ReportWire

Tag: Misinformation

  • Twitter slashes its staff as Musk era takes hold on platform

    Twitter slashes its staff as Musk era takes hold on platform

    [ad_1]

    Twitter began widespread layoffs Friday as new owner Elon Musk overhauls the company, raising grave concerns about chaos enveloping the social media platform and its ability to fight disinformation just days ahead of the U.S. midterm elections.

    The speed and size of the cuts also opened Musk and Twitter to lawsuits. At least one was filed alleging Twitter violated federal law by not providing fired employees the required notice.

    The San Francisco-based company told workers by email Thursday that they would learn Friday if they had been laid off. About half of the company’s staff of 7,500 was let go, Yoel Roth, Twitter’s head of safety & integrity, confirmed in a tweet.

    Musk tweeted late Friday that there was no choice but to cut the jobs “when the company is losing over $4M/day.” He did not provide details on the daily losses at the company and said employees who lost their jobs were offered three months’ pay as a severance.

    No other social media platform comes close to Twitter as a place where public agencies and other vital service providers — election boards, police departments, utilities, schools and news outlets — keep people reliably informed. Many fear Musk’s layoffs will gut it and render it lawless.

    Roth said the company’s front-line moderation staff was the group the least impacted by the job cuts.

    He added that Twitter’s “efforts on election integrity — including harmful misinformation that can suppress the vote and combatting state-backed information operations — remain a top priority.”

    Musk, meanwhile, tweeted that “Twitter’s strong commitment to content moderation remains absolutely unchanged.”

    But a Twitter employee who spoke with The Associated Press Friday said it will be a lot harder to get that work done starting next week after losing so many colleagues.

    “This will impact our ability to provide support for elections, definitely,” said the employee who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of concerns for job security.

    The employee said there’s no “concrete sense of direction” except for what Musk says publicly on Twitter.

    “I follow his tweets and they affect how we prioritize our work,” said the employee. “It’s a very healthy indicator of what to prioritize.”

    Several employees who tweeted about losing their jobs said Twitter eliminated their entire teams, including one focused on human rights and global conflicts, another checking Twitter’s algorithms for bias in how tweets get amplified, and an engineering team devoted to making the social platform more accessible for people with disabilities.

    Eddie Perez, a Twitter civic integrity team manager who quit in September, said he fears the layoffs so close to the midterms could allow disinformation to “spread like wildfire” during the post-election vote-counting period in particular.

    “I have a hard time believing that it doesn’t have a material impact on their ability to manage the amount of disinformation out there,” he said, adding that there simply may not be enough employees to beat it back.

    President Joe Biden, at a campaign event in Illinois Friday night, said: “Now what are we all worried about? Elon Musk, who goes out and buys an outfit that sends and spews lies all across the world. … How do we expect kids to be able to understand what is at stake?”

    Twitter’s employees have been expecting layoffs since Musk took the helm. He fired top executives, including CEO Parag Agrawal, and removed the company’s board of directors on his first day as owner.

    As the emailed notices went out, many Twitter employees took to the platform to express support for each other — often simply tweeting blue heart emojis to signify its blue bird logo — and salute emojis in replies to each other.

    A Twitter manager said many employees found out they had been laid off when they could no longer log into the company’s systems. The manager said the way the layoffs were conducted showed a “lack of care and thoughtfulness.” The manager, who spoke to the AP on the condition of anonymity out of concerns for job security, said managers were not given any notice about who would be getting laid off.

    “For me as a manager, it’s been excruciating because I had to find out about what my team was going to look like through tweets and through texting and calling people,” the employee said. “That’s a really hard way to care for your people. And managers at Twitter care a lot about their people.”

    A coalition of civil rights groups escalated their calls Friday for brands to pause advertising buys on the platform. The layoffs are particularly dangerous ahead of the elections, the groups warned, and for transgender users and other groups facing violence inspired by hate speech that proliferates online.

    In a tweet Friday, Musk blamed activists for what he described as a “massive drop in revenue” since he took over Twitter late last week.

    Insider Intelligence analyst Jasmine Enberg said there is “little Musk can say to appease advertisers when he’s keeping the company in a constant state of uncertainty and turmoil, and appears indifferent to Twitter employees and the law.”

    “Musk needs advertisers more than they need him,” she said. “Pulling ads from Twitter is a quick and painless decision for most brands.”

    A lawsuit was filed Thursday in federal court in San Francisco on behalf of one employee who was laid off and three others who were locked out of their work accounts. It alleges Twitter violated the law by not providing the required notice.

    The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification statute requires employers with at least 100 workers to disclose layoffs involving 500 or more employees, regardless of whether a company is publicly traded or privately held, as Twitter is now.

    The layoffs affected Twitter’s offices around the world. In the United Kingdom, it would be required by law to give employees notice, said Emma Bartlett, a partner specializing in employment and partnership law at CM Murray LLP.

    The speed of the layoffs could also open Musk and Twitter up to discrimination claims if it turns out, for instance, that they disproportionally affected women, people of color or older workers.

    ———

    AP Business Writers Mae Anderson, Alexandra Olson and Ken Sweet in New York, James Pollard in Columbia, S.C., Frank Bajak in Boston and Danica Kirka in London contributed to this story.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Settlement reached in suits over FBI posing as AP reporter

    Settlement reached in suits over FBI posing as AP reporter

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press will get a $145,000 settlement following a pair of lawsuits filed after an FBI agent posed as a reporter for The Associated Press and created a fake story.

    The long-running Freedom of Information Act cases led to appeals court decisions that will help bolster access to public records, said Adam Marshall, an attorney for the group. The cases also shed light on FBI agents posing as members of the media, a tactic that free press advocates say undermines media credibility and blurs lines between law enforcement and the press.

    The agency failed to follow its own rules over such undercover operations when an agent posed as an AP reporter and sent a link to a fake story in an investigation in Washington state in 2007, according to documents uncovered in the lawsuit filed along with The Associated Press.

    Then-FBI Director James Comey called the technique “proper and appropriate” under FBI guidelines at the time, though he said it would require higher-level approvals when the incident came to light seven years later, in 2014. No actual story was published and it led to an arrest, he maintained.

    The agent posing as an AP reporter sent a link to the fake article to a 15-year-old suspected of making bomb threats at a high school. When the teen clicked the link, a tracking tool revealed his computer’s location and helped agents confirm his identity.

    The FBI declined to comment Friday.

    Kathleen Carroll, then executive editor of the AP, said in 2014 that the FBI’s “unacceptable tactics undermine AP and the vital distinction between the government and the press.” A letter signed by two dozen news organizations called the revelations “inexcusable” and the Reporter’s Committee specifically called out the use of the AP’s name as “cover for delivery of electronic surveillance software.”

    Lauren Easton, an Associated Press spokeswoman, declined additional comment Friday.

    The lawsuits were filed as part of an effort to get records about FBI news-media impersonations, and eventually resulted in important court decisions about how far agencies must go in searching for requested documents and the standards they must meet in order to withhold documents, Marshall said. The settlement will cover attorney’s fees and costs.

    “This has shown that there are significant, concerning and ongoing issues with respect to federal law enforcement impersonation of the press in the United States,” Marshall said. The cases have also “shown that the Reporters Committee and The Associated Press were committed to finding out as much as we could about what happened here for the public to know.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • BBC tries to understand politics by creating fake Americans

    BBC tries to understand politics by creating fake Americans

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Larry, a 71-year-old retired insurance broker and Donald Trump fan from Alabama, wouldn’t be likely to run into the liberal Emma, a 25-year-old graphic designer from New York City, on social media — even if they were both real.

    Each is a figment of BBC reporter Marianna Spring’s imagination. She created five fake Americans and opened social media accounts for them, part of an attempt to illustrate how disinformation spreads on sites like Facebook, Twitter and TikTok despite efforts to stop it, and how that impacts American politics.

    That’s also left Spring and the BBC vulnerable to charges that the project is ethically suspect in using false information to uncover false information.

    “We’re doing it with very good intentions because it’s important to understand what is going on,” Spring said. In the world of disinformation, “the U.S. is the key battleground,” she said.

    Spring’s reporting has appeared on BBC’s newscasts and website, as well as the weekly podcast “Americast,” the British view of news from the United States. She began the project in August with the midterm election campaign in mind but hopes to keep it going through 2024.

    Spring worked with the Pew Research Center in the U.S. to set up five archetypes, although the center was not involved in how to use them. Besides the very conservative Larry and very liberal Emma, there’s Britney, a more populist conservative from Texas; Gabriela, a largely apolitical independent from Miami; and Michael, a Black teacher from Milwaukee who’s a moderate Democrat.

    With computer-generated photos, she set up accounts on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and TikTok. The accounts are passive, meaning her “people” don’t have friends or make public comments.

    Spring, who uses five different phones labeled with each name, tends to the accounts to fill out their “personalities.” For instance, Emma is a lesbian who follows LGBTQ groups, is an atheist, takes an active interest in women’s issues and abortion rights, supports the legalization of marijuana and follows The New York Times and NPR.

    These “traits” are the bait, essentially, to see how the social media companies’ algorithms kick in and what material is sent their way.

