We explain Twitter files (twitter documents) – part 1 and part two

porcjawiedzy.pl 2 years ago

Twitter files (twitter documents) is the name given by the fresh Twitter owner, Elon Musk, interior platform papers over the past fewer years. The papers are viewed by independent journalists selected by Musko and posted on Twitter in the form of threads. Twitter files were divided into separate categories, concerning various controversial decisions taken by the platform's management. In the following article, we will effort to explain and give additional context.

Twitter files, part 1 – huntsman Biden's laptop

In the first part, writer Matt Taibbi explains how Twitter censored or banned users at the request of political parties. Matt claims that both parties (Democratic and Republican) enjoyed the privilege, but in later parts of the papers he adds that he has not yet found even 1 request from Trump, or his administration.

1. Thread: THE TWITTER FILES

— Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) December 2, 2022

The writer then goes to the main course, which is huntsman Biden's laptop

Background: In 2019, the boy of the current U.S. President, huntsman Biden, carried his water-filled laptop to the site, asking to retrieve the data collected on it. As he did not study for receipt within 90 days, the laptop switched to the property of the service. Normally, a laptop would be on sale, but the owner of the service during data recovery discovered very disturbing things. The disc was filled with pornographic recordings involving the boy of the future president (and prostitutes), and photographs showing drug use. However, not that, there were only many e-mails with different politicians suggesting that the Biden household might have been active in bribery and corruption. The owner of the service notified his findings to the FBI, and prominent Republican politicians. These gave its contents to fresh York Post journalists.

The laptop footage came out 2 weeks before the election. Immediately after his Twitter and Facebook publication, they decided to “restrict distribution”, which in practice meant that only a tiny part of the net was displayed. A small later Twitter went 1 step further: it blocked distribution, then banned both the diary editorial account and White home spokesperson (for sharing the article). There have been warnings on certain alerts that the content may be ‘dangerous’. The platform besides blocked the anticipation of sharing material, both through tweets and in private news. As a reason Twitter gave “materials derived from a hacking attack”. So far, specified draconian practices have been reserved for the most dangerous crimes (e.g. kid pornography)

Although almost 99% of the political grants from Twitter employees went to the Democratic Party, not all supported the decision to block history. Many of them were amazed or afraid about the decision. The employees claimed that the decision was unfounded. any asked whether another materials of this kind would be censored in a akin way. The decision was made by Vijay Gadde, head of the “policy and trust” department. The decision was made without the engagement of the then CEO of Twitter, Jack Dorsey.

It is worth adding here that the materials derived from the hacking attacks are distributed on the platform without any obstacles. An example is the alleged "Dworczyk's emails" – the content of the post box by Michał Dworczyk revealing his correspondence with many politicians in this with Prime Minister Morawiecki. The platform besides did not block the distribution stolen in president Trump's hacking documents. Another aspect of the communicative is the fact that the origin of the laptop was publically known – the owner took over the laptop with its contents according to the law, so the "hacker attack" was not mentioned.

Media reaction

The media consequence is very interesting. Most of them considered emails to be ‘unverified’ and ‘unidentified’. There have besides been accusations of “Russian misinformation”. Washington Post rated the fresh York Post article as "unfair". It was only months after the election that the newspapers withdrew from their opinions. Washington Post and fresh York Times editorials did not verify emails until mid-March 2022 (a year and a half since the election) and CBS tv nearly 2 years after the election. Why are we writing about this? due to the fact that further parts of Twitter's papers show that Twitter's followers were relying on articles from these newspapers to combat disinformation. So this created a kind of feedback.

Even more interesting was the media consequence to the disclosure of Twitter documents. Most left-wing editorials considered the disclosure of papers to be "small". They besides accused Matt Tabiby of "weak journalism" and of creating "PR" (public relations) for the richest man in the world.

Twitter files, part 2 – secret black Twitter letters

The second part was revealed by writer Bari Weiss. This time, mechanisms for limiting the visibility and banting of users are shown.

THE TWITTTER FILES PART YOURS.

TWITTER’S SECRET BLACKLITS.

— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 9, 2022

Visibility filtering or shadowbanning

The interior Twitter strategy covered user profiles with different labels. They meant that the user could not be found through a search engine, was blocked from trending tweets, or his tweet did not appear to another users. Of course, Twitter's usage of moderation tools is not surprising, but Twitter's followers categorically denied utilizing shadowbanting. specified words were besides made during an under oath before Congress. Meanwhile, Twitter papers uncover that shadowbanning was a average part of Twitter's moderation systems. The only difference was naming — blocking and limiting visibility was called “visibility filtering”.

The "Strategic consequence squad – Global Escalation Team" (SRT-GET) was liable for imposing appropriate blockades. SRT-GET dealt with an average of 200 cases a day. 1 example is prof. Jayant’s “Jay” Bhattacharya – lecturers at Stanford University specialising in medicine. Being an authority in his field, the prof. publically stated that the covid lockdown would affect the children. Although this man is an expert, SRT-GET has decided to limit the visibility of his tweets through the alleged "trend blacklist". It is besides worth noting that the fact that Jaynata has now preached confirmed by studies – social and educational improvement in pre-school age has been importantly slowed down.

SIP-PES

Despite the existence of a peculiar banal department, there was another, overriding 1 consisting of a Twitter lineup, including Vijaya Gadde, Yoel Roth (the head of the “trust and security” department), Twitter CEO, Jack Dorsey (and his successors Parag Agrawal), and respective others. This group was called “Site Integrity Policy, Policy Escalation Support” (in SIP-PES). The group dealt with the most controversial decisions. erstwhile the moderator ran into a case involving individual highly crucial (politician, celebrity), the case was transferred to SIP-PES.

On many occasions, it appears that the SIP-PES group deliberately suspended users who in no way violated the Rules of Procedure. An example is the LibsofTikTok account, which specializes in providing further recordings made available by people with left-wing views on the TikTok platform. Although the account did not break any of the regulation points, it was regularly banned – in only 2022, it was 7 week bans. This means that the full account was suspended for almost 2 months, for no reason whatsoever. Interestingly, the interior papers clearly show that the group could not find even 1 tweet that was a direct violation of the Rules of Procedure.