2) resources and definitions did you know that US federal agencies do not have a common, agreed-upon definition of "domestic terrorist" or "domestic terrorism"?https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/24/opinion/sunday/facebook-twitter-terrorism-extremism.html …
-
Show this thread
-
3)* time scale The spread of the New Zealand livestream was alarming and the capability of the platforms to deal with it was also deeply alarming. But we're looking at a time scale of 48, 72 hours or so? +
1 reply 3 retweets 34 likesShow this thread -
For years, the national security community wanted YouTube to completely ban Anwar al-Awlaki's sermons, even the innocuous ones, because they said it would just rabbit hole people into the more extreme content. Here's a piece from 2015 about it:https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/30/magazine/the-lessons-of-anwar-al-awlaki.html …
1 reply 4 retweets 32 likesShow this thread -
YouTube stuck to its guns and only prohibited sermons that advocated violence. Of course, those sermons made it online too (even if they were eventually reported and taken down). And YouTube search would take you to both the innocuous and the violentpic.twitter.com/kGNpITFKqv
1 reply 5 retweets 31 likesShow this thread -
In 2017 that changed, and currently all of his content is barred from YouTube. And in case you missed this bit — al-Awlaki was droned in Yemen in 2011. His name is on a list, there's a bright-line rule for YouTube to refer to in order to ban him.
1 reply 5 retweets 34 likesShow this thread -
I'm not sure how people think this works. No one is going to build a robot that stares at videos and goes, "Ah yes, this one has hate in its heart."
5 replies 23 retweets 112 likesShow this thread -
Keeping violent from spreading online means adequate law enforcement investment in combatting said violent extremism. And not, say, this https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/magazine/FBI-charlottesville-white-nationalism-far-right.html …pic.twitter.com/LPmEjkuIjF
2 replies 14 retweets 54 likesShow this thread -
-
Do I think the platforms bear some form of culpability? Yes, they're irresponsibly designed in a way that amplifies and replicates attention-grabbing behavior, a purposeful design that can obviously be hijacked by acts of terrorism.
3 replies 10 retweets 67 likesShow this thread -
But does their success with ISIS mean they can be just as successful with white supremacist ideologies? No, because (1) ISIS wasn't as good at hijacking attention, (2) I don't think the platforms were "successful," I think they reached an acceptable equilibrium over time.
5 replies 11 retweets 44 likesShow this thread
(3) Reducing the reach of ISIS didn't trigger the US right and far-right to rail against $platform.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.