    Through what she followed and liked, Britney was revealed as anti-vax and critical of big business, so she has been sent into several rabbit holes, Spring said. The account has received material, some with violent rhetoric, from groups falsely claiming Donald Trump won the 2020 election. She’s also been invited to join in with people who claim the Mar-a-Lago raid was “proof” Trump won and the state was out to get him, and groups that support conspiracy theorist Alex Jones.

    Despite efforts by social media companies to combat disinformation, Spring said there’s still a considerable amount getting through, mostly from a far-right perspective.

    Gabriela, the non-aligned Latina mom who’s mostly expressed interest in music, fashion and how to save money while shopping, doesn’t follow political groups. But it’s far more likely that Republican-aligned material will show up in her feed.

    “The best thing you can do is understand how this works,” Spring said. “It makes us more aware of how we’re being targeted.”

    Most major social media companies prohibit impersonator accounts. Violators can be kicked off for creating them, although many evade the rules.

    Journalists have used several approaches to probe how the tech giants operate. For a story last year, the Wall Street Journal created more than 100 automated accounts to see how TikTok steered users in different directions. The nonprofit newsroom the Markup set up a panel of 1,200 people who agreed to have their web browsers studied for details on how Facebook and YouTube operated.

    “My job is to investigate misinformation and I’m setting up fake accounts,” Spring said. “The irony is not lost on me.”

    She’s obviously creative, said Aly Colon, a journalism ethics professor at Washington & Lee University. But what Spring called ironic disturbs him and other experts who believe there are above-board ways to report on this issue.

    “By creating these false identities, she violates what I believe is a fairly clear ethical standard in journalism,” said Bob Steele, retired ethics expert for the Poynter Institute. “We should not pretend that we are someone other than ourselves, with very few exceptions.”

    Spring said she believes the level of public interest in how these social media companies operate outweighs the deception involved.

    The BBC said the investigation was created in accordance with its strict editorial guidelines.

    “We take ethics extremely seriously and numerous processes are in place to ensure that our activity does not affect anyone else,” the network said. “Our coverage is transparent and clearly states that the investigation does not offer exhaustive insight into what every U.S. voter could be seeing on social media, but instead provides a snapshot of the important issues associated with the spread of online disinformation.”

    The BBC experiment can be valuable, but only shows part of how algorithms work, a mystery that largely evades people outside of the tech companies, said Samuel Woolley, director of the propaganda research lab in the Center for Media Engagement at the University of Texas.

    Algorithms also take cues from comments that people make on social media or in their interactions with friends — both things that BBC’s fake Americans don’t do, he said.

    “It’s like a journalist’s version of a field experiment,” Woolley said. “It’s running an experiment on a system but it’s pretty limited in its rigor.”

    From Spring’s perspective, if you want to see how an influence operation works, “you need to be on the front lines.”

    Since launching the five accounts, Spring said she logs on every few days to update each of them and see what they’re being fed.

    “I try to make it as realistic as possible,” she said. “I have these five personalities that I have to inhabit at any given time.”

    ———

    This story was first published on Nov. 1, 2022, and updated on Nov. 4, 2022, to add that the Pew Research Center was not involved in how five archetypes of fake Americans were used.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Republicans fight to block the sale of Miami radio station

    Republicans fight to block the sale of Miami radio station

    [ad_1]

    Republicans fight to block the sale of Miami radio station – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    With the midterms days away, Democrats and Republicans are hoping to win over Latinos who have proven to be important swing votes. As the elections ramp up, so do allegations of false and misleading information discussed on some Spanish-language media platforms. CBS News correspondent Enrique Acevedo takes us to South Florida, where some Democrats are buying a radio station at the heart of this battle.

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • BBC tries to understand politics by creating fake Americans

    BBC tries to understand politics by creating fake Americans

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Larry, a 71-year-old retired insurance broker and Donald Trump fan from Alabama, wouldn’t be likely to run into the liberal Emma, a 25-year-old graphic designer from New York City, on social media — even if they were both real.

    Each is a figment of BBC reporter Marianna Spring’s imagination. She created five fake Americans and opened social media accounts for them, part of an attempt to illustrate how disinformation spreads on sites like Facebook, Twitter and TikTok despite efforts to stop it, and how that impacts American politics.

    That’s also left Spring and the BBC vulnerable to charges that the project is ethically suspect in using false information to uncover false information.

    “We’re doing it with very good intentions because it’s important to understand what is going on,” Spring said. In the world of disinformation, “the U.S. is the key battleground,” she said.

    Spring’s reporting has appeared on BBC’s newscasts and website, as well as the weekly podcast “Americast,” the British view of news from the United States. She began the project in August with the midterm election campaign in mind but hopes to keep it going through 2024.

    Spring worked with the Pew Research Center in the U.S. to set up five archetypes. Besides the very conservative Larry and very liberal Emma, there’s Britney, a more populist conservative from Texas; Gabriela, a largely apolitical independent from Miami; and Michael, a Black teacher from Milwaukee who’s a moderate Democrat.

    With computer-generated photos, she set up accounts on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and TikTok. The accounts are passive, meaning her “people” don’t have friends or make public comments.

    Spring, who uses five different phones labeled with each name, tends to the accounts to fill out their “personalities.” For instance, Emma is a lesbian who follows LGBTQ groups, is an atheist, takes an active interest in women’s issues and abortion rights, supports the legalization of marijuana and follows The New York Times and NPR.

    These “traits” are the bait, essentially, to see how the social media companies’ algorithms kick in and what material is sent their way.

    Through what she followed and liked, Britney was revealed as anti-vax and critical of big business, so she has been sent into several rabbit holes, Spring said. The account has received material, some with violent rhetoric, from groups falsely claiming Donald Trump won the 2020 election. She’s also been invited to join in with people who claim the Mar-a-Lago raid was “proof” Trump won and the state was out to get him, and groups that support conspiracy theorist Alex Jones.

    Despite efforts by social media companies to combat disinformation, Spring said there’s still a considerable amount getting through, mostly from a far-right perspective.

    Gabriela, the non-aligned Latina mom who’s mostly expressed interest in music, fashion and how to save money while shopping, doesn’t follow political groups. But it’s far more likely that Republican-aligned material will show up in her feed.

    “The best thing you can do is understand how this works,” Spring said. “It makes us more aware of how we’re being targeted.”

    Most major social media companies prohibit impersonator accounts. Violators can be kicked off for creating them, although many evade the rules.

    Journalists have used several approaches to probe how the tech giants operate. For a story last year, the Wall Street Journal created more than 100 automated accounts to see how TikTok steered users in different directions. The nonprofit newsroom the Markup set up a panel of 1,200 people who agreed to have their web browsers studied for details on how Facebook and YouTube operated.

    “My job is to investigate misinformation and I’m setting up fake accounts,” Spring said. “The irony is not lost on me.”

    She’s obviously creative, said Aly Colon, a journalism ethics professor at Washington & Lee University. But what Spring called ironic disturbs him and other experts who believe there are above-board ways to report on this issue.

    “By creating these false identities, she violates what I believe is a fairly clear ethical standard in journalism,” said Bob Steele, retired ethics expert for the Poynter Institute. “We should not pretend that we are someone other than ourselves, with very few exceptions.”

    Spring said she believes the level of public interest in how these social media companies operate outweighs the deception involved.

    The BBC experiment can be valuable, but only shows part of how algorithms work, a mystery that largely evades people outside of the tech companies, said Samuel Woolley, director of the propaganda research lab in the Center for Media Engagement at the University of Texas.

    Algorithms also take cues from comments that people make on social media or in their interactions with friends — both things that BBC’s fake Americans don’t do, he said.

    “It’s like a journalist’s version of a field experiment,” Woolley said. “It’s running an experiment on a system but it’s pretty limited in its rigor.”

    From Spring’s perspective, if you want to see how an influence operation works, “you need to be on the front lines.”

    Since launching the five accounts, Spring said she logs on every few days to update each of them and see what they’re being fed.

    “I try to make it as realistic as possible,” she said. “I have these five personalities that I have to inhabit at any given time.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Musk tweets link to an unfounded conspiracy theory

    Musk tweets link to an unfounded conspiracy theory

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — Elon Musk on Sunday tweeted a link to an unfounded rumor about the attack on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband, just days after Musk’s purchase of Twitter fueled concerns that the social media platform would no longer seek to limit misinformation and hate speech.

    Musk’s tweet, which he later deleted, linked to an article by a fringe website, the Santa Monica Observer, an outlet that has previously asserted that Hillary Clinton died on Sept. 11 and was replaced with a body double.

    In this case, the article recycled a baseless claim that the personal life of Paul Pelosi, the speaker’s husband, somehow played a role in an intruder’s attack last week in the couple’s San Francisco home, even though there is no evidence to support that claim.

    Musk did so in reply to a tweet by Hillary Clinton. Her tweet had criticized Republicans for generally spreading “hate and deranged conspiracy theories” and said, “It is shocking, but not surprising, that violence is the result.”

    In response to Clinton’s tweet, Musk provided a link to the Santa Monica Observer article and added, “There is a tiny possibility there might be more to this story than meets the eye.”

    The Los Angeles Times, the dominant news organization in the Southern California area where the Observer is located, has said the Observer is “notorious for fake news.”

    Police in San Francisco have said the suspect in last week’s attack, identified as David DePape, 42, broke into the Pelosi family’s Pacific Heights home early Friday and confronted Paul Pelosi, demanding to know, as the AP has reported, “Where is Nancy?”

