ReportWire

Tag: social media

  • Elon Musk disbands Twitter’s board, cementing control over company | CNN Business

    Elon Musk disbands Twitter’s board, cementing control over company | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Twitter’s board of directors was dissolved on Thursday following Elon Musk’s takeover of the company, according to a securities filing on Monday.

    The company filing states that all previous members of Twitter’s board, including recently ousted CEO Parag Agrawal and chairman Bret Taylor, are no longer directors “in accordance with the terms of the merger agreement.”

    Musk, according to the filing, became “the sole director of Twitter.”

    The move, while unsurprising, highlights how the world’s richest man has quickly cemented his control over one of the world’s most influential platforms, with few if any checks on his power over the company.

    Almost immediately after Musk completed his $44 billion deal to acquire Twitter on Thursday, Musk terminated at least four of its top executives, including Agrawal.

    The new Twitter owner plans to rethink the company’s content moderation policies and permanent bans for users who previously violated the platform’s policies, including former President Donald Trump, although he said over the weekend that no major decisions have been made yet. He also is reported to be planning large layoffs at the company.

    While Musk has a reputation as an innovative entrepreneur, he is also known for erratic and controversial behavior. This weekend, Musk was widely criticized for tweeting a link to a fringe conspiracy theory about the violent attack on Paul Pelosi, the husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

    Musk later deleted the tweet.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kyrie Irving faces backlash for promoting antisemitism

    Kyrie Irving faces backlash for promoting antisemitism

    [ad_1]

    Kyrie Irving faces backlash for promoting antisemitism – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    Brooklyn Nets star Kyrie Irving recently tweeted a link to an antisemitic documentary that pushed conspiracy theories about Jewish people and the slave trade. The NBA is facing criticism for its silence in response. Michael George has the latest.

    Be the first to know

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


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Big Ships

    Big Ships

    [ad_1]

    Tom Hicks is an artist based in the UK.

    Read more…

    [ad_2]

    Luke Plunkett

    Source link

  • Bracing For A Recession, Twitter Cutting Costs And Moving To Subscription Based Model

    Bracing For A Recession, Twitter Cutting Costs And Moving To Subscription Based Model

    [ad_1]

    Elon Musk isn’t losing time revamping Twitter. One of Musk’s first moves at the company was the firing of four key executives, as well as the entire board of directors, with plans reportedly in the works to lay off thousands of employees.

    Although the company had already planned a major staff reduction, Edward Chen, a data scientist formerly in charge of Twitter’s
    TWTR
    spam and health metrics and currently CEO of Surge AI (a content moderation start-up), told the Washington Post the proposal cited in the media to cut roughly 75% of employees was unimaginable. He said it would put users at risk of hacks and exposure to child pornography and other offensive content.

    Still, with a recession looming, tough decisions must be made and Musk is moving quickly to make sure the social media company isn’t reliant as much on advertising revenue, which tends to tank during an economic downturn. At the same time, he is dramatically cutting costs to try and get Twitter’s margins moving rapidly upwards.

    Despite being a private company, the billionaire did convince Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey to roll his nearly $1 billion 2.4% stake in the public Twitter into the new private Twitter, and Saudi Prince Alwaleed confirmed that he also rolled his $1.9 billion position into the company, making him the second largest shareholder. Alwaleed and Kingdom Holding now own approximately 4% of Twitter.

    In addition, Musk convinced a number of high-profile investors to put billions in the company, so he is under pressure to make changes quickly.

    One proposed change which didn’t go over very well with users was a planned implementation of a $20/month charge so that high-profile users can keep their blue check mark showing that they are a verified account. In essence, it’s a way to avoid fake news because consumers and the media can quickly find out if the comments are from the actual person.

    Musk defended the $20/month charge but later back-tracked to an $8/month charge after a backlash from some users, although he did note that the cost would vary by country. A survey sent out by Jason Calacanis, a longtime start-up investor who encouraged Musk to buy Twitter, asked how much they would pay to have the blue check mark. Of the 1.9 million who responded, more than 80% said they wouldn’t pay anything. The second most popular was $5/month, which got 10% of the votes.

    Many people will have an adverse reaction, even those who can well afford it like author Stephen King who tweeted last October, “$20 a month to keep my blue check? Fuck that, they should pay me. If that gets instituted, I’m gone like Enron.”

    “We need to pay the bills somehow! Twitter cannot entirely rely on advertisers. How about $8?” responded Musk. The Information’s Jessica Lessin responded with an article saying, “I’m far more interested in leaving that emotion aside and focusing on the business rationale of charging Twitter users $8 a month to be “verified” and for other features, like seeing fewer ads. Many commentators have pointed out that this subscription tier isn’t likely to net Twitter much money. There are 423,700 users verified currently. If they all paid, that would be $41 million in new revenue.”

    However, Musk seems to be targeting a more broad adoption of the monthly fee, tweeting “Twitter’s current lords & peasants system for who has or doesn’t have a blue checkmark is bullshit.”

    FiveThirtyEight political writer Nate Silver had a similar reaction to Stephen King. “I’m probably the perfect target for this, use Twitter a ton, can afford $20/mo, not particularly anti-Elon, but my reaction is that I’ve generated a ton of valuable free content for Twitter over the years and they can go fuck themselves,” he wrote on Twitter.

    Musk is also planning to convert the $4.99 premium service called Twitter Blue, which has a function allowing you to edit your tweets 30 minutes after posting them as well as test new features before they are rolled out, into a required subscription for those who want to keep their verified status. He reportedly told employees to get the program in place by November 7 or they are fired. The price point on the revamped service is set to rise from $4.99/month to $7.99/month.

    Another issue Musk is facing is getting advertisers on board. Both Havas Media and Interpublic Group
    IPG
    have told their clients they should temporarily stop advertising on Twitter due to concerns over the company’s ability to monitor its content.

    Also weighing heavily on Musk’s mind must be data which was exclusively reported by Reuters that heavy tweeters—which account for less than 10% of users but 90% of all tweets and half of global revenue—have been in “absolute decline since the pandemic.” This came from an internal document entitled “Where did the Tweeters Go?” which was obtained by Reuters.

