Platform Regulation Director, Stanford Cyber Policy Center. Former Google AGC. This is roughly my zillionth rodeo.
3 subscribed
Sep 29, 2023 • 15 tweets • 3 min read
The S Ct will review the must-carry provisions of the TX and FL laws, and the requirements for "individualized notice" to users of content moderation decisions, but not other transparency requirements in the laws.
It says cert is for Questions 1 and 2 in the SG's brief. 1/
What statutory provisions does that actually encompass? The SG brief says it includes Texas's appeals provision, too. The Texas statutory sections it mentions as part of Q2 are 120.103 and 120.104, unless I am missing something. 2/
Sep 26, 2023 • 12 tweets • 2 min read
The EU's database is live! In theory it should include every Statement or Reasons sent by platforms explaining content moderation decisions. I've groused about it, but it's an amazingly ambitious effort and already pretty interesting. 1/
When I first opened it half an hour or so ago, the database had 3.4 million entries. Now it's 3.5 million. 2/
Jul 21, 2023 • 15 tweets • 5 min read
The statements from Thierry Breton of the European Commission about shutting down social media during riots are shocking. They vindicate every warning about the DSA that experts from the majority world (aka global south) have been shouting throughout this process. 1/
Breton asserts authority under the DSA to make platforms remove posts calling for “revolt” or “burning of cars” immediately. If platforms don’t comply, they will be sanctioned immediately and then banned. (He says “immediately” four times in a short quote.) 2/
Jul 13, 2023 • 16 tweets • 5 min read
Monday is apparently the deadline (!) for comments on one of the most under-discussed transparency measures in the DSA: the public database of every (!) content moderation action taken by platforms. 1/ digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/digita…
Comments can be general, or can be specific to the technical specs the Commission has published. I hope this could be a longer and iterative discussion, bc the spec is (understandably) very much a first draft.
2/
Jul 5, 2023 • 16 tweets • 4 min read
In the injunction against Biden administration officials "jawboning" social media companies, the judge makes a classic legal and logical error. He thinks he can protect "free expression" while leaving the govt free to restrict content he personally considers bad or dangerous. 1/
Here's the Missouri v. Biden injunction. It's 7 pages. 2/int.nyt.com/data/documentt…
One important message: SIMMER DOWN about the The Algorithm, wonks. You do not actually need to speculate and make things up.
Ranking systems are actually quite well understood among CS people, who can explain things calmly and rationally if you let them.
Mar 16, 2023 • 17 tweets • 6 min read
At a quick skim, OFCOM appear to walk a very fine line in its guidance for "illegal content risk assessments."
It doesn't *require* platforms to proactively monitor users' posts. But it's hard to say how platforms could comply without doing so, at least for sample sets. 1/
The sample questions a platform might ask in risk assessments are all about something other than looking at specific user content.
Mar 9, 2023 • 15 tweets • 4 min read
In researching platform transparency, I've come across many examples of really troubling state enforcement, happening now.
AGs claim to be investigating whether platforms stated their policies correctly. But they also have clear agendas of changing platforms' speech policies. 1/
The most well-known example is Texas AG Ken Paxton's suit demanding that Twitter hand over all records about content moderation. The suit was explicitly filed in retaliation for Twitter deplatforming Trump. 2/
I have a new draft article about platform transparency mandates and the First Amendment. It is an attempt to take very seriously the questions likely headed to the Supreme Court in the NetChoice Texas/Florida law cases. 1/
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
Neither the parties nor the lower courts have really taken the time to examine the transparency issues.
There is a very big iceberg here. So much case law uncited, and practical considerations unaddressed. My paper is long and it still only gets to a fraction of the issues. 2/
Mar 8, 2023 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
I generally am trying not to engage on AI issues. But for the record, I love the passive aggressive gloating evil AI song from the end of Portal I so, so much.
At one point, every person in my household could sing this all the way through.
Feb 22, 2023 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
What situation *should* expose platforms to U.S. ATA liability, according to their own lawyer in the S Ct today?
