• Lab
  • AndroidForMobile Foundation at
    HOME
              
    LATEST STORY
    Will Vox’s new section on effective altruism…well, do any good?
    ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
    June 21, 2018, 12:27 p.m.
    Audience & Social
    LINK:   |   Posted by: Marlee Baldridge   |   June 21, 2018

    Yesterday, Gizmodo Media’s Splinter that included the cell phone number of Trump advisor Stephen Miller. (“He’s a busy guy, but maybe you can get ahold of him long enough to have a productive discussion.”) People started tweeting out links to the story. And almost immediately, .

    In fact, just about anyone who linked to the article, tweeted a screenshot of it, or published the phone number had their Twitter account locked down for 12 hours. (Twitter PR: “We are aware of this and are taking appropriate action on content that violates our Terms of Service.”)

    Twitter indeed has a against revealing other people’s personal information, but this raised two questions. First, Twitter’s speed dealing with these tweets seemed at odds with the many other times it has seemed slow (or unwilling) to hate speech and abuse on its platform. And second, it’s one thing to ban tweets that share private information — but banning tweets that merely link to an actual news source seems different. That would seem to position Twitter as policing news content that isn’t even published on its site. Meanwhile, tweets like this live on:

    Meanwhile, elsewhere in Social Media Land, Facebook’s running into trouble with its new ad policy, which can inaccurately consider promotions of news stories “political ads” — while missing actual partisan ads.

    When news stories are sorted into the “political ad” category, the page of the organization must go through a lengthy authorization and authentication process. This includes, according to , “submitting Social Security numbers and identification that Facebook now requires for anyone running ‘electoral ads’ or ‘issue ads.'” have stopped paid promotion on Facebook in protest.

    include a “whitelist” of established organizations, an idea Facebook’s head of news Campbell Brown flatly rejected. “An exemption or whitelist would directly negate the new levels of transparency we’re trying to achieve,” she said in a statement to Digiday.

    Facebook and Twitter have been trying to fight fake news for a while now — but better understanding the difference between news and not-news would be a useful first step.

    Show tags Show comments / Leave a comment
     
    Join the 45,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
    Will Vox’s new section on effective altruism…well, do any good?
    “It came out of a sense that there were some really important topics with impacts on human beings that didn’t get as much coverage in traditional journalism sections and pieces.”
    Chasing leads and herding cats: How journalism’s latest job title — partner manager — works in ProPublica’s newsroom
    “In short, we came to think that the collaboration itself was something that needed editing.”
    What have tech companies done wrong with fake news? Google (yep) lists the ways
    Plus: A woman-oriented fact-checking initiative, and possible problems with California’s media literacy bill.
    dengi24.kiev.ua

    http://oncesearch.com/details/femdom--joi_-_pov_-_tara_tainton_siterip_part_1_44gb

    http://gepatite.com