After Calls For an Edit Button, Twitter Says it is Considering a 'Clarification' Feature (mashable.com)

Despite years-long calls from power users for an "edit" button, Twitter is considering how it could enable 'clarifications' of tweets, CEO Jack Dorsey said Thursday at Goldman Sachs' tech conference in San Francisco. From a report: "One of the concepts we're thinking about is clarifications," Dorsey said, saying that it could function similarly to a quote tweet. "Kind of like retweet with comment.. to add some context and some color on what they might have tweeted, or what they might have meant."

People already often use the quote tweet option for this kind of thing, but the two tweets may not always have the same reach, Dorsey noted. But if the person had opted to "clarify" that tweet, then the original tweet could always appear with the subsequent clarification. Dorsey cautioned that the feature is still just something the company is thinking about, not necessarily something that would launch. But he said such a feature could help people feel more comfortable with Twitter.

Comments

covfefe

[Cedric Tsui]

I don't think anybody would want to be able to edit an old tweet.

Re:covfefe

[Zocalo]

Yeah, who'd want to do that?

Sarcasm aside, I think Twitter's proposal is the right one here given the way shitstorms have been kicked off by social media posts. Yes, you should be able to "correct the record" for honest errors, etc., but equally people need to be able to see the original unedited post where it's already triggered responses and the correction might alter the tone of those responses. Being able to say one thing, provoke a response, then subtly edit the original to make the initial repliers look like jerks is definitely not the way to go - you might as well roll out the red carpet and put a mat at the end with "Trolls Welcome" on it. I dare say someone could leverage it into a libel suit under the right circumstances as well (whether they'd prevail or not is another matter entirely).

Re:covfefe

[squiggleslash]

I've been wanting Slashdot to do that for ages, but until recently you couldn't even reply to a message you just posted for five minutes, let alone place a clarification (or edit or delete it.)

I'm not as married to the idea that people shouldn't be able to edit their comments as others are, as long as something about the comment shows its been edited there shouldn't be an issue. But clarifications is a decent compromise between people like me who see the value in being able to withdraw stuff that communicates the wrong thing, and people who believe everyone should be punished for typing too quickly and not passing their comments by a proof reader and a (human) editor before posting them.

I don't like it

[nospam007]

Where will the 'smocking guns', 'covfefe' and the 'muderers' come from in the future?
Twitter has 'the best words' as we know.

Twitter edit button is a stupid idea

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Post a tweet that will elicit certain reactions.
2. Wait for those certain reactions to pour in.
3. Edit original tweet to make reactions look evil/racist/ignorant/etc.

Re:People Want to be Insulted

[jellomizer]

Something I have learned over time, it is generally a bad idea to try to bate people to get angry at you, or worse a false persona of you. A sarcastic comment, could lead to some guy actually taking you seriously.

Where do you think these flat earthers came from? Probably from some guy trying to use sarcasm to explain the flaw, in some Anti-Science policy that is popular at the time, so they made the most crazy statement they could think of "The earth is flat" and fill it with flawed logic. There will be someone who doesn't pick it up, and followed it. Just because someone is an idiot, it doesn't mean they are not influential.

How many times can you "Clarify"?

[mykepredko]

I can see something like this happening:
Original Tweet: "Contrary to what's being reported by the lying MSM, I did not have relations or even spend time with that woman."
Clarification 1: "After reflection and prayer with my wife and my pastor, I realize that the interactions I had with that woman were inappropriate."
Clarification 2: "I have consulted with my attorney and I can confidently say that at no time during our time together did I have any reason to think that woman was a member of the Russian government."
Clarification 3: "I realize that the police report says otherwise, but because I met the woman in the hotel bar, I naturally assumed that she was over 18."
Clarification 4: "To be completely honest, the skimpy dress lead me to originally believe the person that I spent time with in my hotel room was a woman."

Just do it like a wiki

[SuperKendall]

Let a user edit once, for five minutes.

Indicate the tweet was edited, with a link to see a diff.

Then you get the benefit of people being able to edit typos, with still the fiery aspect of the full hot take for all to see.

Prufe yuo dont nead it

[Tablizer]

Imagin what wud happin if Slahsdot let us fix are typos.

Two words: Auto correct

[Hillie]

I find that 90% of the errors in my tweets are auto-correct related. It does the most insane blunders, and also butchers their/there/they're to/too are/our etc. Pretty much any word that sounds the same it will make you look like an illiterate fool who triggers grammar nazis on the daily.

You don't always have time to proofread tweets two or three times just to make sure you don't miss some stupid auto-correct blunder.

And now-- if it's not bad enough desktop OS's have auto-correct built into them as well.

Re:Boycott Trump's Propaganda Outlet

[DNS-and-BIND]

LOL you mean the way the US President bypasses the media and speaks directly without editing? That's the greatest thing to happen to democracy since the printing press.