    The two men struggled over a hammer before officers responding to a 911 call to the home saw DePape strike Paul Pelosi at least once, police said. DePape was arrested on suspicion of attempted murder, elder abuse and burglary. Prosecutors plan to file charges on Monday and expect his arraignment on Tuesday.

    Police say the attack was “intentional” and not random but have not stated publicly what they consider to be the motive.

    The exchange between Musk and Clinton occurred a day after Yoel Roth, Twitter’s head of safety and integrity, tweeted that the company’s policies toward “slurs” and “hateful conduct” were still in place.

    “Bottom line up front: Twitter’s policies haven’t changed. Hateful conduct has no place here,” Roth wrote.

    Shortly after Musk took control of Twitter, some accounts on the platform began tweeting messages ranging from racist slurs to political misinformation, such as “Trump won,” to see what Twitter will now tolerate.

    Musk himself said Friday that he would form a “content moderation council” for Twitter and promised advertisers that the website would not devolve into a “free for all hellscape.” Musk has also described himself as a “free speech absolutist.”

    But at least one major advertiser, General Motors, has said it will suspend advertising on Twitter while it monitors the direction of the platform under Musk.

    Also on Sunday, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that she didn’t trust Musk to run Twitter.

    Referring to antisemitic attacks and the QAnon conspiracy theory that were advanced online by DePape, the suspect in the attack, Klobuchar said, “I think you have to have some content moderation.”

    “If Elon Musk has said now that he’s going to start a content moderation board,” the senator said, “that was one good sign. But I continue to be concerned about that. I just don’t think people should be making money off of passing on this stuff that’s a bunch of lies.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Musk tweets link to an unfounded conspiracy theory

    Musk tweets link to an unfounded conspiracy theory

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — Elon Musk on Sunday tweeted a link to an unfounded rumor about the attack on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband, just days after Musk’s purchase of Twitter fueled concerns that the social media platform would no longer seek to limit misinformation and hate speech.

    Musk’s tweet, which he later deleted, linked to an article by a fringe website, the Santa Monica Observer, an outlet that has previously asserted that Hillary Clinton died on Sept. 11 and was replaced with a body double.

    In this case, the article recycled a baseless claim that the personal life of Paul Pelosi, the speaker’s husband, somehow played a role in an intruder’s attack last week in the couple’s San Francisco home, even though there is no evidence to support that claim.

    Musk did so in reply to a tweet by Hillary Clinton. Her tweet had criticized Republicans for generally spreading “hate and deranged conspiracy theories” and said, “It is shocking, but not surprising, that violence is the result.”

    In response to Clinton’s tweet, Musk provided a link to the Santa Monica Observer article and added, “There is a tiny possibility there might be more to this story than meets the eye.”

    The Los Angeles Times, the dominant news organization in the Southern California area where the Observer is located, has said the Observer is “notorious for fake news.”

    Police in San Francisco have said the suspect in last week’s attack, identified as David DePape, 42, broke into the Pelosi family’s Pacific Heights home early Friday and confronted Paul Pelosi, demanding to know, as the AP has reported, “Where is Nancy?”

    The two men struggled over a hammer before officers responding to a 911 call to the home saw DePape strike Paul Pelosi at least once, police said. DePape was arrested on suspicion of attempted murder, elder abuse and burglary. Prosecutors plan to file charges on Monday and expect his arraignment on Tuesday.

    Police say the attack was “intentional” and not random but have not stated publicly what they consider to be the motive.

    The exchange between Musk and Clinton occurred a day after Yoel Roth, Twitter’s head of safety and integrity, tweeted that the company’s policies toward “slurs” and “hateful conduct” were still in place.

    “Bottom line up front: Twitter’s policies haven’t changed. Hateful conduct has no place here,” Roth wrote.

    Musk himself said Friday that he would form a “content moderation council” for Twitter and promised advertisers that the website would not devolve into a “free for all hellscape.” Musk has also described himself as a “free speech absolutist.”

    But at least one major advertiser, General Motors, has said it will suspend advertising on Twitter while it monitors the direction of the platform under Musk.

    Also on Sunday, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that she didn’t trust Musk to run Twitter.

    Referring to antisemitic conspiracy theories that were advanced online by DePape, the suspect in the attack, Klobuchar said, “I think you have to have some content moderation.”

    “If Elon Musk has said now that he’s going to start a content moderation board,” the senator said, “that was one good sign. But I continue to be concerned about that. I just don’t think people should be making money off of passing on this stuff that’s a bunch of lies.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Musk takes over Twitter and faces social media crash course

    Musk takes over Twitter and faces social media crash course

    [ad_1]

    Twitter’s newly minted owner, the self-described “free speech absolutist” Elon Musk, is about to get a crash course on global content moderation.

    Among his first moves after completing his $44 billion takeover Thursday was to fire the social media platform’s top executives, including the woman in charge of trust and safety at the platform, Vijaya Gadde.

    He also posted a conciliatory note to wary advertisers, assuring them he won’t allow Twitter to devolve into a “free-for-all hellscape.”

    The problem is, not even the world’s richest man can have it both ways.

    Lightly moderated “free speech” sites such as Gab and Parler serve as cautionary tales of what can happen when the guardrails are lowered. These small, niche sites are popular with conservatives and libertarians fed up with what they see as censorship of their viewpoints on mainstream platforms like Facebook. They are also full of Nazi imagery, racist slurs and other extreme content, including calls to violence.

    Some conservative personalities jumped on Twitter Friday after Musk’s takeover to recirculate long-debunked conspiracy theories in an apparent attempt to see if the site’s policies on misinformation were still being enforced.

    Advertisers don’t want to promote their products next to disturbing, racist and hateful posts — and most people don’t want to spend time on chaotic online spaces where they are barraged by racist and sexist trolls.

    On Friday, GM announced it would be pausing advertising on Twitter while it figures out the direction of the platform under Musk. But Lou Paskalis, former head of media for Bank of America, said Twitter’s most loyal advertisers, many Fortune 100 companies, believe in the platform and probably won’t leave unless “some really untoward things” happen.

    But it’s not just ads and jokes that are at stake.

    Eddie Perez, a former Twitter civic integrity team leader, said Musk seems to consider Twitter a digital public square where everyone has equal voice. It’s a “quaint idea of the modern-day version of the town square,” Perez said.

    But that’s not how the major social media platforms work. They have instead become powerful tools of asymmetric warfare, and many of their users don’t realize they are being manipulated with disinformation by nation states and bad domestic actors — many with significant resources.

    “The danger here is that in the name of ‘free speech,’ Musk will turn back the clock and make Twitter into a more potent engine of hatred, divisiveness, and misinformation about elections, public health policy, and international affairs,” said Paul Barrett, deputy director of the NYU Stern Center for Business and Human Rights.

    Though he’d been expected to reinstate banned accounts — ranging from conspiracy theorist Alex Jones to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene — Musk said on Friday that no decisions on content or reinstatements will be made until a “content moderation council” is put in place. The council, he wrote, would have “diverse viewpoints,” but he gave no further details.

    Musk may be starting from scratch, but Twitter has spent years building up its content moderation system, which is still far from perfect. As such, experts have expressed grave concern’s about Musk’s efforts — after all, the Tesla CEO has little experience navigating the temperamental and geopolitical world of social media, even if he is a constant and wildly popular user of the site he just bought.

    “I am most concerned about Musk’s decision to summarily fire Vijaya Gadde, Twitter’s head of legal policy, trust, and safety — a senior executive who was trying, however imperfectly, to keep the platform from spreading even more harmful content than it does,” Barrett said.

    Many are looking to see if he will welcome back a number of influential conservative figures banned for violating Twitter’s rules — speculation that is only heightened by upcoming elections in Brazil, the U.S. and elsewhere.

    “I will be digging in more today,” Musk tweeted early Friday, in response to a conservative political podcaster who has complained that the platform favors liberals and secretively downgrades conservative voices.

    Former President Donald Trump, an avid tweeter before he was banned, said Friday he was “very happy that Twitter is now in sane hands” but promoted his own social media site, Truth Social, that he launched after being blocked from the more widely used platform.

    Trump was banned two days after the Jan. 6 attacks for a pair of tweets that the company said continued to cast doubts on the legitimacy of the presidential election and raised risks for the presidential inauguration that Trump said he would not be attending.

    Another task for Musk: delivering on his promise to clean up the fake profiles, or “spam bots” that have preoccupied him and bedeviled Twitter since long before he expressed interest in acquiring it.

    The bot count matters because advertisers — Twitter’s chief revenue source — want to know roughly how many real humans they are reaching when they buy ads. It’s also important in the effort to stop bad actors from amassing an army of accounts to amplify misinformation or harass political adversaries.

    ———

    Associated Press writers Frank Bajak, Jill Colvin and Mae Anderson contributed to this story. Follow AP’s coverage of Elon Musk: https://apnews.com/hub/elon-musk

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • West says no biological weapons in Ukraine, Russia disagrees

    West says no biological weapons in Ukraine, Russia disagrees

    [ad_1]

    UNITED NATIONS — The U.S. and its Western allies on Thursday dismissed Russia’s claims that banned biological weapons activities are taking place in Ukraine with American support, calling the allegation disinformation and fabrications.

