{"id":35200,"date":"2014-05-22T11:42:22","date_gmt":"2014-05-22T15:42:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/twitters-selective-censorship-of-tweets-may-be-the-best-option-but-its-still-censorship\/"},"modified":"2014-05-22T11:42:22","modified_gmt":"2014-05-22T15:42:22","slug":"twitters-selective-censorship-of-tweets-may-be-the-best-option-but-its-still-censorship","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/transhuman-news-blog\/censorship\/twitters-selective-censorship-of-tweets-may-be-the-best-option-but-its-still-censorship\/","title":{"rendered":"Twitters selective censorship of tweets may be the best option, but its still censorship"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>  22 hours ago May. 21, 2014 - 10:28 AM PDT<\/p>\n<p>    Twitters ability to block certain tweets or users from being    seen in specific countries, a somewhat Orwellian     feature it calls the country-withheld content tool, seems    to be getting more popular, according to the Chilling Effects    clearinghouse, which tracks such things: tweets and\/or users    are now    being blocked in Pakistan as well as Turkey, and a    pro-Ukrainian account is apparently unavailable to users who        try to view it from inside Russia, at the request of the    government.  <\/p>\n<p>    In much the same way that Google     now shows different maps to users depending on whether they    live in Russia or Ukraine, Twitter is shaping the view that its    users have of the world around them. Is this a clever way of    getting around censorship, or does it ultimately just disguise    the problem?  <\/p>\n<p>    Twitter first    introduced the selective censorship tool in 2012, after    repeated requests from a number of countries to remove tweets    that were judged to be illegal, such as pro-Nazi comments in    Germany. When it was launched, the company said that Twitter        would do its best to avoid using it as much as possible and    to remain the free-speech wing of the free-speech party, to    use a phrase popularized by Twitters former general counsel    Alex Macgillivray.  <\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>    Zeynep Tufekci, a sociologist at the University of North    Carolina in Chapel Hill and an expert in the effects of    social-media use during events like the Arab Spring revolutions    in Egypt and Tunisia, wrote at the time it was introduced that    the policy was the    best available way for Twitter to protect free speech while    also trying to expand its network into new parts of the world.    As she described it in a blog post:  <\/p>\n<p>      In my opinion, with this policy, Twitter is fighting to      protect free speech on Twitter as best it possibly can      previously, when Twitter would take down content when forced      to do so by a court order, it would disappear globally. Now,      it will only be gone in the specific country in which the      court order is applicable. This is a great improvement.    <\/p>\n<p>    As Tufekci pointed out, Twitters approach is a lot better than    that taken by Facebook, which routinely deletes content from    its platform with little or no warning, and virtually no    attempt at transparency. To take just one example, pages posted    by dissidents in Syria that are devoted to the chemical weapon    attacks of last year are being deleted, which     blogger Brown Moses has pointed out is thereby depriving    the world of a crucial record of those events.  <\/p>\n<p>    Its also true that Twitter has a much better track record of    fighting for the free-speech rights of its users than just    about any other platform: it alerted users that the Justice    Department     was asking for their personal information in relation to a    WikiLeaks investigation, even though it was asked not to do so,    and it fought hard in a French court for the right not to turn    over user data     related to tweets that broke that countrys laws on    homophobia and anti-Semitic content.  <\/p>\n<p>    All that said, however, not everyone is convinced that    selective censorship is the best possible approach for Twitter    to take. Jillian York, the Director for International Freedom    of Expression at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, seemed    frustrated by the companys increasing use of the    country-withheld content tool, judging    by some of her comments on Twitter  and some critics of    Tufekcis stance on the issue have argued that the feature    actually makes the problem worse by making it less obvious that    censorship has occurred.  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Go here to read the rest:<br \/>\n<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/gigaom.com\/2014\/05\/21\/twitters-selective-censorship-of-tweets-may-be-the-best-option-but-its-still-censorship\" title=\"Twitters selective censorship of tweets may be the best option, but its still censorship\">Twitters selective censorship of tweets may be the best option, but its still censorship<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> 22 hours ago May. 21, 2014 - 10:28 AM PDT Twitters ability to block certain tweets or users from being seen in specific countries, a somewhat Orwellian feature it calls the country-withheld content tool, seems to be getting more popular, according to the Chilling Effects clearinghouse, which tracks such things: tweets and\/or users are now being blocked in Pakistan as well as Turkey, and a pro-Ukrainian account is apparently unavailable to users who try to view it from inside Russia, at the request of the government.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/transhuman-news-blog\/censorship\/twitters-selective-censorship-of-tweets-may-be-the-best-option-but-its-still-censorship\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[19],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-35200","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-censorship"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35200"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=35200"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35200\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=35200"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=35200"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=35200"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}