Not taking down user speech when Turkish police tell them to. This was literally his example.
Twitter fired all the lawyers who have actually dealt with Turkish/Erdogan government takedown demands. So I guess they forgot everything they ever knew on that topic.
Feb 21, 2023 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
You know that natural human tendency to focus on things you're good at and can accomplish more easily?
Maybe that's why the Supreme Court in Gonzalez today kept asking about aiding and abetting. Which is the topic of *tomorrow's* case.
I wish I could lounge in a work chair like Alito. He's a master.
Nov 19, 2022 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
I try to avoid rant mode on here, but seriously, this is so painful to watch.
Trust and Safety workers right now are like surgeons whose operating room has been seized by frat boys. The patient is on the table. The boys have their scalpels out, and are confidently explaining where they plan to start cutting.
Nov 19, 2022 • 8 tweets • 3 min read
The most important thing about the @nytimes op ed by @yoyoel about Twitter under Musk is that it’s great and insightful and you should read it. His departure from Twitter is a huge loss for the company, but perhaps a great gain for open public discussion about Trust and Safety.
The second most important thing is that in an op ed ostensibly about Musk, he spends eight paragraphs explaining the enormous hidden influence, capriciousness, and lack of clear standards or processes employed by another great unchecked power: APP STORES.
Sep 22, 2022 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
Like an idiot, I took the 5th Circuit at its word when it said the NetChoice plaintiff trade associations represented every company covered by Texas’s law. That is so, so far from the truth. Read Corbin’s attachment from @ericgoldman and weep.
You should especially be weeping if you’re one of the many companies that have to comply with Texas’s wild requirements to carry hate speech, porn, etc. and you had NO IDEA and were NOT represented in a lawsuit driven by only the very biggest incumbent platforms.
Sep 20, 2022 • 17 tweets • 4 min read
I think there are legitimate First Amendment issues with platform transparency mandates. I wish there weren't, and I think they can be addressed with good drafting.
This blog post explains one of the main issues: *state* influence over online speech.
cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2022/09/s… 1/
The post lists five examples of culture war flashpoint issues that could be framed as legitimate areas for inquiry and enforcement by state AGs like Ken Paxton in Texas, or Rob Bonta in California, under transparency laws. 2/
Sep 20, 2022 • 8 tweets • 2 min read
Confused about what legal arguments have been raised, resolved, preserved, or teed up for Supreme Court review in the NetChoice cases?
Possibly me too. An RA and I made this tracker doc, listing and linking to everything that's happened so far.
It's kind of alarming how sloppy the 5th Circuit opinion about the Texas must-carry law is. It's like the bully who knows that what he says doesn't have to be true or make sense, because he'll get his way anyhow. techfreedom.org/wp-content/upl… 2/
Sep 17, 2022 • 23 tweets • 4 min read
It's easy to take potshots at the wacky opinion the 5th Circuit just issued upholding Texas's must-carry law for platforms. techfreedom.org/wp-content/upl… 1/
I'll definitely get to that. 2/
Aug 31, 2022 • 22 tweets • 6 min read
Wow. Strong move by @Cloudflare in its newly announced policy saying they will not exercise discretion to terminate security services to sites like the Daily Stormer going forward.
The post by @eastdakota and Alissa Starzak is very thoughtful.
blog.cloudflare.com/cloudflares-ab…
1/@Cloudflare@eastdakota This is nuanced. As I read this, they *will* terminate where the law so requires, including geoblocking for locally illegal content. And they will still kick people off Cloudflare's less-used *hosting* services based on their own discretionary policies. 2/
Aug 23, 2022 • 8 tweets • 2 min read
I feel like I, or anyone who has worked in the space, could have written this leaked third-party audit of Twitter's disinfo policy enforcement without even having to interview anyone. Because it describes every company I've ever heard of. s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2218…
Policy changes are made in firedrill/crisis situations, without the input of all relevant stakeholders? You don't say...
Ooh, and the relevant teams aren't very diverse and are mostly based on California? Shocker.
And different teams don't communicate well. My oh my.
3 subscribed
