Twitter is blocked in China, but its state news agency is buying promoted tweets | Hacker News Reader

Twitter is blocked in China, but its state news agency is buying promoted tweets

techcrunch.com

161 pointsnoarchy46 comments

Twitter just posted this statement: https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2019/informati...

And a new policy banning all state-controlled media from advertising: https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2019/advertisi...

I think this is an interesting example of recent discussions about the disproportionate influence of social media companies on information. Obviously, it doesn't seem right for a government to manipulate public conversation. But it's also worrisome that a single company has the power to shut down an entire government trying to spread its ideas. In this instance it's well justified, but it feels a little scary that the flow of information is policed by a couple private individuals with very little oversight. I don't have any particular opinions here on what might need to change, if anything - just thinking out loud.

Interesting - but many pro-HK bot accounts are still up and running. Indeed, there's a discord channel where many LIHKG (a 4chan-like HK site) users congregate to brigade Twitter and Reddit, and they've explicitly shared scripts and bots to manipulate or mass retweet messages in the channel.

How is this any different than the New York Times or the Nightly News? They control to a large extent the news people see.

For one, social media companies are a different kind of entity in legal terms and have different legal responsibilities.

These are journalistic organizations. Not tech companies selling ads. Sure, newspapers sell a ton of ads, but they tend to balance the news and the commercial sides way better and more delicate than your average SV tech corps.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent

Because you know that what you see in NYT and NN voices mainly the opinion of their editor/journalists, while Twitter can give you the illusion that the opinions you see reaching consensus there, come from your peers.

I’m going long $TWTR with this news, the quarterly report is going to be great

Maybe what you are after (I think...) is some form of code ethics like the code of Bordeaux for journalists [0] but then also applicable to tech corporations in Silicon Valley.

Many journalists and more important journalistic organizations take this seriously. Doesn’t mean there aren’t bad apples or mistakes. It just means there is a moral guideline to fall back on.

[0] https://www.ifj.org/who/rules-and-policy/global-charter-of-e...

Why would it be ok for the Chinese government to influence public opinion on Hong Kong, but Russia can't influence public opinion on presidential elections? Feels like it should be both or none.

There's lots of differences at a high enough resolution of analysis.

Both are wrong. I don’t think anyone is arguing anything different.

Neither is ok, but Jack likes the guys who chants “Russia is our friend”:

https://boingboing.net/2018/09/03/twitter-was-going-to-ban-c...

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/10/10/when-white-na...

Twitter permanently banned Alex Jones a couple of days after the above article was published.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/06/twitter-permanently-bans-ale...

Spencer (the neo-nazi), not Jones (the conspiracy theorist slash propagandist), is the one who loves Russia and who Jack is friendly with.

Spencer is still active on Twitter where he still posts white supremacy stuff.

I hope they also put a stop to Russian and American propaganda... :-)

The other weird thing is that Twitter is seen as a global information platform but the value system imposed on it is very US-centric. Likewise for Facebook.

The whole "interference" in US elections on Facebook, for example, was quite possibly blown way out of proportion compared to all the other "interference" happening around the world on Facebook.

For example, why was Facebook called to testify in front of US Congress, but not testify in front of Beijing for spreading misinformation about China?

Beijing would have FB testify if it were possible to compel them and if it suited their purposes.

Not to undermine your concerns, for you raise fair questions, but this is justifiable behavior on Twitter’s part for a simple reason: Twitter is blocked in PRC.

It seems fair to block the activities of even entire governments to operate on a platform that is itself blocked from operating normally in that country. Governments are not above reproach or criticism anymore than corporations are. If PRC will not subject itself to fair scrutiny or allow their subjects to participate on Twitter’s platform, then why should Twitter have to play or even allow PRC’s game on their platform, especially when they are blatantly breaking Twitter’s rules and intentionally trying to deceive Twitter’s users.

I think the ethics on this is quite clear. PRC is not trying to share their ideas in a fair manner. Rather, they are trying to shape and manipulate beliefs by distorting the amount of support there is for their preferred take. It's next level propaganda.

If not for the fact that hundreds, perhaps thousands, of bots are being coordinated to create an illusion of weight for some consensus, things would indeed be murkier. As it is, the PRC is currently acting disingenuously.

> But it's also worrisome that a single company has the power to shut down an entire government trying to spread its ideas.

Twitter doesn't have the power to shut down an entire government trying to spread its ideas. Not by a long shot—the very idea is laughable. Twitter has the power to shut down an entire government trying to spread its ideas via twitter. And that is in no way worrisome; that is a very good thing! If it were impossible for Twitter to do so, that would be worrisome.

it's also worrisome that a single company has the power to shut down an entire government trying to spread its ideas

To be clear, that's not what Twitter is doing. They specifically state:

"Affected media entities are free to continue to use their Twitter account(s) to organically participate in public conversation"

What they're doing is blocking paid ads by governments and deceptive practices by everyone. But they're fine with governments spreading their ideas on Twitter the old-fashioned way, by tweeting things under their own name and getting lots of likes/retweets.

And, obviously, Twitter has no power whatsoever to shut down governments spreading their ideas the old-fashioned way off of Twitter.

