Old wine, new bottles: Twitter’s ‘simplified’ rules are just as vague and arbitrary

Screen Shot 2019-06-07 at 11.21.13 AM

Twitter has revamped its rules, cutting them into tweet-sized morsels in the name of a “healthier public conversation.” Just as opaque and patronizing as before, they’re now even more likely to get you banned. Move over, YouTube!

Twitter has presented its users with a reformulated “easier to understand” set of rules, moving most of the text off the main page for a pleasing aesthetic experience and upping the chance users will never read the detailed policies. The byzantine and often self-contradictory conduct code is chock full of pitfalls, and users are quickly finding out the range of bannable offenses has swollen to rival YouTube’s and Facebook’s.

“Private Information,” “Sensitive Media” and “Terrorism & Violent Extremism” are the subsections advertised on the new rules page as having received a makeover, but reading through them is likely to leave the user even more confused than before. “We also prohibit the glorification of violence,” the tweet-sized takeaway under “violence and extremism” reads, but if you click through to the actual policy page, it turns out “violent acts by state actors” get a pass.

Non-state actors – including Vox blogger Carlos Maza, whose complaints have been blamed for triggering Wednesday’s mass deplatforming on YouTube – have also gotten away with what could fall under “glorification of violence,” as some were quick to point out, noting their accounts had not only survived but thrived during the latest “purge.”

Screen Shot 2019-06-07 at 11.28.31 AM

Another user raised the question of why Twitter would ask for government-issued identification in the course of a suspension appeal, and where that information might end up – considering how fellow tech giant Google hands over the personal data of tens of thousands of users yearly at the government’s request.

Screen Shot 2019-06-07 at 11.29.40 AM

Twitter’s notoriously-vague hate speech rules have not been clarified – if anything, they’ve grown even more complex. There’s a “hateful conduct” policy and an “abuse/harassment” policy, the latter of which includes “hoping that someone experiences physical harm,” handing even more ammunition to the opponents of ‘thought police’.

Still want to get somebody banned but can’t find a rationale under the new and improved hate speech/harassment rules? Twitter has thoughtfully included a catch-all, menacingly vague prohibition against “platform manipulation” that echoes the “coordinated inauthentic behavior” reason Facebook gave for deplatforming hundreds of politically-active accounts before the 2018 US midterm elections.

“You may not use Twitter’s services in a manner intended to artificially amplify or suppress information or engage in behavior that manipulates or disrupts people’s experience on Twitter.”

Screen Shot 2019-06-07 at 11.31.51 AM

The page warns users against tweeting too much, following too many people, “aggressively adding users to lists,” trying to make accounts “appear more popular or active than they are,” and tweeting with “excessive, unrelated hashtags” – among dozens more no-nos. But “hobby/artistic bots” are apparently OK – a ready-made loophole for the likes of New Knowledge, the American Democrat-linked “experts” who ran an army of fake “Russian bots.”

The new rules don’t explain the “unusual behavior” that has apparently become grounds for banning, and many users took the opportunity to lash out at the platform for its censorship.

Screen Shot 2019-06-07 at 11.34.06 AM

Parody accounts are supposedly still allowed, though someone apparently forgot to tell whoever deplatformed the latest AOC parody account on Tuesday.

Screen Shot 2019-06-07 at 11.35.16 AM

The new, improved Twitter rules dropped less than 24 hours after the #VoxAdpocalypse left hundreds of YouTubers demonetized or even deleted for so-called “supremacist content” – a vague term which in practice seems to have translated to “conservative political speech,” since most white supremacist content had already been removed from the platform in earlier purges and “supremacist” content of any other kind appears to have been largely left alone.

‘This will not go well’: YouTube cracks down on pundits & journalists after policy change

Screen Shot 2019-06-07 at 11.37.30 AM

“Open borders are the source of Europe’s strength”, says the UN Secretary-General

By Arthur Lyons

EU member-states must cede the power to restrict immigration to technocrats in Brussels because the continent “has been enriched throughout its history by diversity”, according to the Secretary-General of the UN Antonio Guterres.

Upon receiving the pro-globalist, anti-national sovereignty Charlemagne Prize which in past years has been awarded to anti-nationalist figures like Angela Merkel, Pope Francis, and Emmanuel Macron, Mr. Guterres began his acceptance speech by warning the crowd that many Europeans were “turning inward, mired in the memory of a golden age that probably never was”.

Throughout his speech which was full of moral grandstanding, he asserted, “Assimilating several cultures [s]and legacies was the starting point of European culture,” while pointing out that the Charlemagne Palace of Aachen “borrowed several elements of Roman and Byzantine civilization”.

According to Mr. Guterres, European simply cannot “protect [the continent’s]rich heritage” unless they consent to relentless waves of mass immigration from the third world, commit to reducing carbon emissions to zilch by 2050, and meet “the [UN] 2030 Agenda and its Sustainable Development Goals”, which seeks to implement cultural Marxist doctrine like equality of outcome based on gender, unchecked abortion laws, and the promotion LGBT lifestyles to young children.

The idea of Europe “cannot be premised on ‘us’ versus ‘them” mentality, the Portuguese politician lectured, adding that there exists “no alternative” other than to open Europe’s borders to the third world. He also alleged that “closing our doors to asylum seekers does not protect but shame this heritage”.