    Heavy tweeters are defined as those who login six or seven days a week and tweet about three to four times a week. Unfortunately, news, sports and entertainment, all attractive to advertisers, are in decline amongst English-speaking heavy tweeters while cryptocurrency and “Not Safe For Work,” NFSW (which includes nudity and pornography), are rising rapidly for this group. Adult content comprises 13% of content on twitter and is not popular with most advertisers.

    This is certainly a challenge short-term as Musk has said that anyone previously removed from the service for violating its rules won’t be allowed back onto the platform until the company has a clear process in place, which will be at least a few weeks.

    He said, “Twitter’s content moderation council will include representatives with widely divergent views, which will certainly include the civil rights community and groups who face hate-fueled violence.”

    This may be leaving ad agencies and advertisers scratching their heads as to what the product will look like and which advertisers it will be attractive to. Elon Musk is very quick to change course so it may be wise for advertisers to sit on the sidelines to wait and see how the social media platform evolves.

    [ad_2]

    Derek Baine, Contributor

    Source link

  • Musk emerging as Twitter’s chief moderator before US midterms

    Musk emerging as Twitter’s chief moderator before US midterms

    [ad_1]

    Days after taking over Twitter and a week before the US midterm elections, billionaire Elon Musk has positioned himself as moderator-in-chief of one of the most important social media platforms in American politics.

    Musk has said he will not make major decisions about content or restoring banned accounts before setting up a “content moderation council” with diverse viewpoints. But his own behaviour as a prolific tweeter has signalled otherwise.

    He has engaged directly with figures on the political right who are appealing for looser restrictions, including a Republican candidate for Arizona secretary of state who credited Musk with enabling him to begin tweeting again after his account was briefly suspended Monday.

    Musk even changed his profile to “Twitter Complaint Hotline Operator” – with a photo of himself when he was a toddler holding a telephone. But it is almost impossible for those outside of Twitter to know what strings he is pulling or whose accounts have been suspended: The company has stopped responding to media questions, except for the few that Musk answers by tweet.

    Musk’s promised interventions started last week on his first full day as Twitter’s owner. A conservative political podcaster shared examples of the platform allegedly favouring liberals and secretively downgrading conservative voices – a common criticism that Twitter’s previous leaders dismissed as inaccurate. “I will be digging in more today,” Musk responded.

    It continued when the daughter of Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson, whose provocative critiques of “politically correct” culture and feminism are popular with some right-wing activists, appealed for Musk to restore her father’s account after a tweet about transgender actor Elliot Page that apparently ran afoul of Twitter’s rules on hateful conduct.

    “Anyone suspended for minor & dubious reasons will be freed from Twitter jail,” Musk pledged. He had months earlier said in reference to Peterson that Twitter was “going way too far in squashing dissenting opinions”.

    One of Musk’s first big moves was an open letter to advertisers – Twitter’s chief revenue source – promising that he would not let Twitter descend into a “free-for-all hellscape” as he follows through with his plans to promote free speech on the platform. And he has suggested asking users to pay $8 for a coveted verified blue check mark as a way to diversify revenue.

    The check mark has been criticised as a symbol of elitism on the platform. But its primary purpose has been to verify that accounts in the public eye – such as politicians, brands and journalists – are who they say they are. It has been a tool to prevent impersonation and help stem the flow of misinformation.

    But some still have their worries about Musk opening the platform to a flood of online toxicity that’s bad for their brands. General Motors has said it will suspend advertising on Twitter as it monitors the platform under Musk, and others are facing pressure to review their own plans. On Tuesday, more than three dozen advocacy organisations sent an open letter to Twitter’s top 20 advertisers, calling on them to commit to halting advertising on the platform if Twitter under Musk undermines “brand safety” and guts content moderation.

    ‘King of the platform’

    Musk has changed his profile to ‘Twitter Complaint Hotline Operator’ and changed his picture to one of himself as a toddler, holding a phone [Twitter]

    Over the weekend, the billionaire posted – then deleted – an article that contained baseless rumours about the attack on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband. And much of his commentary in recent days has been a response to appeals from conservative voices.

    In a text exchange with The Associated Press, Mark Finchem, the Republican running to become Arizona’s secretary of state, said his access to the platform was restored quickly after reaching out to Musk via his personal Twitter handle. Asked why his account was suspended, Finchem said, “Perhaps you should reach out to Elon Musk. We were banned for an unknown reason, we reached out to him and 45 minutes later we were reinstated.”

    Finchem, who has questioned the results of the 2020 presidential election and was at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, has drawn national attention for his statements about election security and his ability to change election rules if he wins the state’s top election post next week.

    Musk tweeted Monday evening that he was “Looking into it” in response to a complaint about Finchem’s apparent suspension. The complaint came from lawyer Jenna Ellis, who was a legal adviser to former President Donald Trump’s campaign. About 40 minutes later, Finchem posted a “test” tweet on his account, which was followed by a lengthier post thanking Musk for restoring his ability to use the site.

    “Thank you @elonmusk for stopping the commie who suspended me from Twitter a week before the election,” Finchem wrote in the Tweet. “Twitter is much better with you at the helm.”

    Jared Holt, a senior research manager at The Institute for Strategic Dialogue, said big social media companies have typically operated on the whims of their owners. But “that problem is especially glaring when somebody like Elon Musk takes the reins and kind of establishes himself as king of the platform, rather than an owner trying to run a coherent business,” Holt said.

    Content moderation council

    At the same time, Musk has sent mixed signals about his intentions. Despite overt examples of appealing to conservative calls and complaints about Twitter’s policies, there is also plenty of evidence that the platform’s policies on combating misinformation are still in effect.

    Separately, Musk has defended Twitter’s continuing head of trust and safety, Yoel Roth, after some conservative users called for his firing over past comments expressing liberal views. Roth remained on the job this week after other top executives were fired or resigned. And apart from Musk, he appeared to be the chief public voice of Twitter’s content moderation, explaining that the company spent the weekend working to remove a “surge in hateful conduct” following Musk’s takeover.

    “We’ve all made some questionable tweets, me more than most, but I want to be clear that I support Yoel,” Musk tweeted in response to a complaint from another conservative commentator. “My sense is that he has high integrity, and we are all entitled to our political beliefs.”

    Some longtime Twitter observers have expressed scepticism about the effectiveness of Musk’s planned content moderation council. In part, that is because Twitter already has a trust and safety advisory council to address moderation questions.