    Russia’s U.N. ambassador said Moscow will pursue a U.N. investigation of its allegations that both countries are violating the convention prohibiting the use of biological weapons.

    The dispute came in the third U.N. Security Council meeting on Ukraine-related issues that Russia has called since Tuesday. This one focused on a 310-page document that Russia circulated to council members this week alleging there is “military biological” activity in Ukraine with support of the U.S. Defense Department.

    The document includes an official complaint to the council, allowed under Article VI of the 1972 biological weapons convention, and a draft resolution that would authorize the Security Council to set up a commission to address Russia’s claims.

    Russia’s allegation of secret American biological warfare labs in Ukraine has been disputed by independent scientists, Ukrainian leaders and officials at the White House and Pentagon. An Associated Press investigation in March found the claim was taking root online, uniting COVID-19 conspiracy theorists, QAnon adherents and some supporters of former President Donald Trump.

    Ukraine does have a network of biological labs that have gotten funding and research support from the U.S. They are owned and operated by Ukraine and are part of an initiative called the Biological Threat Reduction Program that aims to reduce the likelihood of deadly outbreaks, whether natural or manmade. The U.S. efforts date back to work in the 1990s to dismantle the former Soviet Union’s program for weapons of mass destruction.

    U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield called Thursday’s meeting “a colossal waste of time,” rejected Russia’s allegation as “pure fabrications brought forth without a shred of evidence.” She said the claim is part of a Moscow “disinformation campaign” that is attempting “to distract from the atrocities Russian forces are carrying out in Ukraine and a desperate tactic to justify an unjustifiable war.”

    “Ukraine does not have a biological weapons program,” she said. “The United States does not have a biological weapons program. There are no Ukrainian biological weapons laboratories supported by the United States.”

    British Ambassador Barbara Woodward told the council that since Russia’s Feb. 24 invasion of Ukraine it “has repeatedly spread disinformation, including wild claims involving dirty bombs, chemical weapons and offensive biological research.”

    “How much more of this nonsense do we have to endure?” she asked.

    Norway’s ambassador, Mona Juul, said: “The sole purpose of these false allegations is to provide a smoke screen … that’s sowing confusion and drawing attention from Russia’s unprovoked, illegal and brutal warfare in Ukraine.”

    French Ambassador Nicolas De Riviere condemned “this umpteenth attempt made by Russia to make us forget that it is violating the United Nations Charter” and accused Moscow of again “using the Security Council as a propaganda platform.”

    Other council members including China and India focused on a key problem with the biological weapons convention: Unlike the convention banning the use of chemical weapons, it has no provision to verify compliance and investigate complaints.

    China’s deputy U.N. ambassador, Geng Shuang, urged a late November conference of the 197 state parties to the convention to restart verification negotiations “that have been stalled for more than 20 years.”

    Last month, the state parties met at Russia’s request on the activities at biological laboratories in Ukraine, but a final report said it wasn’t possible to reach consensus.

    Adedeji Ebo, the U.N. deputy high representative for disarmament, told the council that this was the first time Article VI of the convention had been invoked with a complaint to the Security Council.

    He repeated statements in March and May that the United Nation “is not aware of any such biological weapons programs” and “currently has neither the mandate nor the technical or operational capacity to investigate this information.”

    But Ebo said: “Should the council initiate an investigation, the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs stands ready to support it.”

    In his briefing, Russia’s Nebenzia accused the U.S. of conducting work in Ukraine with deadly pathogens — including cholera, plague, anthrax and influenza — that couldn’t be justified under the guise of public health. He said documents and evidence recovered by Russian authorities suggested a military application.

    Nebenzia said the Russian military had recovered drones capable of spraying bioagents as well as documents that he said related to research on the possibility of spreading pathogens through bats and migrating birds.

    Thomas-Greenfield called Russia’s claims “absurd for many reasons, including because such species, even if they could be weaponized, would pose as much a threat to the European continent and to Ukraine itself as they would to any other country.”

    Nebenzia took the floor for a second time at the end of the meeting, saying Western ambassadors routinely accuse Russia of sounding “a false alarm,” disseminating “disinformation” and distracting the Security Council from discussing more important issues. At the same time, he said, “our Western colleagues have nothing to say on the substance” of Russia’s claims.

    He said Russia will move ahead on the resolution calling for a Security Council investigation. He said a second meeting of council experts is the next step, “and then we will be deciding when we’ll put it to the Security Council.”

    ———

    Associated Press writer David Klepper contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Cardi B absolved in racy mixtape artwork lawsuit

    Cardi B absolved in racy mixtape artwork lawsuit

    [ad_1]

    SANTA ANA, Calif. — A jury sided with Cardi B on Friday in a copyright infringement case involving a man who claimed the Grammy-winning rapper misused his back tattoos for her sexually suggestive 2016 mixtape cover art.

    The federal jury in Southern California ruled Kevin Michael Brophy did not prove Cardi B misappropriated his likeness. After the jury forewoman read the verdict, the rapper hugged her attorneys and appeared joyful.

    Cardi B thanked the jurors, admitting she was “pretty nervous” before hearing the verdict.

    “I wasn’t sure if I was going to lose or not,” she said after leaving the courthouse. She was swarmed by several reporters, photographers and more than 40 high schoolers who chanted her name. One fan held up a sign asking if she could take him to his homecoming dance, to which she replied “Yes, I’ll see what I can do.”

    “I told myself if I win, I was going to cuss Mr. Brophy out. But I don’t have it in my heart to cuss him out,” she said. In the courtroom, Cardi B had a brief, cordial conversation with Brophy and shook his hand.

    Brophy filed the lawsuit a year after the rapper’s 2016 mixtape was released. He called himself a “family man with minor children” and said he was caused “ distress and humiliation ” by the artwork – which showed a tattooed man from behind with his head between the rapper’s legs inside a limousine. The man’s face cannot be seen.

    “At the end of the day, I do respect you as an artist,” Brophy said to Cardi B.

    Brophy’s lawyer, A. Barry Cappello, said photo-editing software was used to put the back tattoo, which has appeared in tattoo magazines, onto the male model featured on the mixtape cover.

    But Cardi B, whose real name is Belcalis Almanzar, disputed the allegations during her testimony earlier in the week — and had such an intense exchange with Cappello that the trial was briefly halted by U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney.

    Cardi B said she felt Brophy hadn’t suffered any consequences as a result of the artwork. She said Brophy has harassed her legally for five year – and even at one point said she missed the “first step” of her youngest child because of the trial.

    Cardi B delivered pointed answers to several of Cappello’s questions. The lawyer once asked her to calm down, but she sharply pushed back at his contention that she knew about the altered image.

    Their heated exchange prompted the judge to send jurors out of the Santa Ana, California, courtroom and told both sides that he was considering a mistrial. After a short break, he called the arguing “unprofessional” and “not productive” but allowed questioning to resume, then placed new restrictions for both sides.

    Cardi B said an artist used only a “small portion” of the tattoos without her knowledge. She had previously said the cover art – created by Timm Gooden – was transformative fair use of Brophy’s likeness.

    Cappello said Gooden was paid $50 to create a design, but was told to find another tattoo after he turned in an initial draft. He said Gooden googled “back tattoos” before he found an image and pasted it on the cover.

    Cardi B’s lawyer, Peter Anderson, said Brophy and the mixtape image are unrelated, noting the model did not have neck tattoos – which Brophy does.

    “It’s not your client’s back,” Cardi B said about the image, which featured a Black model. Brophy is white. The rapper pointed out that she posted a photo of the “famous Canadian model” on her social media.

    “It’s not him,” she continued. “To me, it doesn’t look like his back at all. The tattoo was modified, which is protected by the First Amendment.”

    Cardi B said the image hasn’t hindered Brophy’s employment with a popular surf and skate apparel brand or his ability to travel the world for opportunities.

    “He hasn’t gotten fired from his job,” said the rapper, who implied that the mixtape was not a lucrative one for her. “He hasn’t gotten a divorce. How has he suffered? He’s still in a surf shop at this job. Please tell me how he’s suffered.”

    Last month, Cardi B pleaded guilty to a criminal case stemming from a pair of brawls at New York City strip clubs that required her to perform 15 days of community service. Earlier this year, the rapper was awarded $1.25 million in a defamation lawsuit against a celebrity news blogger who posted videos falsely stating she used cocaine, had contracted herpes and engaged in prostitution.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Cardi B absolved in racy mixtape artwork lawsuit

    Cardi B absolved in racy mixtape artwork lawsuit

    [ad_1]

    SANTA ANA, Calif. — A jury sided with Cardi B on Friday in a copyright infringement case involving a man who claimed the Grammy-winning rapper misused his back tattoos for her sexually suggestive 2016 mixtape cover art.

    The federal jury in Southern California ruled Kevin Michael Brophy did not prove Cardi B misappropriated his likeness. After the jury forewoman read the verdict, the rapper hugged her attorneys and appeared joyful.

    Cardi B thanked the jurors, admitting she was “pretty nervous” before hearing the verdict.

    “I wasn’t sure if I was going to lose or not,” she said after leaving the courthouse. She was swarmed by several reporters, photographers and more than 40 high schoolers who chanted her name. One fan held up a sign asking if she could take him to his homecoming dance, to which she replied “Yes, I’ll see what I can do.”

