Discord Censorship / reading or scanning of private messages [Citation needed]

It was during a Senate Judiciary Hearing on November 17, 2020.

Josh Hawley: (02:45:56)
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In the late 19th century, the heads of the biggest corporations in America, the robber barons, got together and they set rates, they set prices, they determined how they would control information flow. They determined how they’d get rid of competition. And I’ll be darned if we aren’t right back there again. Except for this time, you’re the robber barons. Your companies are the most powerful companies in the world and I want to talk about how you’re coordinating together to control information. In recent days, my office was contacted by a Facebook whistleblower, a former employee of the company, with direct knowledge of the company’s content moderation practices. And I want to start by talking about an internal platform called Tasks that Facebook uses to coordinate projects, including censorship. The Tasks platform allows Facebook employees to communicate about projects they’re working on together. That includes Facebook’s censorship teams, including the so-called community wellbeing team, the integrity team, and the hate speech engineering team, who all use the task platform to discuss which individuals or hashtags or websites to ban. Now, Mr. Zuckerberg, you’re familiar with the test platform, aren’t you?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:47:11)
Senator, we use the Task system for, I think it’s, as you say, for people coordinating all kinds of work across the company, although I’m not sure if I’d agree with the characterization specifically around content moderation that you gave.

Josh Hawley: (02:47:28)
Well, let’s get into that. And let me see if we can refresh your memory and provide folks at home watching with an example. Here over my shoulder is an example, is a screenshot of the Task platform in use. You’ll notice, if the cameras zoom in, several references to election integrity throughout on these lists of tasks. Again, this is shared across Facebook sites, company locations by working groups. What particularly intrigued me is that the platform reflects censorship input from Google and Twitter as well. So as I understand it, Facebook censorship teams communicate with their counterparts at Twitter and Google, and then enter those companies suggestions for censorship onto the task platform so that Facebook can then follow up with them and effectively coordinate their censorship efforts. Mr. Zuckerberg, let me just ask you directly under oath now, does Facebook coordinate its content moderation policies or efforts in any way with Google or Twitter?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:48:32)
Senator, let me be clear about this. We do coordinate on and share signals on security related topics. So for example, if there is signal around a terrorist attack or around child exploitation imagery or around a foreign government creating an influence operation, that is an area where the companies do share signals about what they see. But I think it’s important to be very clear that that is distinct from the content and moderation policies that we or the other companies have, where once we share intelligence or signals between the companies, each company makes its own assessment of the right way to address and deal with that information.

Josh Hawley: (02:49:21)
Well, I’m talking about content moderation, I’m talking about individuals, websites, hashtags, phrases to ban. Is it your testimony that you do not communicate with Twitter or Google about content moderation, about individuals, websites, phrases, hashtags to ban? Just yes or no? Do you communicate with Twitter or Google about coordinating your policies in this way?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:49:46)
Senator, we do not coordinate our policies.

Josh Hawley: (02:49:49)
Do your Facebook content moderation teams communicate with their counterparts at Twitter or Google?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:49:56)
Senator, I’m not aware of anything specific, but I think it would be probably pretty normal for people to talk to their peers and colleagues in the industry. [crosstalk 02:50:05]

Your source contradicts your claim. Zuckerberg denies coordination on moderation policies.

1 Like

You seem to not be reading what he is not saying. He said he denied coordination in moderation policies. He never denied coordination in moderation. Then goes on to say “I think it would be probably pretty normal for people to talk to their peers and colleagues in the industry.”

Makes sense. We’re doing this right now.

I guess after the buildup we were expecting actual proof of some kind of collusion.

1 Like

Read the transcript. It’s all there. Even watch the video were you can see the screen shots of what they are talking about

He says that about his moderation teams, not himself, and denies knowledge of any specifics on the matter.

It’s simply not there. Content of said screenshots, unfortunately isn’t visible either, but from the context, it seems it regards moderation on fake news.

They are very large corporations with different people heading different areas. He cannot possibly know what is going on all the time in detail unless he investigates himself.

The tite of this thread is:

“Discord Censorship / reading or scanning of private messages”

Do you have evidence of Discord scanning PMs in order to censor people for vaccine related discussion over PM beyond the hearsay of a YouTuber drawing the conclusion off timing?

I understand the desire to fall back on an unspecific general conversation about Facebook, who Facebook collaborates with, gov’t suggestions, gov’t interference, trends toward censorship in tech and various other things but i’ve yet to see a citation that even brings up Discord let alone one that shows an example of Discord doing what you’re claiming in the title.

2 Likes

I’ve added [Citation needed] to the initial post.

It’s not my place to be the arbiter of truth or apply “fact checker” notations. I think it’s critical that people feel maximally free to share their thoughts (even very negative ones) in good faith and ideas can compete on a level playing field.

Presenting a highly charged and disparaging claim about a well used service as a fact in the absence of personal experience, remotely reasonable evidence or evidence that even mentions the word “Discord”, then ignoring people raising that issue during the inevitable fallout is not posting in good faith.

You’re welcome to remove “[Citation needed]” if you adjust your initial post to reflect what you know.

1 Like

Starts at: 0:50

"The Discord server was apparently trashed, nobody was banned. It was either when I told people to stop fighting about current medical conditions and talk to your healthcare provider or it was when I sent publically available information privately to a friend.

One of those two got the entire Discord Server completely deleted and my entire discord account too
by the way." - Switched to Linux

https://odysee.com/@switchedtolinux:0/amazon-coming-for-your-kids-weekly-news:3

Comparing to:

“Discord Censorship / reading or scanning of private messages”

“So, there is one guy who makes Linux videos. He calls it Switched to Linux. Each Friday he posts one he calls Weekly News Roundup. On this one he first announces that the Discord server & account had been completely deleted after he sent a private message to another stating to the other person to seek medical advice from their physician before taking the “vaccine.”

He’s not sure if his PM caused it. You’re using this as evidence of a fact of PM scanning/reading causing it.

We don’t know if a member of his community or the person he PMed used a report function or what that member reported which may or may not have been related. Given Switched to Linux chat appears to be pretty open to non-Linux stuff that could have been for a lot of things.

Switched to Linux doesn’t share what Discord told him so we don’t know if the cause is his best guess.

4 Likes