Deleted tweet detection is currently running at reduced
capacity due to changes to the Twitter API. Some tweets that have been
deleted by the tweet author may not be labeled as deleted in the PolitiTweet
interface.
Showing page 71 of 223.
jack @jack
We updated our civic integrity policy to address misleading or disputed information that undermines confidence in the election, causes voter intimidation or suppression or confusion about how to vote, or misrepresents affiliation or election outcomes. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
Finally, before I close, I wanted to share some reflections on what we saw during the US Presidential election. We focused on addressing attempts to undermine civic integrity, providing informative context, and product changes to encourage greater consideration. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
It’s critical as we consider these solutions, we optimize for new startups and independent developers. Doing so ensures a level playing field that increases the probability of competing ideas to help solve problems going forward. We mustn’t entrench the largest companies further. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
Requiring 1) moderation process and practices to be published, 2) a straightforward process to appeal decisions, and 3) best efforts around algorithmic choice, are suggestions to address the concerns we all have going forward. And they all are achievable in short order. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
Three weeks ago we proposed three solutions to address the concerns raised, and they all focus on services that decide to moderate or remove content. They could be expansions to §230, new legislative frameworks, or a commitment to industry-wide self-regulation best practices. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
I hope this illustrates the rationale behind our actions, and demonstrates our ability to take feedback, admit mistakes, and make changes, all transparently to the public. We acknowledge there are still concerns around how we moderate content, and specifically our use of §230. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
We did not have a practice around retroactively overturning prior enforcement. This incident demonstrated that we needed one, and so we created one we believe is fair and appropriate. https://t.co/uRzMa9i3S6 — PolitiTweet.org
Twitter Safety @TwitterSafety
In response, we’re updating our practice of not retroactively overturning prior enforcement. Decisions made under… https://t.co/6CQNOKX4bA
jack @jack
We informed the @NYPost of our error and policy update, and how to unlock their account by deleting the original violating tweet, which freed them to tweet the exact same content and news article again. They chose not to, instead insisting we reverse our enforcement action. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
We made a quick interpretation, using no other evidence, that the materials in the article were obtained through hacking, and according to our policy, blocked them from being spread. Upon further consideration, we admitted this action was wrong, and corrected it within 24 hours. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
We were called here today because of an enforcement decision we made against the @NYPost, based on a policy we created in 2018 to prevent Twitter from being used to spread hacked materials. This resulted in us blocking people from sharing a @NYPost article, publicly or privately. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
Thank you members of the Judiciary Committee for the opportunity to speak with the American people about Twitter and your concerns around censorship and suppression of a specific news article, and generally what we saw in the 2020 US Elections conversation. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
Welcome, Mudge! — PolitiTweet.org
Mudge @dotMudge
Looks like the cat is out of the bag. I’m very excited to be joining the executive team at Twitter! I truly belie… https://t.co/oNTHp5MnJM
jack @jack
No. https://t.co/X6EWJ73sRx — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
RT @jerrybrito: 1/ Patent trolls are a massive threat to innovation. Every crypto firm and project should join the Crypto Open Patent All… — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
What we learned from our work around the 2020 US Elections conversation https://t.co/z9Z6Xv8q21 — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
RT @nedsegal: Today @twitter is investing $100 million from our balance sheet in Black, Latinx and other underserved communities in the US,… — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
RT @AfriFintech: "#Africa will define the future (especially the #bitcoin one!)" #AFTS2020 is pleased to welcome @jack to answer the who,… — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
RT @CashApp: You can now customize your entire Cash Card https://t.co/AgQlKdUrLF — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
Agreed — PolitiTweet.org
Senator John Thune @SenJohnThune
Appreciate @Jack working on an idea that was generated from Stephen Wolfram’s testimony at a hearing I convened on… https://t.co/9qpj3oJZn9
jack @jack
Thank you for the time, and I look forward to a productive discussion to dig into these and other ideas. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
It’s critical as we consider these solutions, we optimize for new startups and independent developers. Doing so ensures a level playing field that increases the probability of competing ideas to help solve problems. We mustn’t entrench the largest companies any further. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
Requiring 1) moderation process and practices to be published, 2) a straightforward process to appeal decisions, and 3) best efforts around algorithmic choice, are suggestions to address the concerns we all have going forward. And they’re all achievable in short order. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
We’re inspired by the market approach suggested by Dr. Stephen Wolfram before this committee in June 2019. Enabling people to choose algorithms created by third parties to rank and filter their content is an incredibly energizing idea that’s in reach. https://t.co/Oavx4xVskC — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
And finally, much of the content people see today is determined by algorithms, with very little visibility into how they choose what they show. We took a first step in making this more transparent by building a button to turn off our home timeline algorithms. It’s a good start. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
The second is requiring a straightforward process to appeal decisions made by humans or algorithms. This ensures people can let us know when we don't get it right, so that we can fix any mistakes and make our processes better in the future. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
The first is requiring a service’s moderation process to be published. How are cases reported and reviewed? How are decisions made? What tools are used to enforce? Publishing answers to questions like these will make our process more robust and accountable to the people we serve. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
There are three solutions we’d like to propose to address the concerns raised, all focused on services that decide to moderate or remove content. They could be expansions to §230, new legislative frameworks, or a commitment to industry wide self-regulation best practices. — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
That concept of “good faith” is what’s being challenged by many of you today. Some of you don’t trust we’re acting in good faith. That’s the problem I want to focus on solving. How do services like Twitter earn your trust? How do we ensure more choice in the market if we don’t? — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
§230 gave internet services two important tools. The first provides immunity from liability for user’s content. The second provides “Good Samaritan” protections for content moderation and removal, even of constitutionally protected speech, as long as it’s done “in good faith.” — PolitiTweet.org
jack @jack
Thank you members of the Commerce Committee for the opportunity to speak with the American people about Twitter and §230. My remarks will be brief to get to questions. §230 is the most important law protecting internet speech. Removing §230 will remove speech from the internet. — PolitiTweet.org
