Samidh Profile picture
16 Sep, 10 tweets, 2 min read
Today's WSJ reporting was especially difficult for me to read because it touches on a topic that probably "kept me awake" more than anything else when I was at FB. And that is, how can social networks operate responsibly in the global south? wsj.com/articles/faceb…

🧵...
It can't be easily disputed that social networks' rapid expansion into the global south was at times reckless and arguably neocolonialist. And the inadequate attention both within platforms and within the media on these issues is rightly shocking. What can help? Some thoughts...
When a social network operates in any market, it needs to ensure it can adhere to some minimal set of trust & safety standards. It needs to be capable of processing user reports and automatically monitoring for the worst content in all the supported dialects.
Seems like table stakes (and it is), but not operationally trivial. You must find ppl who know the dialect & context, train them on platform rule nuances, ensure they have a safe workplace, and hire enough to staff 24/7 and mitigate single points of bias. Takes time, not just $.
You further need to duplicate this staffing to train your automated classifiers. Local people are needed to tag content, evaluate accuracy, and do this repeatedly as norms & language constantly shift. Do this for all languages, perhaps even those spoken by just 1% of people.
We must also recognize that asking platforms to police safety issues on their platforms-- even ones they don't inherently make worse than the rest of the internet-- means that we are also asking them to surveil their communities in ways many may find invasive.
This may be less of an issue in places where there is established rule of law, but in other countries where governments use their power to unethically demand information about dissidents, your increased monitoring may put some innocent people at great risk.
Why operate at all in risky places? Why not let governments block you? In much of the world, state-controlled media has historically been the only media people ever had prior to social networks. FB and the rest really does democratize voice in a way that people truly value.
In the end, this is yet another area where regulation can be helpful. Social networks need to be held to a minimal trust & safety standard before they can operate at scale in a place, and those operations necessary for safety must be protected from malicious gov't intrusion.
My heart goes out to those who are victims of these terrible crimes across the world. Human and child trafficking are absolutely abhorrent. I send the teams working to stop these abominations my gratitude and wish them enduring resilience.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Samidh

Samidh Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @samidh

15 Sep
Was hoping for a quiet day but @JeffHorwitz strikes again. Do I have thoughts on the issues raised? You bet! I share in the spirit of trying to enhance understanding of these complex dilemmas. In short, we need to imbue feeds with a sense of morality. wsj.com/articles/faceb…
When you treat all engagement equally (irrespective of content), increasing feed engagement will invariably amplify misinfo, sensationalism, hate, and other societal harms. I wish this weren't the case, but it is so predictable that it is perhaps a natural law of social networks.
So it is no surprise that the MSI (meaningful social interaction) ranking changes of 2018/2019 had this impact, and as the reporting shows, many people at FB are conscious of and concerned about these side effects.
Read 11 tweets
14 Sep
To those whose reaction to this story involves saying "I can't believe Instagram wrote that down", would you rather they not write it down? wsj.com/articles/faceb…
I see it as a testament to @mosseri's leadership that Instagram is willing to invest in understanding its impact on people-- both the good and the awful-- and spin up dedicated efforts to mitigate even the most intractable and heartbreaking harms.
The alternative would be an app that is blind to its role in society. That would be reckless and dangerous to us all. Instead, we need to engage with this research thoughtfully and bring to the conversation a spirit of constructive problem solving.
Read 5 tweets
13 Sep
While I had no involvement whatsoever in @JeffHorwitz's very thorough reporting in the WSJ on FB's x-check system, I was quoted in the article based on a leaked internal post, so I am compelled to give a more full perspective.
First, to state the obvious, automated moderation systems inevitably make lots of mistakes because human language is nuanced & complex. In theory, a confirmatory round of review is prudent because it is an awful experience to have your post taken down without cause.
But how you execute that second round of review is critically important! Figuring out who is eligible, how you staff, etc. makes all the difference between responsible enforcement and de-facto exemptions from the platform's policies.
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(