    “Truly, I can’t imagine how it would differ,” said Danielle Citron, a University of Virginia law professor who sits on the council and has been working with Twitter since 2009 to tackle online harms, such as threats and stalking. “Our council has the full spectrum of views on free speech.”

    Citron said she was still waiting to hear if the council will be having its next meeting, scheduled for the day after the midterms.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk says he wants to charge $8 a month for Twitter’s “blue check” verification badge

    Elon Musk says he wants to charge $8 a month for Twitter’s “blue check” verification badge

    [ad_1]

    Twitter CEO Elon Musk now says he wants to charge users $8 per month to retain their verification badge or obtain one on the platform — after an earlier report suggested he might seek even more for the privilege.

    On Tuesday, Musk outlined his plan on Twitter and called the current system that gives out the blue checkmark badges “bulls**t.” The blue check feature, indicating that the person’s identity has been verified, would become part of Twitter Blue, which costs $5 a month. 

    “Power to the people! Blue for $8/month,” he wrote.

    The blue checkmark has become a coveted marker of status among some of the celebrities, politicians and journalists who are heavy users of Twitter. On Sunday, Musk said the whole verification process is getting “revamped.” 

    For the $8 monthly charge, users will also get priority in replies, mentions and search, ability to post longer videos and audio, and half as many ads, Musk said. He said that there would be a “paywall bypass” for publishers who are “willing to work with us.”

    Elon Musk and Twitter
    Elon Musk took ownership of Twitter in October 2022.

    Anadolu Agency/Getty Images


    The new strategy, he said, will give Twitter a revenue stream to reward content creators. 

    He added that there will be a secondary tag below a public figure’s name, much like there is now for politicians.

    Opponents of the approach say it will make it easier for users to spread disinformation or to impersonate someone else on Twitter. Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez mocked the idea of Musk charging user fees.

    “Lmao at a billionaire earnestly trying to sell people on the idea that ‘free speech’ is actually a $8/mo subscription plan,” she tweeted

    Still, Musk is undeterred. 

    “To all complainers, please continue complaining, but it will cost $8,” he wrote. 

    The SpaceX and Tesla CEO went on to share a clip of the British comedy show Monty Python, which he says inspired him. “Totally stole idea of charging for insults & arguments from Monty Python tbh,” he wrote.

    The plan comes after The Verge reported Musk was looking to charge $20 a month for blue check users — prompting fierce pushback, including from legendary horror writer Stephen King, who said “Twitter should pay” him to stay on the app.  

    “If that gets instituted, I’m gone like Enron,” King tweeted, referring to the energy company that filed for bankruptcy in 2001. 

    Users and tech industry analysts have voiced an array of concerns about what Twitter may look like under Musk, who declared his intent to manage the platform as a “free speech” space.

    Since Musk took charge of Twitter last week, the platform has seen a significant spike in hate speech, according to a new study. Researchers from Montclair State University found that the 12 hours immediately following Musk’s ascension to ownership saw a much more “hostile” environment on Twitter. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • NOT REAL NEWS: A look at what didn’t happen this week

    NOT REAL NEWS: A look at what didn’t happen this week

    [ad_1]

    A roundup of some of the most popular but completely untrue stories and visuals of the week. None of these are legit, even though they were shared widely on social media. The Associated Press checked them out. Here are the facts:

    ___

    Graphic misrepresents House GOP agenda

    CLAIM: An image shows the House Republicans’ “Commitment to America” plan, including raising the eligibility age for Medicare from 65 to 75 and making retirees with pensions, 401(k)s or disabled veterans’ benefits ineligible for Social Security payments.

    THE FACTS: The image shows policies that don’t match the language in House Republicans’ actual plan. Ahead of the midterm elections, social media users are sharing the misleading graphic that claims to outline House Republicans’ policy plan. The image shows a logo reading “Commitment to America” that matches branding on House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s website for the House GOP’s 2022 agenda. “Entitlements are bankrupting our country and the future of our children,” reads the image. “Republicans are the only Party with a plan to address our fiscal crisis and commit to the following if you give us the majority in November.” The image goes on to list several policies: making retirees “who have pension, IRAs, 401Ks, disabled veteran benefits” ineligible for Social Security; raising the age of Medicare eligibility to 75; and taxing “disabled veterans benefits” and employer-sponsored health care plans. One tweet sharing the image gained more than 3,000 likes. But the graphic’s contents do not match the policies and goals outlined in the Commitment to America agenda. Mark Bednar, McCarthy’s director of strategic communications, told the AP that the graphic is “fabricated” and contains “false information.” A summary of the plan contains only one mention of Social Security or Medicare, saying it would “save and strengthen” the programs. A document outlining the plan’s fiscal proposals says “Congress must be prepared to make reforms to extend the solvency of the entitlement programs,” but does not contain explicit references to cutting particular programs. Neither the summary nor individual policy documents on McCarthy’s website explicitly recommend taxing veterans’ disability benefits or employer-sponsored health care plans. Congressional Republicans have previously proposed raising the Medicare eligibility age. A fiscal 2023 budget proposal from the Republican Study Committee suggests adjusting the Medicare eligibility age to reflect increased average life expectancy, though it does not offer a specific age. That committee’s prior proposal, for fiscal 2022, suggested gradually increasing the eligibility age to 70. Buckley Carlson, a spokesperson for the Republican Study Committee, confirmed the statements in the graphic are inaccurate. Republican Rep. Jim Banks, who chairs the committee, also tweeted about the image, calling it a “fake graphic.”

    — Associated Press writers Karena Phan in Los Angeles and Graph Massara in San Francisco contributed this report.

    ___

    USPS won’t reject mail-in ballots for too few stamps

    CLAIM: Absentee ballots will not be accepted unless voters mail them with up to two stamps.

