Posted on 01/11/2018 6:11:10 AM PST by Red Badger
Steven Pierre, Twitter engineer explains shadow banning, says its going to ban a way of talking Former Twitter software engineer Abhinav Vadrevu on shadow banning: they just think that no one is engaging with their content, when in reality, no one is seeing it Former Twitter Content Review Agent Mo Norai explains banning process: if it was a pro-Trump thing and Im anti-Trump I banned his whole account its at your discretion When asked if banning process was an unwritten rule, Norai adds Very. A lot of unwritten rules It was never written it was more said Olinda Hassan, Policy Manager for Twitter Trust and Safety explains, were trying to down rank shitty people to not show up, were working [that] on right now Shadow banning to be used to stealthily target political views- former Twitter engineer says, thats a thing Censorship of certain political viewpoints to be automated via machine learning according to Twitter software engineer Parnay Singh, Twitter Direct Messaging Engineer, on machine learning algorithms, you have like five thousand keywords to describe a redneck the majority of it are for Republicans
(San Francisco) In the latest undercover Project Veritas video investigation, current and former Twitter employees are on camera explaining steps the social media giant is taking to censor political content that they dont like.
This video release follows the first undercover Twitter exposé Project Veritas released on January 10th which showed Twitter Senior Network Security Engineer Clay Haynes saying that Twitter is more than happy to help the Department of Justice with their little [President Donald Trump] investigation. Twitter responded to the video with a statement shortly after that release, stating the individual depicted in this video was speaking in a personal capacity and does not represent of speak for Twitter. The video released by Project Veritas today features eight employees, and a Project Veritas spokesman said there are more videos featuring additional employees coming.
On January 3rd 2018 at a San Francisco restaurant, Abhinov Vadrevu, a former Twitter Software Engineer explains a strategy, called shadow banning, that to his knowledge, Twitter has employed:
One strategy is to shadow ban so you have ultimate control. The idea of a shadow ban is that you ban someone but they dont know theyve been banned, because they keep posting and no one sees their content. So they just think that no one is engaging with their content, when in reality, no one is seeing it.
Twitter is in the process of automating censorship and banning, says Twitter Software Engineer Steven Pierre on December 8th of 2017:
Every single conversation is going to be rated by a machine and the machine is going to say whether or not its a positive thing or a negative thing. And whether its positive or negative doesnt (inaudible), its more like if somebodys being aggressive or not. Right? Somebodys just cursing at somebody, whatever, whatever. They may have point, but it will just vanish Its not going to ban the mindset, its going to ban, like, a way of talking.
Olinda Hassan, a Policy Manager for Twitters Trust and Safety team explains on December 15th, 2017 at a Twitter holiday party that the development of a system of down ranking shitty people is in the works:
Yeah. Thats something were working on. Its something were working on. Were trying to get the shitty people to not show up. Its a product thing were working on right now.
Former Twitter Engineer Conrado Miranda confirms on December 1st, 2017 that tools are already in place to censor pro-Trump or conservative content on the platform. When asked whether or not these capabilities exist, Miranda says, thats a thing.
In a conversation with former Twitter Content Review Agent Mo Norai on May 16th, 2017, we learned that in the past Twitter would manually ban or censor Pro-Trump or conservative content. When asked about the process of banning accounts, Norai said, On stuff like that it was more discretion on your view point, I guess how you felt about a particular matter
When asked to clarify if that process was automated Norai confirmed that it was not:
Yeah, if they said this is: Pro-Trump I dont want it because it offends me, this, that. And I say I banned this whole thing, and it goes over here and they are like, Oh you know what? I dont like it too. You know what? Mos right, lets go, lets carry on, whats next?'
Norai also revealed that more left-leaning content would go through their selection process with less political scrutiny, It would come through checked and then I would be like Oh you know what? This is okay. Let it go.
Norai explains that this selection process wasnt exactly Twitter policy, but rather they were following unwritten rules from the top:
A lot of unwritten rules, and being that were in San Francisco, were in California, very liberal, a very blue state. You had to be I mean as a company you cant really say it because it would make you look bad, but behind closed doors are lots of rules.
There was, I would say Twitter was probably about 90% Anti-Trump, maybe 99% Anti-Trump.
At a San Francisco bar on January 5th, Pranay Singh details how the shadow-banning algorithms targeting right-leaning are engineered:
Yeah you look for Trump, or America, and you have like five thousand keywords to describe a redneck. Then you look and parse all the messages, all the pictures, and then you look for stuff that matches that stuff.
When asked if the majority of the algorithms are targeted against conservative or liberal users of Twitter, Singh said, I would say majority of it are for Republicans.
Project Veritas founder James OKeefe believes the power over speech Silicon Valley tech giants has is unprecedented and dangerous:
What kind of world do we live in where computer engineers are the gatekeepers of the way people talk? This investigation brings forth information of profound public importance that educates people about how free they really are to express their views online.
Project Veritas plans to release more undercover video from within Twitter in the coming days.
Mr. OKeefe has just completed a book about this series entitled AMERICAN PRAVDA: My fight for Truth in the Era of Fake News. The book will be released by St. Martins Press on January 16, 2018.
those are excellent points. Especially the one about the phone company.
Interesting analogy . I can see the phone company being sued for censoring calls. However it seems that Internet sites seem to be given carte blanche. I suppose if a website has a stated policy, If they censor people in a way different than that policy, perhaps they could also be taken to court.
Perhaps NOT, but if so, they made a HUGE error.
Red, if you have a ping list, please put me on it.
I missed this article . . .
Anybody post this on FB? Get feedback? Anybody see this posted by others on FB?
>>They will continue as long as the stock price increases...
“Wall Street Bank with Three Felonies Sends Employee to Head SEC Trading Division”
http://wallstreetonparade.com/2018/01/wall-street-bank-with-three-felonies-sends-employee-to-head-sec-trading-division/
I enjoy stories like this. A few more are being convinced that a Eugenic Solution to the DNC is closer and closer...
Great post.
I don’t have a ping list for this category, I just happened upon it...............
>>The 1st Amendment applies to the government, not private businesses.
Private corporate collectives that operate under the privilege of corporate charter and use public infrastructure like DARPAnet.
Maybe their hive shouldn’t enjoy that privilege if it’s so bent on subverting the error-contradicting spirit of the 1st amendment.
We used to prohibit commerce with the Soviets for good reason.
But Jim doesn’t systematically operate antagonistically towards the spirit of the 1st amendment. Truth generally does prevail here.
Shrug, I guess you’d be ok with having a subversive Soviet collective operating under the privilege of corporate charter utilizing American resources for their Oligarchic pleasure.
“Norai explains that this selection process wasnt exactly Twitter policy, but rather they were following unwritten rules from the top:”
Sounds like material misrepresentation of fact.
Is that still FRAUD?
This is the very reason I have never opened a Twitter, Facebook, Google or other fascist controlled social media account. I stopped ordering from Amazon more than a year ago - don’t feed the beasts.
Whatever Mr. “crusader”.
Meanwhile, in the regulated real world - 2nd protects 1st for a reason.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.