Politics Twitter shadowbanning political comments

Discussion in 'The Howard Stern Show' started by playitagainfred, Feb 17, 2016.

  1. playitagainfred

    playitagainfred Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    15,447
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2012
    Messages:
    2,823
    Likes Received:
    5,506
    http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/02/16/exclusive-twitter-shadowbanning-is-real-say-inside-sources/

    Rumours that Twitter has begun ‘shadowbanning’ politically inconvenient users have been confirmed by a source inside the company, who spoke exclusively to Breitbart Tech. His claim was corroborated by a senior editor at a major publisher.
    According to the source, Twitter maintains a ‘whitelist’ of favoured Twitter accounts and a ‘blacklist’ of unfavoured accounts. Accounts on the whitelist are prioritised in search results, even if they’re not the most popular among users. Meanwhile, accounts on the blacklist have their posts hidden from both search results and other users’ timelines.

    Our source was backed up by a senior editor at a major digital publisher, who told Breitbart that Twitter told him it deliberately whitelists and blacklists users. He added that he was afraid of the site’s power, noting that his tweets could disappear from users’ timelines if he got on the wrong side of the company.

    Shadowbanning, sometimes known as “Stealth Banning” or “Hell Banning,” is commonly used by online community managers to block content posted by spammers. Instead of banning a user directly (which would alert the spammer to their status, prompting them to create a new account), their content is merely hidden from public view.

    For site owners, the ideal shadowban is when a user never realizes he’s been shadowbanned.

    However, Twitter isn’t merely targeting spammers. For weeks, users have been reporting that tweets from populist conservatives, members of the alternative right, cultural libertarians, and other anti-PC dissidents have disappeared from their timelines.

    Among the users complaining of shadowbans are sci-fi author and alt-right figurehead Vox Day, geek culture blogger “Daddy Warpig,” and the popular pro-Trump account Ricky Vaughn. League of Gamers founder and former World of Warcraft team lead Mark Kern, as well as adult actress and anti-censorship activist Mercedes Carrera, have also reported that their tweets are not appearing on the timelines of their followers.

    The pattern of shadowban reports, which skews towards the alt-right, the populist right, and cultural libertarians, follows close on the heels of Twitter’s establishment of a “Trust and Safety Council” packed with left-wing advocacy groups, as well as Islamic research centre the Wahid Institute.

    It also follows my prediction that Twitter would use its influence to interfere in the 2016 presidential election by muffling conservative voices on the platform.

    For close to a year now, Breitbart has covered Twitter’s march towards political censorship. In May 2015 Allum Bokhari reported that the site had begun to experiment with shadowbans, ostensibly to protect users from abuse. Then, as now, it was suspected that “protecting users from abuse” was an excuse to implement a system that would later be used for political censorship.

    With shadowbans now confirmed by an inside source, there is little room for doubt that the platform is intent on silencing conservatives. Furthermore, it has demonstrated a complete lack of regard for transparency, concealing its shadowbanning system from users and hiding its political bias behind a veneer of opposition to online abuse. (In reality, the site turns a blind eye to abuse from left-wingers.)

    Users in search of a transparent, politically unbiased platform will soon have to find — or build — an alternative.

    Follow Milo Yiannopoulos (@Nero) on Twitter and Facebook, or write to him at Milo Alert! to be notified about new articles when they are published.
     
    CrucifiedAGT likes this.
  2. Coke Can Baby

    Coke Can Baby Don't be a skunk Gold

    Reputations:
    14,282
    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    719
    Likes Received:
    2,777
    beth needs to worry
     
  3. sstressed

    sstressed enhancement toker VIP

    Reputations:
    122,294
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Messages:
    41,153
    Likes Received:
    23,560
    the left will fight to the death for free speech. as long as it's progressive speech. anything they don't agree with they try to shout down or shut down.

    such despicable people. :)
     
  4. Tipsey Russell

    Tipsey Russell VIP Extreme Gold

    Reputations:
    124,556
    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2013
    Messages:
    10,998
    Likes Received:
    25,952
    I followed that korean dude who was a royals fan

    other than that twitter seems sorta goofy to me
     
    John Mahlin likes this.
  5. thegroovologist

    thegroovologist Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    141,451
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2015
    Messages:
    10,324
    Likes Received:
    29,909
    "Facebook's War on Freedom of Speech

    • Facebook is now removing speech that presumably almost everybody might decide is racist -- along with speech that only someone at Facebook decides is "racist."

    • The sinister reality of a society in which the expression of majority opinion is being turned into a crime has already been seen across Europe. Just last week came reports of Dutch citizens being visited by the police and warned about posting anti-mass-immigration sentiments on social media.