    THE FACTS: Some states and counties do require voters to pay for their own postage on mail-in ballots, however, the United States Postal Service says its policy is to deliver all ballots, even those with insufficient postage. As the midterm election approaches, some social media users have warned that those planning to vote by mail need a specific amount of postage to send their ballots or they won’t be counted. “OHIO USE 2 STAMPS ON YOUR BALLOT OR THEY WONT COUNT THEY WILL BE RETURNED FOR UNPAID POSTAGE,” read one tweet posted Wednesday. Another tweet with a similar warning was shared more than 2,000 times. While some states provide pre-paid ballot envelopes, many states do require voters to provide their own postage for returning mail-in ballots. However, USPS doesn’t reject or delay delivery of ballots if the postage is insufficient or unpaid, USPS spokesperson Martha Johnson confirmed. For mail-in ballots that need postage, USPS requires election officials to inform voters of the amount. “We are proactively working with state and local election officials on mailing requirements, including postage payment,” Johnson wrote in an email to the AP. In cases where a post office receives a ballot with insufficient postage, USPS will still deliver it and attempt to collect postage from the appropriate local election officials, Johnson added. The USPS also released an election mail guide in January 2022 that confirms that policy. “Postage is collected from the election office upon delivery or at a later date,” the policy says, referring to unpaid ballots or those with insufficient postage. The amount of postage can vary by jurisdiction. In Ohio, for example, if a person returns an absentee ballot by mail it must be postmarked no later than the day before Election Day, and it is the voter’s responsibility the ballot has enough postage, according to the Ohio Secretary of State’s website. The Lucas County, Ohio, Board of Elections said in a statement posted to Twitter that not every ballot in Ohio needs more than one stamp, and requirements vary depending on how many pages each ballot is. “In addition the post office will deliver it to the board of elections regardless of postage,” the tweet added. The elections administration office in Harris County, Texas — which similarly requires two stamps per ballot — has also been posting reminders about postage. “Our mail ballot office worked with USPS to weigh and determine the amount of postage for this ballot, as it is four sheets of paper long,” Nadia Hakim, a spokesperson for the Harris County elections administration office, told the AP. “USPS determined that the amount of postage needed is $1.08, so we have been telling voters two forever stamps are needed to send their ballot back.” Hakim also confirmed the USPS policy on ballot delivery and postage.

    — Karena Phan

    ___

    Colorado’s universal mail-in ballot system is legal, secure

    CLAIM: Colorado’s practice of sending mail-in ballots to every registered voter is unconstitutional and voters should only vote in person on Election Day.

    THE FACTS: Colorado state law explicitly protects mail-in voting and the U.S. Constitution gives states broad authority to run their elections, according to legal experts. With the midterm elections just weeks away, some social media users are sharing misleading information about Colorado’s mail-in voting system. One Instagram user posted a picture of a ballot that features the label of the Douglas County clerk and recorder and wrote, “So when you get this…mailed unconstitutionally to every Colorado voter whether they requested one or not, ignore the instructions to vote early. Vote in person, on Election Day.” But there’s nothing unconstitutional about the process. In 2013, Colorado adopted legislation requiring that mail-in ballots be sent to all eligible voters. And the Constitution gives state legislatures control over election administration, though Congress can amend regulations for federal elections, experts say. “There’s nothing in the U.S. Constitution that speaks to mail-in balloting. And therefore there’s nothing that prohibits the practice,” said Richard Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles. Doug Spencer, an associate professor of law at the University of Colorado Boulder, agreed that Colorado’s mail-in voting system is “not actually unconstitutional” under the law. Annie Orloff, a spokesperson for the Colorado secretary of state, wrote in an email to the AP that there has “never been a legitimate or successful lawsuit challenging the constitutionality” of the state’s mail-in voting law. Local and national experts and election judges agree that Colorado’s mail-in voting system is safe, the AP has reported. Bipartisan teams transport, verify, open, sort, count and store Colorado’s ballots in secure rooms with windows through which anyone can watch. Election judges and computers check each vote and signature against state registries before the ballots are tabulated and stashed by the hundreds in cardboard boxes, numbered and dated.

    — Associated Press writer Josh Kelety in Phoenix contributed this report.

    ___

    Officials: No fentanyl found in California cereal boxes

    CLAIM: A photo shows cereal boxes filled with fentanyl that were recently seized by law enforcement officials in San Bernardino County, California.

    THE FACTS: The county sheriff’s department said the photo, from a drug bust earlier this year, shows pills suspected of being MDMA, not fentanyl. With Halloween around the corner, social media users have been sharing warnings about the possibility of potentially deadly drugs showing up in otherwise innocuous children’s treats. The latest warning includes a photo of two cereal boxes — one Lucky Charms, the other Trix — and their contents. The widely-circulating image purportedly shows pink-colored pills mixed in with the colorful cereal pieces. “This was seized in San Bernardino County today. It’s Fentanyl mixed with cereal,” wrote one Instagram user in a post that was shared more than 25,000 times before being taken down. “PLEASE SHARE AS HALLOWEEN GETS CLOSER SAVE A LIFE!!!!,” wrote another Instagram user. However, the photograph doesn’t show fentanyl in the cereal, but likely another less lethal recreational drug: MDMA, often referred to as ecstasy or Molly, according to Mara Rodriguez, a spokesperson for the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department. She added that lab tests have not yet been completed on the substance. The photo comes from a joint investigation this summer by the sheriff’s office and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security that involved drugs being distributed through the mail, Rodriguez said. The agency stressed the incident doesn’t raise broader concerns about illegal drugs infiltrating the nation’s food supply. “This is an isolated incident with individual packages, not a mass-produced or commercial/retail distribution system,” the sheriff’s department said in an emailed statement. The use of cereal to conceal the drugs is most likely a smuggling technique, “not a sinister attempt” to market illegal drugs to a younger demographic, says Ryan Marino, an addiction medicine specialist at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine in Ohio. “The drug trade is a business and nobody is giving away expensive products for free,” he said. “It wouldn’t make any logical sense.” The claims come shortly after California authorities seized 12,000 suspected fentanyl pills hidden in candy boxes at Los Angeles International Airport last week. The county sheriff’s department said the suspected trafficker tried to go through security screening with packages of Sweet Tarts, Skittles and Whoppers filled with the drug. The DEA also warned the public in an Aug. 30 news release about the increased presence of candy-colored “rainbow fentanyl,” which it billed as a tactic by drug cartels to sell the highly addictive and potentially deadly opioids to younger users. Still, as trick-or-treat season approaches, the DEA says its so far found “no indication there is a connection” between fentanyl and Halloween, said Nicole Nishida, a DEA spokesperson in the Los Angeles field office. “Traditionally, drug traffickers use different concealment methods to try and evade law enforcement detection,” she wrote in an email. “We have seen fentanyl pills and other drugs hidden in fire extinguishers, fish tanks, candy boxes, everyday household items, pallets, and even concrete blocks.”

