X continues to suck at moderating hate speech, according to a new report::A new report from the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) suggests X is failing to remove posts that violate its own community rules regarding misinformation and hate speech.
X continues to suck at moderating hate speech, according to a new report
https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/14/23960430/x-twitter-ccdh-hate-speech-moderation-israel-hamas-war
22 Comments
TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.world · 35 pts · 2y
Of course it does. It’s literally owned and run by a fascist. I really wish people would stop expecting Twitter to run and behave like it used too. It will not and it never will again.
LWD@lemm.ee · 12 pts · 2y
deleted
PrivateNoob@sopuli.xyz · 4 pts · 2y
Was it good before? Never used it, not my style tbh.
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2y
It was always a pile of garbage, but now it's a toxic cesspit.
originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com · 17 pts · 2y
its not a problem when its feature
JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee · 11 pts · 2y
I'm annoyed they've dropped the 'formerly known as Twitter'. Not while x.com redirects to twitter.com and not the other way around!
DeathWearsANecktie@lemm.ee · 7 pts · 2y
Can we be sure they're trying to moderate hate speech? I don't think they are.
Treczoks@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
Time for the EU to pull out the big FINE-HAMMER.
Anonymousllama@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
It's a feature not a bug!
obinice@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
Isn't hate speech what they're going for?
They're run by literal fascists now, presumably they want it to be a platform for their kind?
OhStopYellingAtMe@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2y
X continues to suck.
auf@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 2y
rhacer@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2y
Would that be this Center for Countering Digital Hate? https://open.substack.com/pub/taibbi/p/the-uk-files-a-history-of-the-center?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=71rh9
ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 2y
I heard Matt Taibbi was under investigation by the IRS, you can't trust him
rhacer@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
He's only a "so-called journalist" . So probably not.
Empricorn@feddit.nl · 3 pts · 2y
By design.
PrincessLeiasCat@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 2y
Can we just get updates like this when something changes?
Diplomjodler@feddit.de · 2 pts · 2y
Can you really say they suck at it when they're not even trying?
sugarfree@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
Don't use it if you don't like it. What's with the obsession with harsh moderation over every facet of the internet? Is that really the future people want?
DoctorButts@kbin.melroy.org · 4 pts · 2y
Maybe?
Anecdotally, I feel like I'm seeing more people pre-emptively censoring their own swears on the fucking internet. Also there's a weird and bad puritan sentiment towards all things sex-related that feels like it popped up out of nowhere in the last few years.
agent_flounder@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
It's easy to suck at doing the opposite of what you want to do.
"Nice guy sucks at being an asshole"
autotldr@lemmings.world · 1 pts · 2y
This is the best summary I could come up with:
According to the CCDH, the reported posts, which largely promoted bigotry and incited violence against Muslims, Palestinians, and Jewish people, were collected from 101 separate X accounts.
Just one account was suspended over their actions, and the posts that remained live accrued a combined 24,043,693 views at the time the report was published.
X filed a lawsuit against the CCDH in July earlier this year over claims the organization “unlawfully” scraped X data to create “flawed” studies about the platform.
In a statement to The Verge, X’s head of business operations, Joe Benarroch, said that the company was made aware of the CCDH’s report yesterday and directed X users to read a new blog post that details the “proactive measures” it has taken to maintain the safety of the platform during the ongoing Israel-Hamas war, including the removal of 3,000 accounts tied to violent entities in the region and taking action against over 325,000 pieces of content that violate its terms of service.
X claims that by choosing to only measure account suspensions, the CCDH has not accurately represented its moderation efforts and urged the organization to “engage with X first” to ensure the safety of the X community.
After publication, Benarroch questioned the methodology of the CCDH’s study and claimed the organization only considers a post “actioned” after the account has been suspended.
The original article contains 476 words, the summary contains 224 words. Saved 53%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
watcher@nopeeking.link · 1 pts · 2y
X, formerly Twitter, ...
bus_go_fast@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y