Slashdot Mirror
Twitter Isn't Removing Enough Hate Speech, Complains The EU (cnn.com)
An anonymous reader quotes CNN:
Twitter is not good enough at removing hate speech from its platform. That's the judgment of Europe's top regulator, which released data on Thursday showing that Twitter has failed to meet its standard of taking down 50% of hate speech posts after being warned that they include objectionable content. Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, and Google have all agreed to do more, promising last May to review a majority of hate speech flagged by users within 24 hours and to remove any illegal content.
A year into the agreement, the European Commission said that Facebook and YouTube, which is owned by Google, have both managed to remove 66% of reported hate speech. Twitter's rate, meanwhile, was 38%. That's below the commission's standard but a major improvement from December, when the service was removing only 19% of hate speech... Twitter was also slightly slower than rivals Facebook and YouTube when it came to reviewing content. The regulator said that Facebook reviewed flagged content within 24 hours in 58% of cases. YouTube did the same 43% of the time, while Twitter met the 24-hour benchmark in 39% of cases.
European lawmakers are considering laws mandating the blocking of online hate speech, so they're carefully watching what happens when social media companies self-regulate.
"Tackling illegal hate speech online is a contribution to the fight against terrorism," argued the EU Commission's top justice official.
A year into the agreement, the European Commission said that Facebook and YouTube, which is owned by Google, have both managed to remove 66% of reported hate speech. Twitter's rate, meanwhile, was 38%. That's below the commission's standard but a major improvement from December, when the service was removing only 19% of hate speech... Twitter was also slightly slower than rivals Facebook and YouTube when it came to reviewing content. The regulator said that Facebook reviewed flagged content within 24 hours in 58% of cases. YouTube did the same 43% of the time, while Twitter met the 24-hour benchmark in 39% of cases.
European lawmakers are considering laws mandating the blocking of online hate speech, so they're carefully watching what happens when social media companies self-regulate.
"Tackling illegal hate speech online is a contribution to the fight against terrorism," argued the EU Commission's top justice official.
Censorchip... that's whats the UE want.
The Russians could likely make the argument that the constant and unfounded blaming of Russia for every real or imagined theft of email or unexpected election result--that is, "Russia-blaming"--constitutes hate speech along the lines of "Jew-blaming." Further, they could argue that Russia-blaming hate speech poses a real threat to international stability and the safety of the Russian people. Given that the people pushing hate-speech laws seem to be aligned against Putin, such a Russian stance could prove worthy of popcorn.
A quick question for everyone.
Kathy Griffin holding the bloody, severed head of the US president was all over twitter the other day.
Does this image count as hate speech? Will Kathy lose her twitter account, or will reposters of the image be banned or penalized in any way?
I'm just wondering if the content is important, as opposed to the political bias.