    — Associated Press writer Philip Marcelo in New York contributed this report.

    ___

    Death of red panda cub in Toronto not linked to COVID vaccine

    CLAIM: The recent death of a red panda cub at Canada’s Toronto Zoo was related to the COVID-19 vaccine.

    THE FACTS: The cub that died was not vaccinated against COVID-19. The Toronto zoo on Monday announced the death of the 3-month-old red panda cub, referred to as “Baby Spice” but recently dubbed Dash following a naming contest. Soon after, erroneous suggestions emerged on social media linking the death to the COVID-19 vaccine. “They killed the red panda,” reads a tweet that received more than 5,000 likes. The tweet included screenshots of two headlines: On the left, a headline from April reported that the zoo had received COVID-19 vaccines for its animals. On the right was a headline about the panda cub’s death. But there is no connection between the two, a spokesperson for the zoo told the AP. “Dash did not receive the Covid vaccine,” Amy Naylor said in an email. “A post-mortem was conducted to collect samples for additional testing which will be required to better understand the possible cause of the rapid decline of this animal. Until the results are available to us, we are unable to definitively state the cause of death.” The zoo also posted a statement responding to the false claim on Twitter. Dash showed no signs of illness on Oct. 22 but by the morning of Oct. 23 was lying on his side and weak, the zoo said. Attempts to treat him were unsuccessful. Red pandas are difficult to breed, the zoo added. Many pregnancies are lost and the zoo estimated that approximately 40% of cubs die within one year.

    — Associated Press writer Angelo Fichera in Philadelphia contributed this report.

    ___

    Find AP Fact Checks here: https://apnews.com/APFactCheck

    ___

    Follow @APFactCheck on Twitter: https://twitter.com/APFactCheck

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Twitter saw an

    Twitter saw an

    [ad_1]

    After months of contention between Elon Musk and Twitter executives over his bid to own the company, the Tesla founder was officially given control on Friday. But as the new leader emerged at the helm, the platform saw a massive spike in hate speech, a new study found. 

    Researchers from Montclair State University found that the 12 hours immediately following Musk’s ascension to ownership saw a much more “hostile” environment on Twitter. The team looked at tweets filled with “vulgar and hostile” rhetoric aimed at people based on their race, religion, ethnicity and orientation, such as the “n-word,” “k-word,” and “f-word,” to find out just how bad it got. 

    And what they found was an “immediate, visible, and measurable spike.” 

    In the week leading up to Musk’s acquisition, researchers said there were no more than 84 hostile tweets an hour on the platform. But from midnight on October 28 – the day Musk took ownership – to noon the next day, there were 4,778 hate-filled tweets. That accounts for more than 398 tweets an hour, about 4.7 times higher than the seven-day average leading up to that day. The potential reach for those tweets was more than 3 million, researchers found. 

    Researchers also said there was an increase in negative sentiment, with more than 67% of the tweets sent after Musk’s takeover having a negative tone.

    “In sum, the content and tone of Twitter posts became measurably more oriented towards hate speech on the day Elon Musk became CEO of the company with significant reach attained for this hate content,” the study says. 

    Yoel Roth, Twitter’s head of safety and security, has also confirmed an increase in hate speech. On Monday, he tweeted that the company has seen a “surge in hateful conduct” and removed more than 1,500 accounts. A graph he shared of total impression of tweets with at least one slur shows that the increase kicked off on Friday very shortly after the Musk acquisition was announced. It appeared to spike between Saturday and Sunday. 

    Roth described the surge as a “short-term trolling campaign” with many of the accounts they removed stemming from repeated “bad actors.” On Saturday, he said as an example that more than 50,000 tweets that used a particular slur were issued by just 300 accounts, most of which were “inauthentic.” 

    “These issues aren’t new, and the people targeted by hateful conduct aren’t numbers or data points. We’re going to continue investing in policy and technology to make things better,” he tweeted.

    While Montclair researchers made it clear that the acquisition saw an immediate increase in hostile language on the platform, what remains murky is what specifically caused it. Musk has long said that this ownership of Twitter would come with fewer restrictions, but researchers said it’s “speculative” to know whether his potential policy changes would have caused the spike. 

    It’s possible, however, that based on his past sentiments users resorted to the language because they assumed they would no longer be banned or suspended from the platform. It’s also possible that having an “unmoderated platform was potentially a source of excitement,” researchers said. 

    Musk has not explicitly said what will be tolerated on the platform since the surge began, although he has retweeted Roth’s statements about the surge. On Friday, Musk said that Twitter will form a “content moderation council with widely diverse viewpoints” and that no major content decisions would be made before that council can convene. 

    “Twitter will not allow anyone who was de-platformed for violating Twitter rules back on platform until we have a clear process for doing so, which will take at least a few more weeks,” Musk said Tuesday night. “Twitter’s content moderation council will include representatives with widely divergent views, which will certainly include the civil rights community and groups who face hate-fueled violence.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • China is caught in a zero-Covid trap of its own making | CNN

    China is caught in a zero-Covid trap of its own making | CNN

    [ad_1]

    Editor’s Note: A version of this story appeared in CNN’s Meanwhile in China newsletter, a three-times-a-week update exploring what you need to know about the country’s rise and how it impacts the world. Sign up here.


    Hong Kong
    CNN
     — 

    It’s been little more than a week since Chinese leader Xi Jinping began his norm-breaking third term in power with a ringing endorsement of his relentless zero-Covid policy.

    But the commitment to stick with it is already fueling scenes of chaos and misery across the country.

    In the northwestern city of Xining, residents spent last week pleading desperately for food as they suffered through the latest of the country’s stringent lockdowns; to the west, in Lhasa, the regional capital of Tibet, angry crowds have been protesting in the streets after more than 70 days of stay-home orders.

    In the central province of Henan, migrant workers have abandoned a locked-down Foxconn factory en masse, walking for miles to escape an outbreak at China’s largest iPhone assembling site. And, in the eastern financial hub of Shanghai, things are gloomy even at Disneyland – the park abruptly shut its gates on Monday to comply with Covid prevention measures, trapping visitors inside for compulsory testing.

