The revelations I have read so far have been extremely underwhelming. Content moderation of any kind is hard. The easy cases don’t take up most of your time or energy. These emails read like people doing their best. Maybe my decision would have been different but maybe not.
And that's before you get into the hairy territory created by multiple jurisdictions, nations, pressure groups, grass roots organizations and so on. From personal experience: it is a minefield and it is impossible to satisfy everybody and to get everything right.
Yeah. Which would probably reveal that not only are content moderation decisions really hard, they are extremely boring, require a huge number of meetings, and probably in many cases involve consulting lawyers
Weiss goes into it on her site, but it's more complicated than just emails. She says they are using some lawyer SW that is meant for speeding up discovery in legal battles.
Seems like she should be a real tech person and just learn how to use grep. Her explanations all just feel like a first year journalism student trying to explain the hot new program she just learned about and everyone else has been just suffering through for a decade.
Completely blocking the spread of a news story that could have a major effect on an election is not moderation.
Moderation is about moderating bad behaviour of individuals. Censorship is blocking entire topics from discussion.
If you think it's underwhelming, just think how you'd feel if it would have been revealed that Don Trump Jr was smoking crack with prostitutes, and twitter blocked the story from spreading. 10 days before an election. Like seriously, think about that. Would you be fine with that?
>Like seriously, think about that. Would you be fine with that?
Maybe they wouldn't be fine with it, but still fine with the H Biden story being censored, because they've got no integrity and want their political opponents censored but not their own.