    • In lieu of violence, speech is one of the best ways for people to vent their feelings and frustrations. Remove the right to speak about your frustrations and only violence is left.

    • The lid is being put on the pressure cooker at precisely the moment that the heat is being turned up. A true "initiative for civil courage" would explain to both Merkel and Zuckerberg that their policy can have only one possible result.

    It was only a few weeks ago that Facebook was forced to back down when caught permitting anti-Israel postings, but censoring equivalent anti-Palestinian postings.

    Now one of the most sinister stories of the past year was hardly even reported. In September, German Chancellor Angela Merkel met Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook at a UN development summit in New York. As they sat down, Chancellor Merkel's microphone, still on, recorded Merkel asking Zuckerberg what could be done to stop anti-immigration postings being written on Facebook. She asked if it was something he was working on, and he assured her it was.

    At the time, perhaps the most revealing aspect of this exchange was that the German Chancellor -- at the very moment that her country was going through one of the most significant events in its post-war history -- should have been spending any time worrying about how to stop public dislike of her policies being vented on social media. But now it appears that the discussion yielded consequential results.

    Last month, Facebook launched what it called an "Initiative for civil courage online," the aim of which, it claims, is to remove "hate speech" from Facebook -- specifically by removing comments that "promote xenophobia." Facebook is working with a unit of the publisher Bertelsmann, which aims to identify and then erase "racist" posts from the site. The work is intended particularly to focus on Facebook users in Germany. At the launch of the new initiative, Facebook's chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, explained that, "Hate speech has no place in our society -- not even on the internet." She went to say that, "Facebook is not a place for the dissemination of hate speech or incitement to violence." Of course, Facebook can do what it likes on its own website. What is troubling is what this organization of effort and muddled thinking reveals about what is going on in Europe.

    The mass movement of millions of people -- from across Africa, the Middle East and further afield -- into Europe has happened in record time and is a huge event in its history. As events in Paris, Cologne and Sweden have shown, it is also by no means a series of events only with positive connotations.

    As well as being fearful of the security implications of allowing in millions of people whose identities, beliefs and intentions are unknown and -- in such large numbers -- unknowable, many Europeans are deeply concerned that this movement heralds an irreversible alteration in the fabric of their society. Many Europeans do not want to become a melting pot for the Middle East and Africa, but want to retain something of their own identities and traditions. Apparently, it is not just a minority who feel concern about this. Poll after poll shows a significant majority of the public in each and every European country opposed to immigration at anything like the current rate.

    The sinister thing about what Facebook is doing is that it is now removing speech that presumably almost everybody might consider racist -- along with speech that only someone at Facebook decides is "racist."

    And it just so happens to turn out that, lo and behold, this idea of "racist" speech appears to include anything critical of the EU's current catastrophic immigration policy.

    By deciding that "xenophobic" comment in reaction to the crisis is also "racist," Facebook has made the view of the majority of the European people (who, it must be stressed, are opposed to Chancellor Merkel's policies) into "racist" views, and so is condemning the majority of Europeans as "racist." This is a policy that will do its part in pushing Europe into a disastrous future.

    Because even if some of the speech Facebook is so scared of is in some way "xenophobic," there are deep questions as to why such speech should be banned. In lieu of violence, speech is one of the best ways for people to vent their feelings and frustrations. Remove the right to speak about your frustrations, and only violence is left. Weimar Germany -- to give just one example -- was replete with hate-speech laws intended to limit speech the state did not like. These laws did nothing whatsoever to limit the rise of extremism; it only made martyrs out of those it pursued, and persuaded an even larger number of people that the time for talking was over.

    The sinister reality of a society in which the expression of majority opinion is being turned into a crime has already been seen across Europe. Just last week, reports from the Netherlands told of Dutch citizens being visited by the police and warned about posting anti-mass-immigration sentiments on Twitter and other social media.

    In this toxic mix, Facebook has now -- knowingly or unknowingly -- played its part. The lid is being put on the pressure cooker at precisely the moment that the heat is being turned up. A true "initiative for civil courage" would explain to both Merkel and Zuckerberg that their policy can have only one possible result.
    "

    http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7371/facebook-freedom-of-speech
     
    CrucifiedAGT and sstressed like this.
  6. SuperFarts

    SuperFarts Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    47,370
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2012
    Messages:
    5,163
    Likes Received:
    9,667
    Ok. :dontknow:

    Personally, I'm against censorship but whats he bitching about.

    Its usually a voice from the Right that will remind us that these are non-government entities and that its their right to limit speech as they see fit...
     