    In many other parts of the country, lockdowns, mandatory quarantines, incessant mass testing edicts and travel restrictions continue to cripple businesses and daily life, even as the rest of the world moves on from the pandemic.

    Rather than relax Covid restrictions – as some had hoped for in the lead-up to the Communist Party’s five-yearly leadership reshuffle, Chinese authorities have ramped them up after Xi’s sweeping endorsement of the strategy.

    “The 20th Party Congress didn’t provide a timetable for moving away from zero-Covid. Instead it highlighted the importance of sticking to the existing approach,” said Yanzhong Huang, a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

    The congress reinforced Xi as an unrivaled supreme leader, and saw him stack the Communist Party’s top ranks with staunch allies – including those who had loyally carried out his Covid policies.

    “The new political ecology also provided more incentive for local governments to impose more draconian Covid control measures,” Huang said.

    A renewed zeal for the policy can be seen most clearly in smaller cities. While metropolises like Beijing and Shanghai can draw on their experiences of major flareups to implement more targeted lockdown measures, smaller cities with no such know-how tend to pursue zero-Covid goals in a more aggressive and extensive manner, Huang said.

    The repeating cycle of lockdowns, quarantines and mass testing is taking a heavy toll on the economy and society. Public patience is wearing thin, and frustrations are building.

    On Monday in Baoding city, Hebei province, a father wielding a knife drove through a Covid checkpoint in a desperate bid to buy milk powder for his son. Video footage of the scene and his subsequent arrest sparked uproar online; the following day local police tried to soothe tempers by saying the man had been fined only 100 yuan ($13.75) and that his child’s “milk powder problem” had been “properly resolved.”

    On Tuesday, the death of a 3-year-old in Lanzhou, Gansu province, sparked another outcry, after the child’s family said lockdown measures had delayed emergency responders. Police said later the child had stopped breathing by the time officers arrived, but did not address the family’s accusations that an ambulance had been delayed. CNN has reached out to Lanzhou authorities for comment.

    In another sign of how sensitive the issue has become, Chinese stocks rallied on Wednesday following unverified social media rumors that China was forming a committee to prepare an exit from the zero-Covid policy.

    Those rumors were quashed, however, when the Foreign Ministry said it was “unaware” of any such plan.

    Meanwhile, experts say they see no signs of the Chinese government taking steps that would suggest it is rethinking its approach.

    Chinese health officials maintain that changing tack now would risk a huge surge in infections and deaths that could overwhelm the country’s fragile health care system.

    Beijing has so far refused to approve for use the mRNA vaccines developed in Western countries, which have been shown to be more potent than those made and used in China. Experts say China also lacks an emergency response plan to cope with surging infections.

    But Jin Dongyan, a virologist at the University of Hong Kong, said such catastrophic scenarios could be avoided with proper preparation.

    Instead of spending vast amounts of time and resources on testing, contact tracing, quarantining and imposing lockdowns, authorities should introduce more effective vaccines and antiviral therapies and boost the vaccination rate among the elderly, Jin said.

    With boosted immunity, asymptomatic or mild cases could be allowed to recover at home – freeing up space at hospitals to treat more severe cases, he said.

    “Using lockdown and containment measures to deal with an infectious disease with such a low mortality rate and high transmissibility is no longer appropriate. The whole world has abandoned this approach – nobody can stand the cost, it’s simply not working,” he said.

    Another hurdle to pivoting from zero-Covid is a pervasive fear of the virus among large swaths of the public, instilled by the Chinese government to justify its harsh control measures, experts say.

    “Authorities have demonized Covid, exaggerating its severity and mortality rate and talking up long-Covid symptoms. Many ordinary people are still very afraid of the virus, with recovered Covid patients suffering from severe discrimination and stigmatization,” Jin said.

    It was partly such fears that drove thousands of migrant workers to flee in panic from the Foxconn factory in Zhengzhou, he said.

    Videos of people traveling on foot, dragging their luggage on roads and across fields, went viral on Chinese social media over the weekend. Zhengzhou, a city of 12 million, imposed sweeping lockdown measures last month after identifying dozens of Covid-19 cases.

    The Foxconn facility has been racing to control an outbreak since mid-October, though the company has not disclosed the number of infections among its workers. On Wednesday, the Zhengzhou Airport Economy Zone, where the Foxconn plant is located, announced new lockdown measures.

    As the Foxconn exodus thrust the Zhengzhou outbreak into the spotlight, the city’s health authorities have tried to allay public fears. On Monday, the Zhengzhou municipal health commission published a WeChat article with the headline: “Covid is not that horrible, but preventable and treatable.”

    Huang, the expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, said misconceptions about the virus would complicate matters if China did at some point decide to move away from zero Covid.

    “Even if in the future, China wants to change the narrative and play down the seriousness of the disease, some people might not buy into the new narrative,” he said.

    As the winter approaches, experts warn that China could be hit by a new wave of infections – and a new cycle of draconian lockdowns.

    China reported 2,755 local infections for Tuesday, the highest daily tally since August.

    “Judging from the situation in China, there will be a major outbreak sooner or later. China has deployed tremendous efforts and paid a heavy cost to prevent that from happening, but in the end, it won’t be able to stop such a highly infectious disease from spreading,” Jin said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • After Elon Musk’s antics on Twitter, advertisers may think twice for now | CNN Business

    After Elon Musk’s antics on Twitter, advertisers may think twice for now | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN Business
     — 

    Hours before news broke on Thursday that he had completed his $44 billion acquisition of Twitter, Elon Musk wrote an open letter to advertisers stressing that he doesn’t want the platform to become a “free-for-all hellscape.”

    But that attempt at reassuring the advertising industry, which makes up the vast majority of Twitter’s business, was quickly overshadowed by Musk’s first days as the new owner of the platform. Some industry experts are now predicting an advertiser exodus could be coming sooner than expected.

    Within the first 24 hours of his ownership, there were several reports that racist comments, hate speech and other objectionable content had increased significantly on Twitter as users tested Musk’s promise that he would allow “free speech” on the platform. Then over the weekend, Musk was widely criticized for tweeting (then deleting without providing a reason) a link to a fringe conspiracy theory about the violent attack on Paul Pelosi, husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

    “I think advertisers are bracing to leave,” said Claire Atkin, co-founder of the adtech watchdog Check My Ads. “It’s very possibly a seismic shift for marketers and advertisers.”

