transcript (machine generated)meta/Facebook blog post: More speech and fewer mistakes.
John Robb:
There’s a reason people don’t trust Mark.
He doesn’t have a highly evolved digital ledger on X.
People learn to trust the digital ledger before they trust the person.
more:
It won’t work.
There’s not enough flow/dynamism on the platform anymore (since they nerfed it in 2014) to make it possible.
Antonia Garcia Martinez:
I distinctly recall when, days after the 2016 election, Zuck posted FB would start adjudicating truth in posts.
As a former employee, I was shocked that a company focused on free speech for all would spin up a censorship apparatus.
That finally ends.
more…
A whole cadre of ‘misinformation’ experts sprung up to morally justify (and cash in on) the enterprise.
For years, a much smaller group warned of where this would lead, and that 1A should be our guide to online speech.
We were universally reviled.
Eoghan Mccabe:
On one hand, it’s frustrating to see Silicon Valley CEOs locate their testicles only after it’s easy to do so. (Although many are still quiet!) On the other, it’s incredible to see how hard the vibe is truly shifting. This is feeling more durable now.
Glenn Greenwald: more and more
One of the worst, most toxic “disinformation” groups in the West is the “Center for Countering Digital Hate” and its conniving President Imran Ahmed.
Leaked documents previously showed their attempt to “kill Musk’s Twitter.” Now @MaxBlumenthal obtained emails showing this:
David Hansson:
I’ve given Zuckerberg a lot of shit over the years, but this is an incredible pivot. You can speculate about motives and authenticity all day long, but reducing political censorship in a world bent on pursuing it is worthy of unqualified applause. Bravo 👏
https://x.com/markpinc/status/1876659312355143831?s=46:
The most successful leaders like zuck and benioff know how to ride the culture wave. This is a master class! They distance themself from the last where they were active participants, protraying themselves as victims too. Now theyre finally free to do whats right. Only they waited until Trump won. But still amazing to watch their skill!
They let @elonmusk and others take the arrows and then ride in when it’s safe. Nice work!
Hans Mancke:
It’s astonishing how easily people forgive or forget the tremendous, often irreversible damage caused by Facebook’s actions.
First off, Facebook banned mentions of the lab leak theory. This had real consequences. If it had been more widely understood that Covid originated in a lab, the entire course of the pandemic would have been very different. Unlike natural viruses, Covid was engineered for human transmission. That rendered mitigation measures such as lockdowns, contact tracing, masks, etc totally useless. Facebook prevented the truth from coming out.
Brendan Eich:
What consequence for malfeasance? These liars even tried evading FOIA, but the judge wasn’t having it. They should not have any position of authority in government, not even dog catcher in a zero dog town.
Amjad Masad:
I was at Facebook in 2013 and it was already in full swing where activist employees were demanding more and more censorship. And user ops teams were clearly political.
David Sacks:
For those of us who have been fighting the free speech wars for years, this feels like a major victory and turning point.
Justin Amash
I know it’s hard to uncover the truth. I don’t blame most people for getting confused from all the noise or tuning it all out because it’s just too much.
But the fact is that this scam continues because people keep falling for it. The only hope we have for our constitutional republic is if enough of us stop letting them take us for a ride.
Nicole Shanahan:
“The axe forgets, but the tree remembers.”
“ai summary” via gpt4:
Matt Taibbi:
For now, his comments feel significant both as confirmation of reporting on the topic, and as an assessment of coming challenges.
Pavel Durov
I’m proud that Telegram has supported freedom of speech long before it became politically safe to do so. Our values don’t depend on US electoral cycles.
Today, other platforms are announcing they’ll now have less censorship. But the real test of their newly discovered values will come once the political winds change again. It’s easy to say you support something when you risk nothing.
Dave Lee:
If Zuck is serious then let’s see the equivalent of the Twitter Files for Facebook. Show all the communication back and forth (not just handpicked ones) between the government and Facebook regarding COVID/vaccine censorship.
Summary of Key Points
Main Themes
- Focus on Free Expression: Commitment to restoring free expression on Facebook, Instagram, and Threads.
- Content Moderation Issues: Challenges with complex moderation systems causing censorship mistakes.
- Shift in Approach: Fact-checkers replaced with community notes, simplifying policies on sensitive topics.
- New Policy Enforcement: Focus on illegal and high-severity issues; rely on user reporting for lower-severity cases.
- Reintroduction of Civic Content: Plans to recommend political and civic content again while ensuring positivity.
- Operational Changes: Relocating trust and safety teams from California to Texas to address bias concerns.
- Global Advocacy: Collaboration with the US government to counter international censorship efforts.