    “I told myself if I win, I was going to cuss Mr. Brophy out. But I don’t have it in my heart to cuss him out,” she said. In the courtroom, Cardi B had a brief, cordial conversation with Brophy and shook his hand.

    Brophy filed the lawsuit a year after the rapper’s 2016 mixtape was released. He called himself a “family man with minor children” and said he was caused “ distress and humiliation ” by the artwork – which showed a tattooed man from behind with his head between the rapper’s legs inside a limousine. The man’s face cannot be seen.

    “At the end of the day, I do respect you as an artist,” Brophy said to Cardi B.

    Brophy’s lawyer, A. Barry Cappello, said photo-editing software was used to put the back tattoo, which has appeared in tattoo magazines, onto the male model featured on the mixtape cover.

    But Cardi B, whose real name is Belcalis Almanzar, disputed the allegations during her testimony earlier in the week — and had such an intense exchange with Cappello that the trial was briefly halted by U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney.

    Cardi B said she felt Brophy hadn’t suffered any consequences as a result of the artwork. She said Brophy has harassed her legally for five year – and even at one point said she missed the “first step” of her youngest child because of the trial.

    Cardi B delivered pointed answers to several of Cappello’s questions. The lawyer once asked her to calm down, but she sharply pushed back at his contention that she knew about the altered image.

    Their heated exchange prompted the judge to send jurors out of the Santa Ana, California, courtroom and told both sides that he was considering a mistrial. After a short break, he called the arguing “unprofessional” and “not productive” but allowed questioning to resume, then placed new restrictions for both sides.

    Cardi B said an artist used only a “small portion” of the tattoos without her knowledge. She had previously said the cover art – created by Timm Gooden – was transformative fair use of Brophy’s likeness.

    Cappello said Gooden was paid $50 to create a design, but was told to find another tattoo after he turned in an initial draft. He said Gooden googled “back tattoos” before he found an image and pasted it on the cover.

    Cardi B’s lawyer, Peter Anderson, said Brophy and the mixtape image are unrelated, noting the model did not have neck tattoos – which Brophy does.

    “It’s not your client’s back,” Cardi B said about the image, which featured a Black model. Brophy is white. The rapper pointed out that she posted a photo of the “famous Canadian model” on her social media.

    “It’s not him,” she continued. “To me, it doesn’t look like his back at all. The tattoo was modified, which is protected by the First Amendment.”

    Cardi B said the image hasn’t hindered Brophy’s employment with a popular surf and skate apparel brand or his ability to travel the world for opportunities.

    “He hasn’t gotten fired from his job,” said the rapper, who implied that the mixtape was not a lucrative one for her. “He hasn’t gotten a divorce. How has he suffered? He’s still in a surf shop at this job. Please tell me how he’s suffered.”

    Last month, Cardi B pleaded guilty to a criminal case stemming from a pair of brawls at New York City strip clubs that required her to perform 15 days of community service. Earlier this year, the rapper was awarded $1.25 million in a defamation lawsuit against a celebrity news blogger who posted videos falsely stating she used cocaine, had contracted herpes and engaged in prostitution.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Social media platforms brace for midterm elections mayhem

    Social media platforms brace for midterm elections mayhem

    [ad_1]

    A Facebook search for the words “election fraud” first delivers an article claiming that workers at a Pennsylvania children’s museum are brainwashing children so they’ll accept stolen elections.

    Facebook’s second suggestion? A link to an article from a site called MAGA Underground that says Democrats are plotting to rig next month’s midterms. “You should still be mad as hell about the fraud that happened in 2020,” the article insists.

    With less than three weeks before the polls close, misinformation about voting and elections abounds on social media despite promises by tech companies to address a problem blamed for increasing polarization and distrust.

    While platforms like Twitter, TikTok, Facebook and YouTube say they’ve expanded their work to detect and stop harmful claims that could suppress the vote or even lead to violent confrontations, a review of some of the sites shows they’re still playing catchup with 2020, when then-President Donald Trump’s lies about the election he lost to Joe Biden helped fuel an insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

    “You would think that they would have learned by now,” said Heidi Beirich, founder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism and a member of a group called the Real Facebook Oversight Board that has criticized the platform’s efforts. “This isn’t their first election. This should have been addressed before Trump lost in 2020. The damage is pretty deep at this point.”

    If these U.S.-based tech giants can’t properly prepare for a U.S. election, how can anyone expect them to handle overseas elections, Beirich said.

    Mentions of a “ stolen election ” and “voter fraud” have soared in recent months and are now two of the three most popular terms included in discussions of this year’s election, according to an analysis of social media, online and broadcast content conducted by media intelligence firm Zignal Labs on behalf of The Associated Press.

    On Twitter, Zignal’s analysis found that tweets amplifying conspiracy theories about the upcoming election have been reposted many thousands of times, alongside posts restating debunked claims about the 2020 election.

    Most major platforms have announced steps intended to curb misinformation about voting and elections, including labels, warnings and changes to systems that automatically recommend certain content. Users who consistently violate the rules can be suspended. Platforms have also created partnerships with fact-checking organizations and news outlets like the AP, which is part of Meta’s fact-checking program.

    “Our teams continue to monitor the midterms closely, working to quickly remove content that violates our policies,” YouTube said in a statement. “We’ll stay vigilant ahead of, during, and after Election Day.”

    Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram, announced this week that it had reopened its election command center, which oversees real-time efforts to combat misinformation about elections. The company dismissed criticism that it’s not doing enough and denied reports that it has cut the number of staffers focused on elections.

    “We are investing a significant amount of resources, with work spanning more than 40 teams and hundreds of people,” Meta said in a statement emailed to the AP.

    The platform also said that starting this week, anyone who searches on Facebook using keywords related to the election, including “election fraud,” will automatically see a pop-up window with links to trustworthy voting resources.

    TikTok created an election center earlier this year to help voters in the U.S. learn how to register to vote and who’s on their ballot. The information is offered in English, Spanish and more than 45 other languages. The platform, now a leading source of information for young voters, also adds labels to misleading content.

    “Providing access to authoritative information is an important part of our overall strategy to counter election misinformation,” the company said of its efforts to prepare for the midterms.

    But policies intended to stop harmful misinformation about elections aren’t always enforced consistently. False claims can often be buried deep in the comments section, for instance, where they nonetheless can leave an impression on other users.

    A report released last month from New York University faulted Meta, Twitter, TikTok and YouTube for amplifying Trump’s false statements about the 2020 election. The study cited inconsistent rules regarding misinformation as well as poor enforcement.

    Concerned about the amount of misinformation about voting and elections, a number of groups have urged tech companies to do more.

    “Americans deserve more than lip service and half-measures from the platforms,” said Yosef Getachew, director of Common Cause’s media and democracy program. “These platforms have been weaponized by enemies of democracy, both foreign and domestic.”

    Election misinformation is even more prevalent on smaller platforms popular with some conservatives and far-right groups like Gab, Gettr and TruthSocial, Trump’s own platform. But those sites have tiny audiences compared with Facebook, YouTube or TikTok.

    Beirich’s group, the Real Facebook Oversight Board, crafted a list of seven recommendations for Meta intended to reduce the spread of misinformation ahead of the elections. They included changes to the platform that would promote content from legitimate news outlets over partisan sites that often spread misinformation, as well as greater attention on misinformation targeting voters in Spanish and other languages.

    Meta told the AP it has expanded its fact-checking network since 2020 and now has twice as many Spanish-language fact checkers. The company also launched a Spanish-language fact-checking tip line on WhatsApp, another platform it owns.

    Much of the misinformation aimed at non-English speakers seems aimed at suppressing their vote, said Brenda Victoria Castillo, CEO of the National Hispanic Media Coalition, who said that the efforts by Facebook and other platforms aren’t equal to the scale of the problem posed by misinformation.

    “We are being lied to and discouraged from exercising our right to vote,” Castillo said. “And people in power, people like (Meta CEO) Mark Zuckerberg are doing very little while they profit from the disinformation.”

    ———

    Follow the AP’s coverage of misinformation at https://apnews.com/hub/misinformation.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Cardi B battles with lawyer in racy mixtape artwork case

    Cardi B battles with lawyer in racy mixtape artwork case

    [ad_1]

    SANTA ANA, Calif. — A heated exchange between rapper Cardi B and the lawyer for a man suing her for copyright infringement got so intense Wednesday that the judge briefly stopped the trial.

    The Grammy winner delivered pointed answers to several questions by attorney A. Barry Cappello, who is representing a man who claims the rapper misused his likeness on the cover of a 2016 mixtape.

    The testy back-and-forth between the Cappello and the star witness prompted U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney to send jurors out of the Santa Ana, California courtroom and tell both sides he was considering a mistrial. After a break, he called the arguing “unprofessional” and “not productive” but allowed questioning to resume – placing new restrictions for both sides.

    Kevin Michael Brophy is seeking $5 million from Cardi B over the appearance of some of his distinctive back tattoos on the mixtape’s artwork, which shows a tattooed man from behind with his head between the rapper’s legs.

    The rapper said she felt Brophy hadn’t suffered any consequences as a result of the artwork, yet has harassed her legally for five years. At one point she said she missed a special moment with her youngest child, who recently turned 1-year-old.