    After months of uncertainty about Musk’s pending acquisition, advertisers must now confront questions around how Musk will change the platform, which is already an also-ran in the digital ad space despite its outsized political influence. Musk, known as both an innovative entrepreneur and an erratic figure, has promised to rethink Twitter’s content moderation policies and undo permanent bans of controversial figures, including former President Donald Trump.

    Brands have long been sensitive to the types of content their ads run against, an issue made more complicated by social media. Most marketers bristle at the thought of having their ads run alongside toxic content such as hate speech, pornography or misinformation. And if Twitter continues to struggle with an uptick in such content — or if Musk updates Twitter’s policies to explicitly allow some of it — companies may cease advertising there for fear of risks to their brands, or because they’re reaching a smaller audience if regular users also depart.

    “If you think about the money, investment and care, real care and attention that goes into connecting with consumers, and then to have your ad be published next to lies … it goes against everything a brand wants to do,” Atkin said.

    Musk, who has previously tweeted “I hate advertising” and indicated he wants to make the platform less reliant on it, is also confronting the reality that about 90% of Twitter’s revenue comes from advertising. In addition to the open letter to advertisers, Musk’s team spent Monday “meeting with the marketing and advertising community” in New York, according to Jason Calacanis, a member of Musk’s inner circle.

    In public and private conversations with advertisers, Twitter has also stressed that its content policies have not changed following the acquisition, and Musk has said they won’t change until a new content moderation council is appointed (apparently to replace the company’s existing Trust and Safety council).

    But Musk may face an uphill battle. Twitter’s digital advertising business is much smaller than those of Meta, Google and Amazon, and doesn’t have growth and user demographics of TikTok. And many brands have already reduced digital ad spending in recent months amid the economic downturn. It may not take much for brands to cut back more.

    General Motors

    (GM)
    , which competes with Musk’s Tesla

    (TSLA)
    , said on Friday it would pause paying for advertising on Twitter while it evaluates “Twitter’s new direction.” CNN on Monday reached out to more than a dozen other brands that advertise on Twitter, most of which did not respond. Toyota

    (TM)
    , another Tesla

    (TSLA)
    competitor, told CNN that it is “in discussions with key stakeholders and monitoring the situation” on Twitter. Ben & Jerry’s said that “at this point we have not considered taking any action.”

    On Monday, advertising giant Interpublic Group advised clients to pause advertising on Twitter for the next week as it awaits more clarity on the platform’s plans for trust and safety and its capacity to carry out those plans under new owner Elon Musk, a person familiar with the situation told CNN. The guidance was sent via an internal memo to IPG employees who work with clients in its Mediabrands ad-buying arm, which include major consumer brands including Coca Cola, Johnson & Johnson, Spotify, Unilever and more.

    Also on Monday, the Global Alliance of Responsible Media, a leading consortium of advertisers and platforms, including Twitter, published an open letter to Musk, encouraging him to ensure Twitter continues to align with the group’s standards, which designate hate speech, violence, harassment and insensitive treatment of debated social issues as “not appropriate for any advertising support.” In response to the letter, Musk said in a tweet, “Twitter’s commitment to brand safety is unchanged,” and Twitter Chief Customer Officer Sarah Personette added that the company takes seriously brand safety and its partnership with the organization. (Personette tweeted on Tuesday that she resigned from the company last week.)

    Also on Monday, Angelo Carusone, CEO of media watchdog Media Matters for America, tweeted calling on major Twitter advertisers “to be putting pressure on Twitter right now” to better address the increase in hate and other toxic content. On Tuesday, a group of more than 40 civil society organizations, including Media Matters, the NAACP, GLAAD and the Center for Countering Digital Hate, sent an open letter to Twitter’s top advertisers calling on them to halt advertising on the platform if Musk cuts back on content moderation.

    “Advertisers are very sensitive to the changing landscape of social media,” said Atkin, adding that the question for Twitter is now “whether Elon Musk can continue to broker trust with advertisers or if he’s going to continue to sow uncertainty and fear.”

    In response to a request for comment on this story, a Twitter representative pointed CNN to the earlier tweets by Musk and Personette and Musk’s letter to advertisers, as well as a tweet by Twitter Head of Safety and Integrity Yoel Roth noting that the platform’s policies hadn’t changed, although it was facing an uptick in hate content from mostly non-human accounts.

    In a separate tweet thread Monday, Roth said that the company had since Saturday “been focused on addressing the surge in hateful conduct on Twitter.” He added: “We’ve made measurable progress, removing more than 1500 accounts and reducing impressions on this content to nearly zero.”

    One advertising executive told CNN on Monday that dozens of their clients had reached out in recent days for guidance on the situation.

    “It seems like a reasonable time for advertisers to rethink things,” said David Karpf, associate professor in the School of Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University. “I think advertisers are going to look at this and say, is the weak Twitter advertising product becoming a better or worse investment? And it’s going to be the same or a little worse … advertisers certainly aren’t going to start spending more on Twitter anytime soon.”

    There is precedent for advertisers stepping away from platforms because of hateful content. In 2020, dozens of brands publicly signed on to the #StopHateForProfit advertiser boycott of Facebook, which called out the platform for its “repeated failure to meaningfully address the vast proliferation of hate on its platforms.”

    But when it comes to Twitter, brands may have to tread carefully to avoid backlash. After GM announced its Twitter advertising pause, some users on the platform, including some right-leaning political figures, have called for a boycott of the automaker.

    Because Musk has positioned himself as a “free speech” maximalist, and one with strong support among many conservative politicians, brands risk being framed as anti-free speech if they exit the platform. But brands also risk appearing to implicitly endorse hate speech and other harmful content if they stay, meaning that many may decide to quietly pause their advertising on the site without a formal announcement.

    “Advertisers are finding it hard to weigh in publicly on what is kind of an unwinnable position to take,” the advertising executive told CNN.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Musk emerging as Twitter’s chief moderator ahead of midterms

    Musk emerging as Twitter’s chief moderator ahead of midterms

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Days after taking over Twitter and a week before the U.S. midterm elections, billionaire Elon Musk has positioned himself as moderator-in-chief of one of the most important social media platforms in American politics.