- Trade-offs and Challenges: Acknowledgment that reducing moderation may catch less bad content but will minimize censorship mistakes.
- Commitment to Improvement: Emphasis on evolving systems to prioritize user voice and build trust over time.
Notable Actions
- Transitioning to a community-driven moderation model.
- Simplifying rules to better align with mainstream discourse.
- Dialing back automated filters and increasing confidence thresholds for content removal.
- Reviving civic and political discussions on platforms.
Conclusion
This vision emphasizes empowering user voices, reducing moderation mistakes, and advocating for free expression in the face of global censorship pressures.
Katie Harbath (links) discusses the 2016 election & Facebook at a 2018 WisPolitics event (audio + transcript).
———-
Backstory: Matt Taibbi:
1. Thread: THE TWITTER FILES
2. What you’re about to read is the first installment in a series, based upon thousands of internal documents obtained by sources at Twitter.
3. The “Twitter Files” tell an incredible story from inside one of the world’s largest and most influential social media platforms. It is a Frankensteinian tale of a human-built mechanism grown out [of] the control of its designer.
4. Twitter in its conception was a brilliant tool for enabling instant mass communication, making a true real-time global conversation possible for the first time.
5. In an early conception, Twitter more than lived up to its mission statement, giving people “the power to create and share ideas and information instantly, without barriers.”
6. As time progressed, however, the company was slowly forced to add those barriers. Some of the first tools for controlling speech were designed to combat the likes of spam and financial fraudsters.
7. Slowly, over time, Twitter staff and executives began to find more and more uses for these tools. Outsiders began petitioning the company to manipulate speech as well: first a little, then more often, then constantly.
8. By 2020, requests from connected actors to delete tweets were routine. One executive would write to another: “More to review from the Biden team.” The reply would come back: “Handled.”
Legacy media notes:
Gareth Vipers:
Zuckerberg directly referenced Trump several times in the video, criticizing the legacy media for their coverage of his first term in office. He also said that fact-checkers had become “too politically biased.”
The company also announced it would be relocating what it calls the “trust and safety teams” responsible for writing policy and reviewing content from California to Texas and other U.S. locations.
Meta implemented its third-party fact-checking function after the 2016 election in what it has said was an effort to restrict misinformation and the spread of false news on its platforms.
In 2019 the company drew the ire of some employees when it said it wouldn’t fact-check paid-for advertising by political candidates.
“Free speech and paid speech are not the same thing,” the employees said in an open letter to Facebook in October 2019. They argued that exempting candidates’ ads from fact checking “allows politicians to weaponize our platform by targeting people who believe that content posted by political figures is trustworthy.”
In response to the letter, the company said it welcomed internal debate and criticism of its policies.
Tim Bradshaw and Yasemin Craggs Mersinoglu:
The $1.6tn company on Tuesday said it would “allow more speech by lifting restrictions on some topics that are part of mainstream discourse and focusing our enforcement on illegal and high-severity violations” and “take a more personalised approach to political content”.
“It’s time to get back to our roots around free expression on Facebook and Instagram,” Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s chief executive and co-founder, said in a video post.
“Just like they do on X, Community Notes will require agreement between people with a range of perspectives to help prevent biased ratings,” Meta said in a blog post.
Theodore Schleifer and Mike Isaac:
Instead of using news organizations and other third-party groups, Meta, which owns Facebook, Instagram and Threads, will rely on users to add notes to posts that may contain false or misleading information.
Notes and links on censorship.
Steve Guest:
Never forget that in 2020, PolitiFact said it was “false” to say COVID came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Jason Koebler:
Meta’s HR team is deleting internal employee criticism of new board member, UFC president and CEO Dana White, at the same time that CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced to the world that Meta will “get back to our roots around free expression,” 404 Media has learned. Some employee posts questioning why criticism of White is being deleted are also being deleted.
Wall Street Journal:
Facebook in March 2021 flagged a Journal op-ed by Johns Hopkins surgeon Marty Makary about the pace at which Americans would develop herd immunity. The platform also targeted the Journal’s review of climate contrarian Steven Koonin’s excellent book “Unsettled.”
Legal discovery in Murthy v. Missouri revealed how Meta executives bowed to demands by Biden officials to censor “misinformation.” The Supreme Court ruled last year that the plaintiffs didn’t prove they were censored in direct response to government pressure, but the case exposed the collusion between the Biden Administration and Big Tech.
The progressive censorship spurred Elon Musk to buy X.com (formerly Twitter) to provide a free-speech forum. To liberal shock, Mr. Musk eliminated the platform’s political speech controls and implemented a Community Notes system in which users can flag posts to provide more context. In other words, counter bad speech with more speech.
We shall see.