    “I have empathy for people,” she said. “I care about people. I feel like I’m being taken advantage of. I missed my child’s first step by being here.”

    Brophy told jurors Tuesday that he felt “humiliated” by the racy artwork.

    At one point, Cardi B pointed out that the man’s face cannot be seen in the artwork. Capello asked her to calm down, but she instead barked back at the lawyer’s contention that she knew about photo-editing software used to put Brophy’s tattoos – which have been featured in magazines – on another model’s body.

    “It’s not your client’s back,” she said about the image, which features a Black model. Brophy is white. The rapper said she posted a photo of the “famous Canadian model” on her social media.

    Cardi B, whose real name is Belcalis Almanzar, said an artist used only a “small portion” of the tattoos without her knowledge. She had previously said the cover art – created by Timm Gooden — was transformative fair use of Brophy’s likeness.

    Cappello said Gooden was paid $50 to create a design but was then told to find another tattoo after he turned in an initial draft. He said Gooden googled “back tattoos” before he found an image and pasted it on the cover.

    Cardi B’s lawyer, Peter Anderson, said Brophy and the mixtape image are unrelated, noting the model did not have neck tattoos, which Brophy does.

    “It’s not him,” the rapper said. “To me, it doesn’t look like his back at all. The tattoo was modified, which is protected by the First Amendment.”

    She said the image hasn’t hindered Brophy’s employment with a popular surf and skate apparel brand or his ability to travel the world for opportunities.

    “He hasn’t gotten fired from his job,” said Cardi B, who implied that the mixtape was not a lucrative one for her. “He hasn’t gotten a divorce. How has he suffered? He’s still in a surf shop at his job. Please tell me how he’s suffered.”

    Brophy, a self-described family man, said he sent a cease-and-desist letter to Cardi B’s representatives to remove the image, but he never received a response. The rapper said she hadn’t seen the letter.

    At one point, Cardi B said she doesn’t check her mailbox because that’s for “old people” – leading some in the courtroom to chuckle.

    When Cardi B left the courthouse, she was swarmed by around 30 high schoolers who were attempting to take selfies with her. As the rapper walked toward her vehicle with security, she smiled and waved before telling them she would be more responsive after the trial.

    Last month, Cardi B pleaded guilty to a criminal case stemming from a pair of brawls at New York City strip clubs that required her to perform 15 days of community service. Earlier this year, the rapper was awarded $1.25 million in a defamation lawsuit against a celebrity news blogger who posted videos falsely stating she used cocaine, had contracted herpes and engaged in prostitution.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Lawyer: Cardi B ‘humiliated’ man with racy image on mixtape

    Lawyer: Cardi B ‘humiliated’ man with racy image on mixtape

    [ad_1]

    SANTA ANA, Calif. — A self-described family man with a distinctive back tattoo felt humiliated after Cardi B allegedly misused his likeness for her sexually suggestive mixtape cover art, his lawyer said during opening arguments Tuesday.

    Kevin Michael Brophy is suing the Grammy-winning musician in a $5 million copyright-infringement lawsuit in federal court in Southern California. His attorneys say Brophy’s life was disrupted and he suffered distress because of the 2016 artwork.

    Brophy’s lawyer A. Barry Cappello said photo-editing software was use to put the back tattoo, which has appeared in tattoo magazines, onto the male model used in the mixtape cover. The image shows a tattooed man from behind with his head between the rapper’s legs. The man’s face cannot be seen.

    Cardi B, who is expected to testify during the trial, is fighting the allegations and said an artist used only a “small portion” of the tattoos without her knowledge. She had previously said the cover art – created by Timm Gooden — was transformative fair use of Brophy’s likeness.

    “Their life has been disrupted,” Cappello told the jury as Cardi B, whose real name is Belcalis Almanzar, watched from the defense table. He said the image disturbed Brophy along with his wife, Lindsay Michelle Brophy, who he says initially questioned her husband if it was him in the cover art. The couple has two young children.

    Brody has said he once considered his back tattoo featuring a tiger battling a serpent to be a “Michelangelo piece” that has since become “raunchy and disgusting.”

    Defense filings have pointed out that the model who posed for the photos was Black, while Brophy is white.

    Cardi B’s lawyer Peter Anderson said Brophy and the mixtape image are unrelated. He said the model did not have tattoos on his neck, which Brophy does.

    “Brophy’s face wasn’t on the mixtape,” Anderson said during his opening statement. “She was already popular. It has nothing to do with Brophy.”

    But Brophy contested in court that everyone who knows him believed he was on the mixtape cover. He said the offensive image was something he would never approve.

    Brophy said he sent a cease-and-desist letter to Cardi B’s representatives to remove the tattoo, but he never received a response.

    “For me, it was something I took a lot of pride in,” Brophy said about his tattoo. “Now, that image feels devalued. I feel robbed. I feel completely disregarded. There’s a lot of things I would like to be spending time on. But the only way to get this removed was to come here to this courtroom.”

    Cappello said Gooden was paid $50 to create a design but was then told to find another tattoo after he turned in an initial draft. He said Gooden googled “back tattoos” before he found an image and pasted it on the cover.

    Last month, Cardi B pleaded guilty to a criminal case stemming from a pair of brawls at New York City strip clubs that required her to perform 15 days of community service. Earlier this year, the rapper was awarded $1.25 million in a defamation lawsuit against a celebrity news blogger who posted videos falsely stating she used cocaine, had contracted herpes and engaged in prostitution.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Rock Band Push Puppets Releases ‘October Surprise’ Music Video About Disinformation

    Rock Band Push Puppets Releases ‘October Surprise’ Music Video About Disinformation

    [ad_1]

    Press Release
    –

    Oct 18, 2022


    CHICAGO, October 18, 2022 (Newswire.com)
    –
    Just in time for the midterm elections, Push Puppets, a Waterweight Music Ltd. recording artist, has released an animated lyric video for the song “October Surprise”, which takes on the spread of disinformation over social and traditional media.

    The song from the new album “Allegory Grey” is about an imaginary training session at a Russian troll farm for spreading propaganda. It is a powerful rock anthem that musically falls somewhere between Pink Floyd and Oasis with lush harmonies and guitar work reminiscent of Queen.

    The video shows false information being spread over social media, print and television, beginning with the ridiculous claim that Hillary Clinton is running a child trafficking ring from the basement of a Washington, D.C. pizzeria. It continues with messages such as “COVID-19 is fake” and bleach and ivermectin can treat COVID. It progresses toward the messaging that led to the storming of the Capitol on Jan. 6, which is inaccurately described as a false-flag operation by Antifa.

    “I feel the propaganda that is ubiquitous on social media and amplified by right-wing television and radio is one of the biggest threats to our country at this time,” says band leader Erich Specht. “I have never shied away from sharing my feelings on political issues, and something I feel so strongly about needs to be expressed.”

    The album “Allegory Grey”, which was released on Sept. 30, is pop/rock with earworm melodies and shiny production that belie the often bittersweet sentiments in the thoughtful lyrics. In addition to his bread-and-butter topics of dysfunctional relationships and hopeless pining, Erich also writes about such subjects as freaking out over receiving an email saying a computer was compromised, convincing a co-conspirator to take the fall, and Karma blowing up his house and running him off the road.

    Two music videos for the singles that were released over the summer in advance of the album are also available on YouTube. The singles “Sometimes the Buds Never Flower” and “There’s No One Else Like Lynette” reached the top of the Radio Indie Alliance Top 75 over the past few months. Additional videos will be released over the coming months.

    “Allegory Grey” is the third album from Push Puppets. The band consists of songwriter Erich Specht on lead vocals and guitar, Tommi Zender on guitar and vocals, John William Lauler on bass, Kyle Magnusson on keyboards and Greg Essig on drums. The video was created by Petros Tryfon.

    Follow Push Puppets:

    Website: pushpuppets.net

    Facebook: @pushpuppetsband

    Twitter: @pushpuppetsband

    YouTube: https://youtube.com/channel/UCu0iVf758LA4ZYBs9giKtJQ

    Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/pushpuppets

    Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/artist/4UpPbTQys8mfxpH0DXMJMk

    Source: Waterweight Music Ltd.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Turkey calls Greek claims on migrant mistreatment fake news

    Turkey calls Greek claims on migrant mistreatment fake news

    [ad_1]

    ISTANBUL — Turkish officials on Sunday shot back at Greek allegations that Turkey forced 92 naked migrants into Greece, calling it “fake news” and accusing Greece of the mistreatment.

    Greek migration minister Notis Mitarachi was “sharing false information” after the official tweeted a photo of the naked migrants on Saturday and blamed Turkey, said Fahrettin Altun, the communications director of Turkey’s president.

    Altun tweeted in Turkish, Greek and English that this was to “cast suspicion on our country,” while calling on Athens to abandon its “harsh treatment of refugees.”

    “Greece has shown once again to the entire world that it does not respect the dignity of refugees by posting these oppressed people’s pictures it has deported after extorting their personal possessions,” he said.

    Deputy Interior Minister Ismail Catakli tweeted that the photo showed Greece’s cruelty. “Spend your time to obey human rights, not for manipulations & dishonesty!”

