Thread by @brianboland

1/13 Some thoughts on @BarackObama's speech on disinformation yesterday. Mainly on transparency, section 230 and accountability. Europe needs to keep leading, but now we need the US to get serious and start legislating. barackobama.medium.com/my-remarks-on-…

2/13 Transparency of the algorithms themselves isn't an answer. They are far too complicated to understand and predict even for the people working at these companies. Yes - even the people working at the tech companies can't predict what the algorithms will do.

3/13 A/B testing systems exist to study what happens with changes to the algorithms - you need to see what comes out to understand what is happening. That is why transparency of content distribution and engagement is critically important.

4/13 President Obama highlighted the Platform Transparency and Accountability Act - this is very important legislation that we need to ensure passes. I would broaden it to include journalists and human rights organizations. law.stanford.edu/press/the-plat…

5/13 On to content - the idea that the best counter to bad speech is more speech is a broken framework in our ranked feed world. The fact that more speech is created doesn't mean it will be seen. Our feeds are a heavily filtered view of the world.

6/13 Imagine a town square where everyone can share their ideas. The more people sharing the better. But then add a stage at one end and choose which people can talk on the mic. Then pick by who gets a reaction. You get a distorted reality and good speech may not cut through.

7/13 Which is why I support Section 230 reforms in a couple of aspects. 230 is important to protect innovation yet leaves too much space for platforms to act without any fear of the consequences for the harms they create.

8/13 First, end the protections for what the algorithms promote. @FrancesHaugen has promoted this view as has a former Meta employee @RoddyLindsay who designed algorithms. This is a really good path forward. nytimes.com/2021/10/06/opi…

9/13 Second, we need to increase accountability around the harms that platforms could knowably reduce. You don't hold a hotel liable for drugs sold in their lobby - unless they become known widely in the community and to themselves as the place to buy drugs. Same with platforms.

10/13 @GretchenSPeters has for years raised the issues of known crimes committed on tech platforms. She has proposed changes to Section 230 that specifically remove protections when real harm is occurring - especially on an ongoing basis. counteringcrime.org/time-to-reform…

11/13 As @JeffHorwitz of @WSJ has highlighted you can spot crimes on the platform and could mitigate them. But we know that investment in these areas (especially outside of Europe and the US) is dramatically lacking. wsj.com/articles/faceb…

12/13 Europe is leading the charge - I am thankful for that. With so many of the tech giants based in the US it is time that we get our act together and create strong sensible legislation. We can protect people better AND we can have innovation.
nytimes.com/2022/04/22/tec…

13/13 And people want it. The polling that I have seen shows that people overwhelmingly don't trust the tech platforms and they overwhelmingly do want protections. And that feeling is bipartisan. So let's get it done.

Last thought... the platforms can afford it. During the time that Meta spent $13 billion on safety they spent $50 billion in stock buybacks.