CargoAdmin, Bureaucrats, Moderators (CommentStreams), fileuploaders, Interface administrators, newuser, Push subscription managers, Suppressors, Administrators
14,662
edits
Twitter: Difference between revisions
m
Text replacement - "USA Today" to "USA Today"
m (Text replacement - "Associated Press" to "Associated Press") |
m (Text replacement - "USA Today" to "USA Today") |
||
| Line 321: | Line 321: | ||
In January 2016, Twitter was sued by the widow of a U.S. man killed in the [[2015 Amman shooting attack]], claiming that allowing the [[Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant]] (ISIL) to continually use the platform, including direct messages in particular,<ref name="verge-revisedisillawsuit">{{cite web|url=https://www.theverge.com/2016/8/30/12717178/twitter-isis-lawsuit-direct-message-revised-complaint|title=Revived lawsuit says Twitter DMs are like handing ISIS a satellite phone|website=The Verge|access-date=August 31, 2016|date=August 30, 2016}}</ref> constituted the [[Providing material support for terrorism|provision of material support to a terrorist organization]], which is illegal under U.S. federal law. Twitter disputed the claim, stating that "violent threats and the promotion of terrorism deserve no place on Twitter and, like other social networks, our rules make that clear".<ref name="wsj-isistwitter">{{cite news|url=https://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2016/01/14/lawsuit-blames-twitter-for-isis-terrorist-attack/|title=Lawsuit Blames Twitter for ISIS Terrorist Attack|work=The Wall Street Journal|access-date=January 16, 2016}}</ref><ref name="wsj-twitterliable">{{cite news|url=https://blogs.wsj.com/law/2016/01/15/can-twitter-be-liable-for-isis-tweets/|title=Can Twitter Be Liable for ISIS Tweets?|work=The Wall Street Journal|access-date=January 20, 2016}}</ref> The lawsuit was dismissed by the [[United States District Court for the Northern District of California]], upholding the [[Section 230]] safe harbor, which dictates that the operators of an interactive computer service are not liable for the content published by its users.<ref name="wsj-twitterliable" /><ref name="verge-section230isis">{{cite web|url=https://www.theverge.com/2016/8/10/11950098/twitter-isis-lawsuit-safe-harbor-terrorism|title=Twitter is not legally responsible for the rise of ISIS, rules California district court|website=The Verge|access-date=August 11, 2016|date=August 10, 2016}}</ref> The lawsuit was revised in August 2016, providing comparisons to other telecommunications devices.<ref name="verge-revisedisillawsuit" /> The second amended complaint was dismissed by the district court, a decision affirmed on appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on January 31, 2018.<ref name="fields-v-twitter-appeal">{{cite web |last1=Smith |first1=Milan D. Jr. |title=Fields v. Twitter, Inc. |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/16-17165/16-17165-2018-01-31.html |publisher=United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit |access-date=May 24, 2024 |date=January 31, 2018}}</ref> | In January 2016, Twitter was sued by the widow of a U.S. man killed in the [[2015 Amman shooting attack]], claiming that allowing the [[Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant]] (ISIL) to continually use the platform, including direct messages in particular,<ref name="verge-revisedisillawsuit">{{cite web|url=https://www.theverge.com/2016/8/30/12717178/twitter-isis-lawsuit-direct-message-revised-complaint|title=Revived lawsuit says Twitter DMs are like handing ISIS a satellite phone|website=The Verge|access-date=August 31, 2016|date=August 30, 2016}}</ref> constituted the [[Providing material support for terrorism|provision of material support to a terrorist organization]], which is illegal under U.S. federal law. Twitter disputed the claim, stating that "violent threats and the promotion of terrorism deserve no place on Twitter and, like other social networks, our rules make that clear".<ref name="wsj-isistwitter">{{cite news|url=https://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2016/01/14/lawsuit-blames-twitter-for-isis-terrorist-attack/|title=Lawsuit Blames Twitter for ISIS Terrorist Attack|work=The Wall Street Journal|access-date=January 16, 2016}}</ref><ref name="wsj-twitterliable">{{cite news|url=https://blogs.wsj.com/law/2016/01/15/can-twitter-be-liable-for-isis-tweets/|title=Can Twitter Be Liable for ISIS Tweets?|work=The Wall Street Journal|access-date=January 20, 2016}}</ref> The lawsuit was dismissed by the [[United States District Court for the Northern District of California]], upholding the [[Section 230]] safe harbor, which dictates that the operators of an interactive computer service are not liable for the content published by its users.