“All societies tend to be, or are already, multi-ethnic, multi-cultural, and multi-religious. This must be considered as a richness, not as a threat,” Guterres insisted, before demanding Brussels tear down EU nation states’ external frontiers and force taxpayers to send money to the Global South in order to achieve a “balanced [immigration]approach addressing the root causes of migration while preserving the rights and dignity of migrants”.

During his address, the Secretary-General emphasized what he referred to as the three unprecedented challenges” which “knock on our doors” at “this time of great geopolitical disorder”: xenophobic “hate speech” which is “fueling terrorism through social media”, human-created climate change, and mass immigration.

The dangers posed by radical Islamic terrorism were never mentioned during the speech. However, he did warn that “the Human Rights agenda has been losing ground to the national sovereignty agenda”.

YouTube to ban ‘hateful’ videos with ‘supremacist’ content

CAP

YouTube has updated its hate speech policies and will now ban videos “with supremacist content,” as well clips promoting certain conspiracy theories.

The company, a subsidiary of Google, announced the clampdown on “hateful content” in a blog post on Wednesday. The company had already restricted commenting and sharing features on similar videos in 2017, but the new ban goes one step further.

“Today, we’re taking another step in our hate speech policy by specifically prohibiting videos alleging that a group is superior in order to justify discrimination, segregation or exclusion,” read the blog post.

YouTube says NO to gay journalist’s request to silence conservative blogger’s ‘homophobic abuse’

CAP

YouTube’s insistence that it will ban all forms of “supremacist” videos stands in contrast to a similar policy change at Facebook, which decided to exclusively ban “white nationalist” and “white supremacist” content, seemingly ignoring similar content from, for example, Black separatist or radical Zionism movements.

Nevertheless, YouTube presented “videos that promote or glorify Nazi ideology” as an example that would break its new rules.

In addition to these changes, YouTube said it will reduce the spread of content that does not outright violate its policies, but “comes right up to the line.”

The company said that this “borderline” content, including flat-earth conspiracy videos and phony science videos, will be dropped from viewers’ recommendations and replaced with videos “from authoritative sources,” a move that will surely rankle free-speech advocates and those who already accuse the site of bias.

‘Death by algorithm’: Maddow inconsolable after YouTube recommends RT interview on Mueller report

CAP

“Finally, we will remove content denying that well-documented violent events, like the Holocaust or the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, took place,” the post continued. YouTube was one of several tech giants that booted Infowars’ Alex Jones from their sites last August, much to the dismay of conservatives and free-speech activists.

Jones had previously suggested that the schoolchildren shot dead in the 2012 Sandy Hook tragedy were “crisis actors”hired to further the gun-control agenda.

Within minutes of the new rules being announced, conservative commentators, journalists, and even black metal musicians reported their videos banned or demonetized by YouTube.

Big Tech caught in antitrust crosshairs of both Trump & Congress

CAP

Silicon Valley tech giants Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google are finding themselves targets of antitrust probes by both the Trump administration and Democrats, in what appears to be a power struggle ahead of the 2020 election.

Although the committee did not name any companies, chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-New York) spoke of “a handful of gatekeepers” who gained control “over key arteries of online commerce, content, and communications.”

Apple shares down after report reveals planned DOJ antitrust probe

House Republicans, usually at odds with Nadler over his investigations into President Donald Trump, seem to have embraced the probe with enthusiasm.

Mere rumors of a Justice Department probe of Google’s parent company Alphabet Inc. and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigation of Amazon and Facebook, caused a massive drop of major technology stocks on Monday, with billions of dollars in market valuation wiped out in minutes.

Alphabet stock was down by more than 6 percent, Facebook went down 7.5 percent, and Amazon dropped 4.6 percent by market closing time. Apple stocks were also down one percent amid rumors of an antitrust probe, even as the company got a bump due to new product announcements.

Conservative journalists and commentators were quick to point out that the antitrust investigations were likely related to the persistent censorship on social media platforms, though there is no direct evidence to that effect.

CAP

Silicon Valley tech giants have maintained that they have every right to police their platforms for “hate speech” and other “unacceptable” content, the definition of which keeps expanding by the day.

Democrats have put pressure on Big Tech to be more censorious – under the guise of rooting out “Russian bots and trolls” – after the 2016 election, when Trump used Twitter and Facebook to bypass the overwhelmingly negative mainstream media coverage and win the presidency. However, it then drew the anger of Republicans, who argued that the suspensions and bans have disproportionately targeted conservative voices.

As voice after voice gets purged from social media, still think there’s no censorship?

CAP

Most recently, Facebook banned any mention of Alex Jones or Infowars from its platforms, including Instagram, unless the posts were critical or hostile. The company also threatened to ban anyone who shared any Infowars content. Several other conservatives were removed in the same purge, and there were reports even photos and mentions of them would get deleted in the aftermath.

Facebook maintained that the ban was part of an ongoing campaign against “individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology.”

For some Democrats running for the 2020 presidential nomination, breaking up big tech has become a trendy rallying cry as they attempt to recruit those unhappy with the online expression monopoly. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has so far been the most aggressive in her offensive on tech giants, launching a social media campaign to break Facebook, Google, Amazon and Apple up. Other Democratic hopefuls jumped in, with the latest being Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), who last month said that he would “of course” back the proposal to disband Facebook. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) has sided with Warren, while a number of other Democrats, including presidential race frontrunner Joe Biden and Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) said that the idea is worth a serious look at least.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