's blog bit.ly/2Z7QSzc. “We expect we’re going to see more political actors cross this line and use coordinated inauthentic behaviour to try to influence public debate.”

    Facebook officials said they took down Stone’s personal Facebook and Instagram pages and his Stone Cold Truth Facebook page, which had 141,000 followers. A total of 54 Facebook accounts and 50 pages were removed for misbehaviour, including the creation of fake accounts. The accounts spent more than $300,000 on advertisements over the past few years, Facebook said.

    Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg was briefed on the actions beforehand, officials said.

    The removals risk further angering Trump and other conservatives who accuse Facebook of suppressing right-wing voices. Facebook last month took down a Trump re-election ad that included a Nazi symbol, and it pledged to steer users to facts on voting when Trump, or anyone else, touches on the topic.

    Facebook is under pressure from civil rights advocates and allied groups as well, and hundreds of advertisers have joined a boycott demanding the company crack down on hateful and divisive messages.

    Stone was convicted last year for witness tampering and lying to Congress as it and former Special Counsel Robert Mueller investigated Russian interference in the 2016 election.

    In a lengthy email, Stone said he did not control fake accounts and that his accounts had no connection to the Proud Boys.

    “I am being censored by Facebook and Twitter because my social media postings expose the truth regarding the now discredited Mueller investigation and the Russian Collusion hoax as well as the unfairness of my trial in 2020 to the extent possible without violating the protective seal left in place by the court and because I am an outspoken supporter of President Trump,” Stone wrote.

    In search warrant documents released this April, the FBI said a Stone assistant told interviewers in 2018 “that he purchased a couple hundred fake Facebook accounts as part of this work.”

    Facebook said its probe was influenced by the April search documents. But the company said that its unit guarding against coordinated inauthentic behaviour had already been looking into Stone’s pages after a referral from a separate Facebook team monitoring dangerous organizations, which was tracking the Proud Boys.

    Facebook marked the Proud Boys as dangerous and banned their content in 2018. Members have been charged with violence in multiple instances and recently clashed with anti-racism protesters.

    One of the accounts connected to the Proud Boys was operated by Jacob Engels, Facebook said. Stone testified last year that Engels could post on Instagram on his behalf and had access to his phone.

    Engels, who writes for far-right sites, told Reuters he is not a member of the Proud Boys but has “embedded” with them to research the group.

    Graphika analyst Ben Nimmo, a disinformation specialist, said the Stone network had been most active in 2016 and 2017, among other things promoting stories about the Democratic emails published by WikiLeaks as part of the Russian interference effort.

    Many of the accounts were later deleted, and in recent weeks they have mostly reflected Stone’s quest to receive a pardon from Trump for his crimes, according to Nimmo.

    “The inauthentic accounts were amplifying various Stone assets, like his page, or advertising one of his books,” Nimmo said.

    Stone has been stepping up his efforts to get a pardon from Trump before he reports to prison, where his family fears the spread of COVID-19. Trump has said that Stone was treated unfairly, and his attorney general intervened to seek a lesser sentence, prompting four career prosecutors to resign from the case.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-fa...KBN24931C?il=0


Posting Permissions

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