<ref name="wsj-twitterliable" /><ref name="verge-section230isis">{{cite web|url=https://www.theverge.com/2016/8/10/11950098/twitter-isis-lawsuit-safe-harbor-terrorism|title=Twitter is not legally responsible for the rise of ISIS, rules California district court|website=The Verge|access-date=August 11, 2016|date=August 10, 2016}}</ref> The lawsuit was revised in August 2016, providing comparisons to other telecommunications devices.<ref name="verge-revisedisillawsuit" /> The second amended complaint was dismissed by the district court, a decision affirmed on appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on January 31, 2018.<ref name="fields-v-twitter-appeal">{{cite web |last1=Smith |first1=Milan D. Jr. |title=Fields v. Twitter, Inc. |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/16-17165/16-17165-2018-01-31.html |publisher=United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit |access-date=May 24, 2024 |date=January 31, 2018}}</ref> | ||
Twitter suspended multiple parody accounts that satirized Russian politics in May 2016, sparking protests and raising questions about where the company stands on [[freedom of speech]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/twitter-suspends-russian-satirical-accounts-raising-free-speech-questions/571146.html|title=Twitter Suspends Russian Satirical Accounts, Raising Free Speech Questions {{!}} News|website=The Moscow Times|date=June 2016 |access-date=June 2, 2016}}</ref> Following public outcry, Twitter restored the accounts the next day without explaining why the accounts had been suspended.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/02/twitter-unblocks-darthputinkgba-spoof-russia|title=Twitter unblocks spoof Putin account after widespread criticism|last1=Times|first1=The Moscow|last2=network|first2=part of the New East|date=June 2, 2016|newspaper=The Guardian|access-date=June 2, 2016}}</ref> The same day, Twitter, along with Facebook, Google, and [[Microsoft]], jointly agreed to a [[European Union]] code of conduct obligating them to review "[the] majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal [[hate speech]]" posted on their services within 24 hours.<ref name="guardian-euhatespeech">{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/31/facebook-youtube-twitter-microsoft-eu-hate-speech-code|title=Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Microsoft sign EU hate speech code|newspaper=The Guardian|access-date=June 7, 2016|date=May 31, 2016|last1=Hern|first1=Alex}}</ref> In August 2016, Twitter stated that it had banned 235,000 accounts over the past six months, bringing the overall number of suspended accounts to 360,000 accounts in the past year, for violating policies banning use of the platform to promote extremism.<ref>{{cite news|first=Elizabeth|last=Weise|title=Twitter suspends 235,000 accounts for extremism|url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2016/08/18/twitter-suspends-235000-terrorism-extremism/88955432|newspaper= | Twitter suspended multiple parody accounts that satirized Russian politics in May 2016, sparking protests and raising questions about where the company stands on [[freedom of speech]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/twitter-suspends-russian-satirical-accounts-raising-free-speech-questions/571146.html|title=Twitter Suspends Russian Satirical Accounts, Raising Free Speech Questions {{!}} News|website=The Moscow Times|date=June 2016 |access-date=June 2, 2016}}</ref> Following public outcry, Twitter restored the accounts the next day without explaining why the accounts had been suspended.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/02/twitter-unblocks-darthputinkgba-spoof-russia|title=Twitter unblocks spoof Putin account after widespread criticism|last1=Times|first1=The Moscow|last2=network|first2=part of the New East|date=June 2, 2016|newspaper=The Guardian|access-date=June 2, 2016}}</ref> The same day, Twitter, along with Facebook, Google, and [[Microsoft]], jointly agreed to a [[European Union]] code of conduct obligating them to review "[the] majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal [[hate speech]]" posted on their services within 24 hours.<ref name="guardian-euhatespeech">{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/31/facebook-youtube-twitter-microsoft-eu-hate-speech-code|title=Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Microsoft sign EU hate speech code|newspaper=The Guardian|access-date=June 7, 2016|date=May 31, 2016|last1=Hern|first1=Alex}}</ref> In August 2016, Twitter stated that it had banned 235,000 accounts over the past six months, bringing the overall number of suspended accounts to 360,000 accounts in the past year, for violating policies banning use of the platform to promote extremism.<ref>{{cite news|first=Elizabeth|last=Weise|title=Twitter suspends 235,000 accounts for extremism|url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2016/08/18/twitter-suspends-235000-terrorism-extremism/88955432|newspaper=USA Today|date=August 18, 2016 |access-date=November 20, 2016}}</ref> | ||