    Greek police said Saturday that police officers found the migrants stark naked on Friday, “some with bodily injuries” who had entered the country using plastic boats to cross the Evros River, which forms a border between the two countries.

    Relations between the two neighboring countries have been tense over a variety of issues, including migration.

    Turkey regularly accuses Greece of violently pushing back migrants entering the country by land and sea. Turkey’s coast guard frequently shares videos of such pushbacks.

    Greece accuses Turkey, which hosts the largest number of refugees in the world, of “pushing forward” migrants to put pressure on the EU.

    The U.N. refugee agency said it was “deeply distressed by the shocking reports,” condemning the “degrading treatment” and calling for an investigation.

    ———

    Follow AP’s coverage of migration issues at https://apnews.com/hub/migration

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Poll: Most in US say misinformation spurs extremism, hate

    Poll: Most in US say misinformation spurs extremism, hate

    [ad_1]

    Americans from across the political spectrum say misinformation is increasing political extremism and hate crimes, according to a new poll that reflects broad and significant concerns about false and misleading claims ahead of next month’s midterm elections.

    About three-quarters of U.S. adults say misinformation is leading to more extreme political views and behaviors such as instances of violence based on race, religion or gender. That’s according to the poll from the Pearson Institute and The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

    “We’re at a point now where the misinformation is so bad you can trust very little of what you read in the media or social media,” said 49-year-old Republican Brett Reffeitt of Indianapolis, who participated in the survey. “It’s all about getting clicks, not the truth, and it’s the extremes that get the attention.”

    The Pearson Institute/AP-NORC survey shows that regardless of political ideology, Americans agree misinformation is leaving a mark on the country.

    Overall, 91% of adults say the spread of misinformation is a problem, with 74% calling it a major problem. Only 8% say misinformation isn’t a problem at all.

    Big majorities of both parties — 80% of Democrats and 70% of Republicans — say misinformation increases extreme political views, according to the survey. Similarly, 85% of Democrats and 72% of Republicans say misinformation increases hate crimes, including violence motivated by gender, religion or race.

    Overall, 77% of respondents think misinformation increases hate crimes, while 73% say it increases extreme political views.

    “This is not a sustainable course,” said independent Rob Redding, 46, of New York City. Redding, who is Black, said he fears misinformation will spur more political polarization and violent hate crimes. “People are in such denial about how dangerous and divisive this situation is.”

    About half say they believe misinformation leads people to become more politically engaged.

    Roughly 7 in 10 Americans say they are at least somewhat concerned that they have been exposed to misinformation, though less than half said they are that worried that they were responsible for spreading it.

    That’s consistent with previous polls that have found people are more likely to blame others than accept responsibility for the spread of misinformation.

    Half of U.S. adults also believe misinformation reduces trust in government.

    “Just because it’s on the internet doesn’t mean it’s true,” said 74-year-old Shirley Hayden, a Republican from Orange, Texas. “A lot of it is opinions and a lot of it is just troublemaking. I don’t believe any of it anymore.”

    The poll finds that Americans who rate misinformation as a major problem are more likely to say it contributes to extreme political beliefs and distrust of government than those who do not. They’re also more likely to try to reduce the spread of misinformation by running claims by multiple sources or fact-checking websites.

    Overall, roughly three-quarters of adults say they have decided not to share something on social media at least some of the time because they didn’t want to spread misinformation, including about half who do that most of the time. Similar percentages regularly check the sources of news they encounter and check other sources of information to ensure they’re not encountering misinformation.

    Only 28% of Americans consult fact-checking sites or tools “most of the time,” though an additional 35% do some of the time. About a third say they do so hardly ever or never.

    “My Facebook page is loaded with this stuff. I see it on TV. I see it everywhere,” 63-year-old Democrat Charles Lopez from the Florida Keys said of the misinformation he encounters. “Nobody does the research to find out if anything is fake or not.”

    Whether it’s lies about the 2020 election or the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, COVID-19 conspiracy theories or disinformation about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, online misinformation has been blamed for increased political polarization, distrust of institutions and even real-world violence.

    The spread of misinformation in recent decades has coincided with the rise of social media and declines in traditional, often local journalism outlets.

    The results of the Pearson Institute/AP-NORC poll didn’t surprise Alex Mahadevan, director of MediaWise, a media literacy initiative launched by the Poynter Institute that works to equip individuals with defenses in the fight against misinformation.

    “You have uncertainty, polarization, the decline of local news: it’s a perfect storm that’s created a flood of misinformation,” Mahadevan said.

    People can teach themselves how to spot misinformation and avoid falling for dubious claims, according to Helen Lee Bouygues, founder and president of the Paris-based Reboot Foundation, which researches and promotes critical thinking in the internet age.

    First, rely on a variety of trusted, established sources for news and fact checks, Bouygues said.

    She also encouraged people to double-check claims that seem designed to play on emotions like anger or fear, and to think twice about reposting content that relies on loaded language, personal attacks or false comparisons.

    “There are steps people can take — simple steps — to protect themselves,” Bouygues said.

    Lopez, the survey respondent from Florida, said he has lost friends after pushing back on misinformation they posted online and that new laws are needed to force tech companies to do more to address misinformation. Maybe that will happen, he said, if voters can pierce the fog of misinformation ahead of next month’s election.

    “You can always have hope,” Lopez said. “We’ll see what happens after this election. You may want to call me back then.”

    ___

    Associated Press writer Nuha Dolby in New York contributed to this report.

    ___

    The poll of 1,003 adults was conducted Sep. 9-12 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 4.0 percentage points.

    ___

    Follow the AP’s coverage of misinformation at https://apnews.com/hub/misinformation.

    Learn more about the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research at www.apnorc.org.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Experts: Russia finding new ways to spread propaganda videos

    Experts: Russia finding new ways to spread propaganda videos

    [ad_1]

    Russia has devised yet another way to spread disinformation about its invasion of Ukraine, using digital tricks that allow its war propaganda videos to evade restrictions imposed by governments and tech companies.

    Accounts linked to Russian state-controlled media have used the new method to spread dozens of videos in 18 different languages, all without leaving telltale signs that would give away the source, researchers at Nisos, a U.S.-based intelligence firm that tracks disinformation and other cyber threats, said in a report released Wednesday.

    The videos push Kremlin conspiracy theories blaming Ukraine for civilian casualties as well as claims that residents of areas forcibly annexed by Russia have welcomed their occupiers.

    English-language versions of the Russian propaganda videos are now circulating on Twitter and lesser-known platforms popular with American conservatives, including Gab and Truth Social, created by former President Donald Trump, giving Russia a direct conduit to millions of people.

    In an indication of the Kremlin’s ambitions and the sprawling reach of its disinformation operations, versions of the videos were also created in Spanish, Italian, German and more than a dozen other languages.

    “The genius of this approach is that the videos can be downloaded directly from Telegram and it erases the trail that researchers try to follow,” Nisos’ senior intelligence analyst Patricia Bailey told The Associated Press. “They are creative and adaptable. And they are analyzing their audience.”

    The European Union moved to ban RT and Sputnik, two of Russia’s leading state-run media outlets, after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in late February. Tech companies such as Google’s YouTube and Meta’s Facebook and Instagram also announced they would ban content from the outlets within the 27-nation EU, undermining Russia’s ability to spread its propaganda.

    Russian attempts to get around the new rules began almost immediately. New websites were created to host videos that make debunked claims about the war. Russian diplomats took on some of the work.

    The latest effort revealed by analysts at Nisos involved uploading propaganda videos to Telegram, a loosely moderated platform that is broadly popular in Eastern Europe and used by many conservatives in the United States. In some cases, watermarks identifying the video as RT’s were removed in a further attempt to disguise their source.

    Once on Telegram, the videos were downloaded and reposted on platforms including Twitter without any labels or other indications that the video was produced by Russian state media. Hundreds of accounts that later posted or reposted the videos were linked by Nisos researchers to the Russian military, embassies or state media.

    Some of the accounts appeared to use fake profile photos or posted content in strange ways that suggested they were inauthentic.

    One example: a Twitter account supposedly run by a woman living in Japan that had a singular interest in Russian propaganda. Instead of posting about a variety of topics such as entertainment, food, travel or family, the account user only posted Russian propaganda videos — and not just in Japanese, but also in Farsi, Polish, Spanish and Russian.

    The account also cited or reposted content from Russian embassies hundreds of times, researchers found, showing again the close relationship between Russian diplomats and the country’s propaganda work.

    When it comes to Russia’s overall disinformation capabilities, Bailey said, the network is “just one piece of a puzzle that is quite large.”

    Twitter labels content that it can identify as coming from Russian state media. Since late February, the company says it’s added labels to more than 900,000 different Tweets that contained links to Russian state outlets like RT. In addition, the platform does not artificially promote content from state media accounts.

    “We use labels to make it clear on Twitter when an account is operated by a state actor, such as a state-backed media outlet, and we will not recommend or amplify Tweets from these types of accounts,” a company spokesperson told The AP.

    More examples of Russian disinformation campaigns have emerged as the war has dragged on.

    Last week, Russia sought to spread a baseless conspiracy theory blaming the U.S. for sabotage to the Nord Stream natural gas pipelines in the Baltic Sea.

    The same week, Meta announced the discovery of a sprawling Russian disinformation network that created websites designed to look like major European news outlets. Instead of news, the websites carried propaganda intended to drive a wedge between Ukraine and its western allies.