By the old-fashioned way on twitter, don't you mean "running ginormous bot-farms tweeting propaganda?" Because I doubt the PRC will be restrained to simply posting tweets under the bluecheck PRC account.

Huh? I'm sure PRC will try to do that, but Twitter won't be fine with it. Twitter will try to stop them, as described in the original article.

More like a government has the power to shutdown all except their own ideas from the internet.

One could ask, "What would China do to WeChat if they showed sponsored content from the US promoting democratic reforms in HK?"

I was recently in Beijing and noticed when posting on Instagram many bot accounts posting "Shame on Hong Kong" in Chinese.

This is a Facebook problem too.

"China appears to be making rapid advances in the development of Ben Garrison technology"

https://twitter.com/hikikomorphism/status/116247064336062054...

I think people worry too much about these "misinformation campaigns". I think the idea behind this worry is "most people would not disagree with me unless they were brainwashed - we can't let people I disagree with do that".

I'm more on the free speech side, of course. I'm definitely not a fan of the Chinese government. I like free speech, after all! But I don't really think these promoted misleading tweets are swaying the opinion of most north-americans or europeans. And I don't like this new world order where your message must align with modern liberal western ideas, in order for you to express it on a popular medium. This trend is honestly a bit scary. We're getting into orthodoxy here.

Don't freak out that some people are broadcasting a message you don't agree with on a popular medium, and maybe some other people out there will be influenced by it. Growing up as a geek/nerd, I got accustomed to nobody I was around really understanding and agreeing with me. It's not the end of the world. But orthodoxy is a bit scary.

There is so much fallacious thinking here it would make me look like a pedantic doof to list them all. Suffice it to suggest that you consider accounting for the fact that there are real things actually happening outside of your mind.

Between this, and mainland Chinese protesting while living/studying abroad whereas they wouldn't have the right to do so at home, the irony is palpable.

You are onto something which had been bothering me yesterday.

I have a Chinese room mate who yesterday showed me images/videos 'anti-protester'and exclaiming how he wanted to be part of. Note in the past and still continues to be against the Chinese government and expresses disapproval of them.

I found it very odd of him to side with the anti-protestors because 'I love China and these protestors hate Chinese'. I told him, the people of Hong Kong are protesting against the Chinese government and the government does not represent the people. He further added, "people in China love the government". "If people don't like the government, they can kick them out".

I told him I am pretty sure they can't because the regime is not communist but instead totalitarian. Even a month ago, he told you can't speak anything against the government even if you wanted to because of their "3 generation threat".

So your comment must be part I missed in my mind, the Chinese national who sympathize with the government here in the US shouldn't be protesting at all. The government they support, it is against any type of protest and unrest. Can it be said that pro-Chinese government individuals don't really have the right no matter which type of environment they live in?

> I told him I am pretty sure they can't because the regime is not communist but instead totalitarian.

Honest question: which communist government isn't / wasn't totalitarian?

Burning man? /s

Do not seek or expect Western style logic. They have no anchor to a reality that you and I know. They have a horrible jumble of countervailing thoughts which lead to chaos and inertia. Just the way the powers that be want it.

many sites are blocked too, but the government agents can access them freely all the time, ironic

Also ironic is China's elite reaping the benefits of democracy while oppressing their own people.

Democracy? I think you mean Capitalism. The two things, although usually existing together, are not the same thing.

Many celebrities have also come out against the protests, such as Jackie Chan. I wonder if they were bought out or threatened by the government in order to do that.

No threats are necessary if he still has family or business in China

I believe Chan has been openly pro-CCP/Beijing for quite some time.

Jackie Chan has a history of defending the CCP and propagandizing for them.

"Taiwan election biggest joke in the world" http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-03/29/content_... https://archive.fo/QYKF

"He was named official Narcotics Control Ambassador by Chinese police in 2009." https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-32620313 https://archive.fo/hFrnF

"we Chinese need to be controlled" https://web.archive.org/web/20090421223810/http://news.yahoo... https://archive.fo/pigfI

"Anger after movie star tells mainland newspaper his hometown has become ‘like South Korea’ and that it should limit the right to protest" https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1103899/jackie-c... [Note this is about 2012 protests not 2019]

"Jackie Chan back in action, branding US more corrupt than China" https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1125813/jackie-c...

"Parents disliked the presence of Jackie Chan in the program" https://www.theepochtimes.com/chinese-netizens-criticize-man... https://archive.fo/lKp1J

"The 63-year-old Chan has aligned himself closely with the authoritarian views of the Chinese Communist Party in recent decades and is now widely seen across the Chinese-speaking world as a mouthpiece for the Beijing regime." https://www.theepochtimes.com/jackie-chan-pushes-to-outlaw-s... https://archive.fo/Ewked

"Jackie Chan’s multilingual film Kung Fu Yoga has courted controversy for having an Indian character allegedly praise Chinese President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)." https://silverscreen.in/news/jackie-chans-kung-fu-yoga-pro-c... https://archive.fo/tVsQy

Will never watch another of his movies again.

Jackie Chan was pro-democracy... back in the 80s:

https://i.imgur.com/luEftKL.jpg

Then China got big and rich so Jackie could not piss off his biggest market.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com