On May 10, 2019, Twitter announced that they suspended 166,513 accounts for promoting terrorism in the July–December 2018 period, stating there was a steady decrease in terrorist groups trying to use the platform owing to its "zero-tolerance policy enforcement". According to [[Vijaya Gadde]], Legal, Policy and Trust and Safety Lead at Twitter, there was a reduction of 19% terror related tweets from the previous reporting period (January–June 2018).<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://economictimes.com/magazines/panache/twitter-suspended-over-1-6-lakh-accounts-for-promoting-terrorism/articleshow/69268206.cms|title=Twitter suspended over 1.6 lakh terror-promoting accounts in six months|date=May 10, 2019|work=The Economic Times|access-date=February 22, 2021|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190531194121/https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/twitter-suspended-over-1-6-lakh-accounts-for-promoting-terrorism/articleshow/69268206.cms|archive-date=May 31, 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.engadget.com/2019/05/09/twitter-transparency-report-terrorism-child-exploitation/|title=Twitter suspensions for promoting terrorism drop yet again|last=Holt|first=Kris|date=May 10, 2019|work=Engadget|access-date=May 10, 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://fortune.com/2019/05/10/twitter-transparency-report-abuse/|title=Twitter's User-Reported Violations Jumped 19%—but the Number of Accounts Punished Dropped|last=Abril|first=Danielle|date=May 10, 2019|work=Fortune}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.sbs.com.au/news/twitter-reports-fall-in-extreme-content|title=Twitter reports fall in extreme content|date=May 10, 2019|work=SBS News|access-date=May 10, 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.firstpost.com/tech/news-analysis/twitter-has-suspended-more-than-166000-accounts-related-to-promotion-of-terrorism-6611591.html|title=Twitter has suspended more than 166,000 accounts related to promotion of terrorism|date=May 10, 2019|work=Tech2|access-date=May 10, 2019|publisher=Firstpost}}</ref> | On May 10, 2019, Twitter announced that they suspended 166,513 accounts for promoting terrorism in the July–December 2018 period, stating there was a steady decrease in terrorist groups trying to use the platform owing to its "zero-tolerance policy enforcement". According to [[Vijaya Gadde]], Legal, Policy and Trust and Safety Lead at Twitter, there was a reduction of 19% terror related tweets from the previous reporting period (January–June 2018).<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://economictimes.com/magazines/panache/twitter-suspended-over-1-6-lakh-accounts-for-promoting-terrorism/articleshow/69268206.cms|title=Twitter suspended over 1.6 lakh terror-promoting accounts in six months|date=May 10, 2019|work=The Economic Times|access-date=February 22, 2021|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190531194121/https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/twitter-suspended-over-1-6-lakh-accounts-for-promoting-terrorism/articleshow/69268206.cms|archive-date=May 31, 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.engadget.com/2019/05/09/twitter-transparency-report-terrorism-child-exploitation/|title=Twitter suspensions for promoting terrorism drop yet again|last=Holt|first=Kris|date=May 10, 2019|work=Engadget|access-date=May 10, 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://fortune.com/2019/05/10/twitter-transparency-report-abuse/|title=Twitter's User-Reported Violations Jumped 19%—but the Number of Accounts Punished Dropped|last=Abril|first=Danielle|date=May 10, 2019|work=Fortune}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.sbs.com.au/news/twitter-reports-fall-in-extreme-content|title=Twitter reports fall in extreme content|date=May 10, 2019|work=SBS News|access-date=May 10, 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.firstpost.com/tech/news-analysis/twitter-has-suspended-more-than-166000-accounts-related-to-promotion-of-terrorism-6611591.html|title=Twitter has suspended more than 166,000 accounts related to promotion of terrorism|date=May 10, 2019|work=Tech2|access-date=May 10, 2019|publisher=Firstpost}}</ref> | ||