  7. Willy Pfister

    Willy Pfister VIP Extreme Gold

    Reputations:
    19,298
    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,544
    Likes Received:
    2,376
    Everything which might cause doubt about the wisdom of the government or create discontent will be kept from the people. The basis of unfavorable comparisons with elsewhere, the knowledge of possible alternatives to the course actually taken, information which might suggest failure on the part of the government to live up to its promises or to take advantage of opportunities to improve conditions--all will be suppressed. There is consequently no field where the systematic control of information will not be practiced and uniformity of views not enforced.
    Friedrich Hayek, The Road to Serfdom
     
  8. Pigsaw

    Pigsaw Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    20,707
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2012
    Messages:
    2,576
    Likes Received:
    5,325
    Their service, their rules. Don't like their service? Use another one. It's a free country.
     
  9. Bristol Chicken

    Bristol Chicken Free Range and Loving It Gold

    Reputations:
    159,140
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    3,619
    Likes Received:
    13,709
    Is shadowbanning the reason I can't see Mlaw's posts?
     
  10. Night Ape

    Night Ape Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    52,490
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2012
    Messages:
    4,754
    Likes Received:
    8,059
    This is unfortunately correct.

    I wonder, though, if it's ethical of them, to, by limiting one side of the argument, promulgate the other?

    It's the old adage again: They're so caught up in what they can do, they never stop to think if it's something they should do.

    Regardless, it's obvious they don't care. It's business. They appeal to the popular notions of the day = they continue to make money.
     
  11. bennymuso

    bennymuso Italian by name, British by nature

    Reputations:
    34,381
    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    2,608
    Likes Received:
    3,507
    Communists.
     
  12. Pigsaw

    Pigsaw Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    20,707
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2012
    Messages:
    2,576
    Likes Received:
    5,325
    Business isn't about ethics. It's about profit.
     
    bea miller and doucheBag like this.
  13. AcquiringSignal

    AcquiringSignal Girthy VIP

    Reputations:
    92,737
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,627
    Likes Received:
    17,237
    I've never heard of shadowbanning before. is it somehow related to:

     
    AbeVigoda and Moon like this.
  14. Stretch5000

    Stretch5000 Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    102,823
    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2014
    Messages:
    4,231
    Likes Received:
    10,246
    This isn't about profit.
     
    CrucifiedAGT likes this.
  15. playitagainfred

    playitagainfred Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    15,447
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2012
    Messages:
    2,823
    Likes Received:
    5,506
    that's fine but be upfront about it. its what the "most transparent president in history" would want them to do
     
    al pacinos baby and CrucifiedAGT like this.
  16. Vincenzo69

    Vincenzo69 Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    69,363
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    14,182
    Likes Received:
    17,823
    You guys realize fb and Twitter are private entities and can do whatever they want?
     
    Mlaw, Mr Cachexic and BethSucks like this.
  17. Pigsaw

    Pigsaw Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    20,707
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2012
    Messages:
    2,576
    Likes Received:
    5,325
    Why should they be upfront about anything? They don't have to explain anything to anyone. It's the users obligation to research the service that they choose to use. At least that's what the "personal responsibility" Libertarians want them to do.
     
    Mlaw likes this.
  18. Vincenzo69

    Vincenzo69 Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    69,363
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    14,182
    Likes Received:
    17,823
    The same Saudi oil sheik who owns Fox News and gives money to ISIS owns Twitter
     
  19. Stretch5000

    Stretch5000 Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    102,823
    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2014
    Messages:
    4,231
    Likes Received:
    10,246
    And he doesn't give a fuck about Vox Day or Milo Yiannopoulos or their opinions.
     
  20. Stretch5000

    Stretch5000 Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    102,823
    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2014
    Messages:
    4,231
    Likes Received:
    10,246
    When will leftists wake up and realize that their side of the spectrum has become what they claim they abhor? They're censorial, they're authoritarian.

    Just like conservative Christians, except their left-leaning political beliefs are their post-modern religion of choice.

    They despise the concept free speech as a philosophy for the very bogus reasons of "safety", anti-harassment, and anti-bullying. Holding an opposing viewpoint can "trigger" someone, and disagreement is now considered "violence". All a bunch of bullshit.

    The Overton Window in the West has firmly shifted to the left. Leftism IS the establishment. They act like they're some valiant underdogs fighting the man, but they are the man. And they don't want to have their viewpoints challenged.

    The people that are being shadowbanned on Twitter, and the posts that are getting deleted on Facebook aren't in violation of TOS agreements. They just run counter to established lefty viewpoints. Pure and simple.