Five Questions We acquire approximately Twitter’s current “Health” procedure
Twitter finally seems to be coming to grips with the extent of its problems. It’s now publicly admitting to them, and it says it’s trying to fix them.
The unhealthy platform has let its issues fester for years. Its feeds acquire long been filled with trolls, misinformation, performative outrage, and abuse. And recent Congressional scrutiny has exposed how woefully unprepared it is to mitigate state-sponsored manipulation of its platform.
On Thursday afternoon, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey went live on Periscope to talk approximately this current focus, explaining that Twitter is trying to work to increase its platform’s “health,” an umbrella term under which it’s currently lumping its procedure to fix whole these problems. On the broadcast, Dorsey was joined by the company’s legal, policy, and trust and safety lead Vijaya Gadde, its head of Trust & Safety Del Harvey, and its health product manager David Gasca. The quartet did their best to account for what “health” means to Twitter, essentially admitting that the company is starting at square one.
Twitter, Dorsey said, is trying to define what health means and how to degree it, and eventually it would like to give its users the option to choose a more healthy experience. Twitter, he said, “can achieve a much better job at giving people tools to choose more health, for however we conclude up measuring that and defining that, which is still being worked on.”
whether that sounds indistinct to you, well, it is. Which is why we’re left with plenty of questions approximately this effort that’s purportedly poised to change the way Twitter works. Here are five to start:
Twitter recently released a request for proposals asking the public to befriend it “define what health means for Twitter and how we should approach measuring it.” Sounds estimable, but what precisely does Twitter procedure to achieve with the data? On the Periscope, Dorsey gave few clues. “We’ve had conversations approximately more moderation by community owners,” he said. “But ultimately we don’t acquire any specific respond right now.” Dorsey said this effort is Twitter’s top precedence. But that’s whole we know now. Where this ship is heading is anyone’s guess — even Twitter’s, it appears.
Content moderation decisions are often incredibly complex, regularly presenting those making them with a lot of wrong options. Twitter seems to bungle even the easy decisions, and it makes its choices with diminutive transparency, often angering its users who feel that some people acquire been unfairly silenced, while others flee amok. Throughout the broadcast, Dorsey repeated the words “transparency” and “trust.” whether the public gets a explore into the content moderation decisions Twitter is facing, perhaps they will trust it more. Or at least, they’ll empathize with some of the unwinnable decisions. And perhaps, possibly that’s fraction of the goal here.
Dorsey, on the broadcast, didn’t mince words approximately the state of verification on Twitter. “Verification, as many of you know, is something that we believe is very broken on our platform and something that we need to fix,” he said. The company, he said, is reworking and rethinking the blue checkmark, a essential hasten after Twitter verified a handful of white nationalists (before eventually taking their verification badges absent). The company long held that the blue checkmark was not an endorsement, but it recently backed off this stance after it became clear that no matter how many times it said “verification is not an endorsement,” people still see it that way. Twitter, Gasca said, is thinking approximately “the profile on the platform, and how can we increase context so you know when you see someone, how to assess what they’re saying. How you should interpret their message based on who they are and what their history is.” Hearing this, it seems like Twitter is considering current verification options that are even more complex than the tough-to-decipher system that exists nowadays. Verification should be simple: It should simply indicate that you are who you say you are. But that’s a tough system to assign in area for more than 300 million users. It remains to be seen how this effort will turn out, but it seems it will steal Twitter time to figure verification out.
Throughout the Periscope broadcast, viewers commented on Periscope approximately the company’s perceived bias against conservatives. “Twitter hates conservatives. Not nice to us,” wrote one user. “Stop crushing conservatives,” wrote another. Gadde addressed these accusations, telling viewers that Twitter’s employees proceed through anti-bias training, and whether they’re found to perform biased decisions, they’re disciplined. Still, should Twitter implement major changes to emphasize “health,” the comments indicated it will likely face pushback from segments of conservatives, some of whom seem ready to seize any opportunity to claim the San Francisco-based company is trying to silence their voices.
The bulk of Dorsey’s comments were was indistinct, but he was crystal clear on one thing: Twitter wants to be more obvious. “Often times we acquire taken action on tweets and accounts and not explained why. We’ve had a bunch of policies in the past that we are now revisiting around how we communicate and to who we communicate,” he said. “In some cases we weren’t communicating to the reporters, in some cases we weren’t communicating to the violator of the terms of services, in some cases we weren’t communicating to the world. We see opportunities around whole those dimensions to add more clarity around our actions.” Is Twitter’s “we don’t comment on individual accounts” policy — which it’s used as a shield when asked to account for tough judgment calls — on its way to the ash heap of history? certain sounds like it.
Twitter did not immediately respond to these questions. We’ll update the narrative whether and when it does.
Alex Kantrowitz is a senior technology reporter for BuzzFeed News and is based in San Francisco. He reports on social and communications.
Contact Alex Kantrowitz at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Got a confidential tip? Submit it here.