{"id":9560,"date":"2022-12-17T16:55:40","date_gmt":"2022-12-17T16:55:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lonecandle.com\/?p=9560"},"modified":"2022-12-17T16:55:40","modified_gmt":"2022-12-17T16:55:40","slug":"what-the-twitter-files-dont-tell-us","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/?p=9560","title":{"rendered":"What the Twitter files don\u2019t tell us"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

\n\n“journalists Weiss and Taibbi shared details of some of the documents and their own analysis in two long Twitter threads. The revelations are ongoing, with plans to post more<\/a> in the coming days. Their central accusation so far is that Twitter has long silenced conservative or contrarian voices, and they reference internal emails, Slack messages, and content moderation systems to show how Twitter limited the reach of popular right-wing accounts like Dan Bongino, Charlie Kirk, and Libs of TikTok.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But these claims and the internal documents lack crucial context.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We don\u2019t have a full explanation, for example, of whyTwitter limited the reach of these accounts \u2014 i.e., whether they were violating the platform\u2019s rules on hate speech, health misinformation, or violent content. Without this information, we don\u2019t know whether these rules were applied fairly or not. Twitter has long acknowledged that it sometimes downranks content<\/a> that is violative of its rules instead of all-out banning it. It\u2019s a strategy that Musk himself has advocated for by arguing that people should have \u201cfreedom of speech, but not freedom of reach\u201d<\/a> on the platform.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And while Weiss has surfaced specific examples of Twitter limiting the reach of conservative accounts known for spreading hateful content about the LGTBQ+ community <\/a>or sharing the \u201cbig lie\u201d about the US presidential elections,<\/a> we don\u2019t know if Twitter did the same for some far-left accounts that have also been known for pushing boundaries, such as some former Occupy movement leaders<\/a> who have complained about Twitter\u2019s content moderation in the past.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Musk, Weiss, and Taibbi are also assuming these decisions were made with explicit political motivation. Historically, most Twitter employees \u2014 like the rest of Big Tech \u2014 lean liberal<\/a>. Twitter\u2019s conservative critics argue that this presents an inherent bias in the company\u2019s content moderation decisions. Former Twitter employees Recode spoke with this week insisted that content moderation teams operate in good faith to execute on Twitter\u2019s policy rules, regardless of personal politics. And research shows that Twitter\u2019s recommendation algorithms actually have an inherent bias in favor of right-wing<\/a> news. What\u2019s been shared so far in the Twitter files doesn\u2019t offer clear proof that anyone at Twitter made decisions about specific accounts or tweets because of their political affiliation. We need more context and information to clarify what\u2019s really going on here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But to right-wing politicians, influencers, and their supporters, none of this nuance ultimately matters.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/www.vox.com\/recode\/2022\/12\/9\/23502237\/twitter-files-elon-musk-conservatives-right-wing-bari-weiss-matt-taibbi-blacklist-shadowban<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“journalists Weiss and Taibbi shared details of some of the documents and their own analysis in two long Twitter threads. The revelations are ongoing, with plans to post more in the coming days. Their central accusation so far is that Twitter has long silenced conservative or contrarian voices, and they reference internal emails, Slack messages, and content moderation systems to show how Twitter limited the reach of popular right-wing accounts like Dan Bongino, Charlie Kirk, and Libs of TikTok.
\nBut these claims and the internal documents lack crucial context.<\/p>\n

We don\u2019t have a full explanation, for example, of why Twitter limited the reach of these accounts \u2014 i.e., whether they were violating the platform\u2019s rules on hate speech, health misinformation, or violent content. Without this information, we don\u2019t know whether these rules were applied fairly or not. Twitter has long acknowledged that it sometimes downranks content that is violative of its rules instead of all-out banning it. It\u2019s a strategy that Musk himself has advocated for by arguing that people should have \u201cfreedom of speech, but not freedom of reach\u201d on the platform.<\/p>\n

And while Weiss has surfaced specific examples of Twitter limiting the reach of conservative accounts known for spreading hateful content about the LGTBQ+ community or sharing the \u201cbig lie\u201d about the US presidential elections, we don\u2019t know if Twitter did the same for some far-left accounts that have also been known for pushing boundaries, such as some former Occupy movement leaders who have complained about Twitter\u2019s content moderation in the past.<\/p>\n

Musk, Weiss, and Taibbi are also assuming these decisions were made with explicit political motivation. Historically, most Twitter employees \u2014 like the rest of Big Tech \u2014 lean liberal. Twitter\u2019s conservative critics argue that this presents an inherent bias in the company\u2019s content moderation decisions. Former Twitter employees Recode spoke with this week insisted that content moderation teams operate in good faith to execute on Twitter\u2019s policy rules, regardless of personal politics. And research shows that Twitter\u2019s recommendation algorithms actually have an inherent bias in favor of right-wing news. What\u2019s been shared so far in the Twitter files doesn\u2019t offer clear proof that anyone at Twitter made decisions about specific accounts or tweets because of their political affiliation. We need more context and information to clarify what\u2019s really going on here.<\/p>\n

But to right-wing politicians, influencers, and their supporters, none of this nuance ultimately matters.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[13],"tags":[1598,1761,327],"class_list":["post-9560","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-article-share","tag-elon-musk","tag-scandal","tag-twitter"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9560","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=9560"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9560\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9561,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9560\/revisions\/9561"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=9560"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=9560"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=9560"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}