An academic study finds that Google steers news searches towards articles in left leaning publications versus to similar stories in right leaning publications. This is another post in our series about the influence that publishers and corporations (including social media) exert on public opinion.
Amazon, for some time, blocked advertisers from running ads that were said to contain “religious content”. This included gifts and clothing items with “biblical quotes and religious language”. Amazon has now announced this was done in error. This is another in our series of how large publishers and corporations use their online dominance to control online speech and thought.
Facebook bans those who appear to engage in hate speech or promoting acts of violence, and says it will ban those who may, in turn, make supportive comments about those who have been banned.
Social media companies want to act like an edited publication that is liable for its content while simultaneously saying they are like the telephone company which is not liable for the content carried over their network. Social media companies promote net neutrality to require third party Internet networks to carry their content unimpeded – while social media company’s simultaneously disable other people’s contents. This is a challenging problem.
This image was censored by Facebook. Why? No one knows. But I suspect it was due to an image to text conversion error, or to AI language analysis that misinterpreted the meaning of the text. AI has been promised as the savior of social media but in reality, it continues to have numerous problems.
Shadow banning is common on social media, including newspaper comments. Rather than outright ban a comment, the media publisher hides the comment from everyone except the person who wrote it. In this way, the comment author is unaware that they have been censored.
AI didn’t work to filter everything: Youtube to ban comments on most videos featuring children under 18 (and perhaps others).
Severe mental health issues come with being a moderator for Facebook wacky posts.
NYPD never heard about this radical notion of the “First Amendment” apparently.
Facebook employs an army of censors to stop “hate speech”, but also at times, censors legitimate and fair political speech based on a complex multi hundred page mashup of censorship guidelines. I’m so old, I remember a few months ago when Mark Zuckerberg promised us AI would solve all these problems 🙂
Imagine a future where everything is subject to manipulation and censorship by robots – we are already there!
NBC makes a major error in reporting on a Trump speech and then retracts its claim, on Twitter – but leaves the original incorrect headline and incorrect video online. NBC News had the story completely wrong.
Source: Platform Censorship: Lessons From the Copyright Wars | Electronic Frontier Foundation I had two music publishers both claim copyright ownership of a music track in one of my videos. Obviously, both could not own the copyright. The music selection I used was written during the U.S. Civil War, decades before music was copyrightable, and the performance was by the U.S. Army with a specific license that it may be used by anyone for any purpose. I challenged the copyright…
Facebook to “fact check” photos, propaganda posters and videos – but how accurate is their “fact checking”, and what happens when Facebook fact checkers must apply subjective interpretation? There is a risk that Facebook will become the arbiter of truth, and due to a false positive problem, turn fake facts into true facts.
An image search for the word “idiot” across 7 different search engines yields curious results.