    That operation was the largest of its kind to originate in Russia since the war began, researchers concluded.

    “The network exhibited an overarching pattern of targeting Europe with anti-Ukraine narratives and expressions of support for Russian interests,” according to a report from the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, which helped identify the network disabled by Meta.

    ___

    Follow AP’s coverage of the war in Ukraine at https://apnews.com/hub/russia-ukraine

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Twitter under Musk? Most of the plans are a mystery

    Twitter under Musk? Most of the plans are a mystery

    [ad_1]

    SAN FRANCISCO — A super app called X? A bot-free free speech haven? These are some of Elon Musk’s mysterious plans for Twitter, now that he may be buying the company after all.

    After months of squabbling over the fate of their bombshell $44 billion deal, the billionaire and the bird app are essentially back to square one — if a bit worse for wear as trust and goodwill has seemed to erode on both sides.

    Musk, the CEO of Tesla Motors and SpaceX and Twitter’s most high-profile user since former President Donald Trump was booted from it, has shared few concrete details about his plans for the social media platform. While he’s touted free speech and derided spam bots since agreeing to buy the company in April, what he actually wants to do about either is shrouded in mystery.

    He could own one of the world’s most powerful communications platforms with 237 million daily users in a matter of weeks, though the deal is not final. The lack of clear plans for the platform are raising concern among Twitter’s constituencies, ranging from users in conflict regions where it offers an information lifeline to the company’s own employees.

    “Both users and advertisers are — understandably — anxious about whether the move will fundamentally change the culture of the platform,” said Brooke Erin Duffy, a professor at Cornell University who studies social media. “And so, Musk will need to decide whether he wants to quash their concerns by retaining core features (the content moderation system, for instance) and keeping the company public — or whether he will undertake a full-scale overhaul.”

    Muddling things further, on Tuesday Musk tweeted that “Buying Twitter is an accelerant to creating X, the everything app,” without further explanation.

    Although Musk’s tweets and statements have been cryptic, technology analysts have speculated that Musk wants to re-create a version of China’s WeChat app that can do video chats, messaging, streaming, scan bar codes and make payments.

    He gave a little more detail during Tesla’s annual shareholder meeting in August, telling the crowd at a factory near Austin, Texas, that he uses Twitter frequently and knows the product well. “I think I’ve got a good sense of where to point the engineering team with Twitter to make it radically better,” he said.

    Handling payments for goods could be a key part of the app. Musk said he has a “grander vision” for what X.com, an online bank he started early in his career that eventually became part of PayPal, could have been.

    “Obviously that could be started from scratch, but I think Twitter would help accelerate that by three-to-five years,” Musk said at the August meeting. “So it’s kind of something that I thought would be quite useful for a long time. I know what to do.”

    For now, Twitter has immediate and pressing problems Musk will need to deal with if he takes ownership of the company. Its social media rivals are struggling with declining stock prices and some, like Snap, even announced layoffs. Government regulation and attracting younger users away from TikTok are also challenges. And Musk’s vision of a free speech haven has social media and content moderation experts, as well as digital and human rights advocates, concerned.

    “When this all started in the spring, we had indicators and a strong sense of what Musk might do with the platform,” said Angelo Carusone of Media Matters, a watchdog group that opposes the takeover. “Because of the lawsuit, we know who he’s been talking to, what he’s been saying and the types of far-right ideological decision makers he wants to put in place. To put it bluntly, the worst fears have been confirmed.”

    Twitter employees, under former CEO Jack Dorsey and his predecessors, have spent years working to tame the platform once called the “free-speech wing of the free-speech party” where hate and harassment abound into something where all are welcome and safe. While it’s far from perfect, critics worry Musk’s ownership will mean turning back the clock on years of this work.

    “Musk made it clear that he would roll back Twitter’s community standards and safety guidelines, reinstate Donald Trump along with scores of other accounts suspended for violence and abuse, and open the floodgates of disinformation,” Carusone said.

    The company, for instance, was an early adopter of the “report abuse” button in 2013, after U.K. member of parliament Stella Creasy received a barrage of rape and death threats on the platform, echoing the experiences of other women over the years.

    In subsequent years, Twitter continued to craft rules and invest in staff and technology to detect violent threats, harassment and misinformation that violates its policies. After evidence emerged that Russia used their platforms to try to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election, social media companies also stepped up their efforts against political misinformation.

    The big question now is how far Musk, who describes himself as a “free-speech absolutist,” wants to ratchet back these systems — and whether users and advertisers will stick around if he does.

    Aiming to tamp down such worries, Musk said in May he wants Twitter to be “as broadly inclusive as possible ” where ideally, most of America is on it and talking — a far cry from the far-right playground his critics are warning against.

    And while Musk has hinted he’d consider reinstating Trump’s account, it’s not clear the former president, who has since launched his own social media platform, would return.

    Then there’s the matter of Twitter’s employees, who’ve been living with uncertainty, high- (and low-) profile departures and a potential owner who’s publicly derided them on their own platform. Musk has also targeted Twitter’s work-from home policy, having once called for the company’s headquarters to be turned into a “homeless shelter” because, he said, so few employees actually worked there.

    As a hyper-frequent Twitter user with over 100 million followers, Musk does know how to use the platform. During an all-hands staff meeting Musk attended in June, he said his goal was to make it “so compelling that you can’t live without it.” If he’s able to realize this, it could finally put Twitter in the big leagues of social media, with TikTok and Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, where users are counted in the billions, not mere millions.

    Of course, Musk is also well known for predictions that are delayed or may not come true, such as colonizing Mars or deploying a fleet of autonomous robotaxis.

    “This is not a car manufacturer where, good enough, all you have to do is beat General Motors. Sorry, that isn’t really that hard,” said David Kirsch, a professor of strategy and entrepreneurship at the University of Maryland who’s studied Twitter bots’ effect on Tesla’s stock price. “You are dealing here with all of these other companies (that) also have very sophisticated AI programs, very sophisticated PhD programmers…everyone is trying to crack this nut.”

    —

    Krisher reported from Detroit.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Former Northeastern employee charged in campus bomb hoax

    Former Northeastern employee charged in campus bomb hoax

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — A former Northeastern University employee who said he was injured when a package he was opening on the Boston campus exploded last month was charged Tuesday with fabricating the incident.

    Jason Duhaime, formerly the new technology manager and director of the university’s Immersive Media Lab, was charged with “conveying false and misleading information related to an explosive device” and then lying to federal investigators, federal authorities said.

    “This alleged conduct is disturbing to say the least,” U.S. Attorney Rachael Rollins said at a news conference. “Our city, more than most, knows all too well that a report or threat of an explosion is a very serious matter and necessitates an immediate and significant law enforcement response, given the potential devastation that can ensue.”

    Duhaime told investigators that the hard plastic case exploded when he opened it on Sept. 13, causing “sharp” objects to fly from the case and injure his arms, but his arms only had superficial marks and there was no damage to his shirt, investigators said.

    According to an FBI affidavit, “The inside and outside of the case did not bear any marks, dents, cracks, holes, or other signs that it had been exposed to a forceful or explosive discharge of any type or magnitude.”

    The case also contained a rambling typed note full of misspellings and exclamation points that railed against virtual reality, referenced Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, and threatened to “destroy” the lab.

    “It has come to our attention that this VR lab is trying to change us as a world,” the note said.

    The letter also said: “We know you are working with Mr. Mark Zuckerberg and the U.S. government.”

    It later said: “We know you are working on a secret flying project to scan buildings across the world so Mark can take over google maps,” and “the robots your (sic) building are walking around NEU, MIT and into Harvard yard.”

    The FBI affidavit said the letter was “pristine” and “bore no tears, holes, burn marks, or any other indication that it had been near any sort of forceful or explosive discharge.”

    Investigators also discovered a word-for-word, electronic copy of the letter stored in a backup folder on a university computer in Duhaime’s office that had been written just hours before he called 911.

    Authorities said they could not comment on the specific motive because of the ongoing investigation.

    “In this case, we believe Mr. Duhaime wanted to be the victim but instead victimized his entire community by instilling fear at college campuses in Massachusetts and beyond,” Joseph Bonavolonta, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s Boston office said.

    Duhaime, who lives in Texas, was scheduled to make an initial court appearance Tuesday afternoon in San Antonio.

    An attorney for Duhaime did not immediately respond to a telephone message and an email seeking comment. Duhaime has previously denied staging the incident, saying in an interview with The Boston Globe that it was “very traumatic.”

    “I did not stage this … No way, shape or form … they need to catch the guy that did this,” he told the newspaper.

    Northeastern is a private university with about 16,000 students. The school in a statement Tuesday said Duhaime no longer works there.

    The reported explosion led to swarms of police including two bomb squads descending on the school, forced the evacuation of several campus buildings, and put the campus on edge even after reassurances from the school that it was safe.

    “His alleged actions diverted significant law enforcement resources away from essential public safety matters and caused fear and panic not only on campus, but also in the homes of the families and friends and loved ones of Northeastern students, faculty and staff,” Rollins said.

    It marked one of the first big scares in Boston since 2013, when two bombs planted near the finish line of the Boston Marathon killed three spectators and wounded more than 260 others.

    [ad_2]

    Source link