    Musk has said he won’t make major decisions about content or restoring banned accounts before setting up a “content moderation council” with diverse viewpoints. But his own behavior as a prolific tweeter has signaled otherwise.

    He’s engaged directly with figures on the political right who are appealing for looser restrictions, including a Republican candidate for Arizona secretary of state who credits Musk with enabling him to begin tweeting again after his account was briefly suspended Monday.

    Musk even changed his profile to “Twitter Complaint Hotline Operator” — with a photo of himself when he was a toddler holding a telephone. But it is almost impossible for those outside of Twitter to know what strings he is pulling or whose accounts have been suspended: The company has stopped responding to media questions, except for the few that Musk answers by tweet.

    Musk’s promised interventions started last week on his first full day as Twitter’s owner. A conservative political podcaster shared examples of the platform allegedly favoring liberals and secretively downgrading conservative voices — a common criticism that Twitter’s previous leaders dismissed as inaccurate. “I will be digging in more today,” Musk responded.

    It continued when the daughter of Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson, whose provocative critiques of “politically correct” culture and feminism are popular with some right-wing activists, appealed for Musk to restore her father’s account after a tweet about transgender actor Elliot Page that apparently ran afoul of Twitter’s rules on hateful conduct.

    “Anyone suspended for minor & dubious reasons will be freed from Twitter jail,” Musk pledged. He had months earlier said in reference to Peterson that Twitter was “going way too far in squashing dissenting opinions.”

    One of Musk’s first big moves was an open letter to advertisers — Twitter’s chief revenue source — promising that he would not let Twitter descend into a “free-for-all hellscape” as he follows through with his plans to promote free speech on the platform. And he’s suggesting asking users to pay $8 for a coveted verified blue check mark as a way to diversify revenue.

    The check mark has been criticized as a symbol of elitism on the platform. But its primary purpose has been to verify that accounts in the public eye — such as politicians, brands and journalists — are who they say they are. It’s been a tool to prevent impersonation and help stem the flow of misinformation.

    But some still have their worries about Musk opening the platform to a flood of online toxicity that’s bad for their brands. General Motors has said it will suspend advertising on Twitter as it monitors the platform under Musk, and others are facing pressure to review their own plans. On Tuesday, more than three dozen advocacy organizations sent an open letter to Twitter’s top 20 advertisers, calling on them to commit to halting advertising on the platform if Twitter under Musk undermines “brand safety” and guts content moderation.

    Over the weekend, the billionaire posted — then deleted — an article that contained baseless rumors about the attack on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband. And much of his commentary in recent days has been a response to appeals from conservative voices.

    In a text exchange with The Associated Press, Mark Finchem, the Republican running to become Arizona’s secretary of state, said his access to the platform was restored quickly after reaching out to Musk via his personal Twitter handle. Asked why his account was suspended, Finchem said: “Perhaps you should reach out to Elon Musk. We were banned for an unknown reason, we reached out to him and 45 minutes later we were reinstated.”

    Finchem, who questions the results of the 2020 presidential election and was at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, has drawn national attention for his statements about election security and his ability to change election rules if he wins the state’s top election post next week.

    Musk tweeted Monday evening that he was “Looking into it” in response to a complaint about Finchem’s apparent suspension. The complaint came from attorney Jenna Ellis, who was a legal adviser to former President Donald Trump’s campaign. About 40 minutes later, Finchem posted a “test” tweet on his account, which was followed by a lengthier post thanking Musk for restoring his ability to use the site.

    “Thank you @elonmusk for stopping the commie who suspended me from Twitter a week before the election,” Finchem wrote in the Tweet. “Twitter is much better with you at the helm.”

    Jared Holt, a senior research manager at The Institute for Strategic Dialogue, said big social media companies have typically operated on the whims of their owners. But “that problem is especially glaring when somebody like Elon Musk takes the reins and kind of establishes himself as king of the platform, rather than an owner trying to run a coherent business,” Holt said.

    At the same time, Musk has sent mixed signals about his intentions. Despite overt examples of appealing to conservative calls and complaints about Twitter’s policies, there’s also plenty of evidence that the platform’s policies on combating misinformation are still in effect. Separately, Musk has defended Twitter’s ongoing head of trust and safety, Yoel Roth, after some conservative users called for his firing over past comments expressing liberal views.

    Roth remained on the job this week after other top executives were fired or resigned. And apart from Musk, he appeared to be the chief public voice of Twitter’s content moderation, explaining that the company spent the weekend working to remove a “surge in hateful conduct” following Musk’s takeover.

    “We’ve all made some questionable tweets, me more than most, but I want to be clear that I support Yoel,” Musk tweeted in response to a complaint from another conservative commentator. “My sense is that he has high integrity, and we are all entitled to our political beliefs.”

    Some longtime Twitter observers have expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of Musk’s planned content moderation council. In part, that’s because Twitter already has a trust and safety advisory council to address moderation questions.

    “Truly I can’t imagine how it would differ,” said Danielle Citron, a University of Virginia law professor who sits on the council and has been working with Twitter since 2009 to tackle online harms, such as threats and stalking. “Our council has the full spectrum of views on free speech.”

    Citron said she’s still waiting to hear if the council will be having its next meeting, scheduled for the day after the midterms.

    ——-

    O’Brien reported from Providence, Rhode Island.. AP Writer Bob Christie in Phoenix contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The last American venture capitalist in Beijing: Here are the strategic miscalculations undermining America’s technology competition with China

    The last American venture capitalist in Beijing: Here are the strategic miscalculations undermining America’s technology competition with China

    [ad_1]

    On Oct. 10, the Biden administration announced a series of sanctions aimed at cutting off the flow of American talent and equipment to the Chinese semiconductor industry. The policy marked a significant departure from the administration’s initial forays which targeted extending American leadership in the industry via funding grants, such as the $100 billion CHIPS and Science Act.

    The latest actions make clear that the U.S. feels it must couple defensive and offensive action to “maintain as large of a lead as possible” over China, as National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan described. What is becoming clear, however, is that the Americans have already lost the initiative in many core technology-enabled areas.

    Since 2017, the U.S. government has pursued a strategic “decoupling” whereby American economic and technological systems were to be disentangled from China. Many of the resulting sanctions, especially on the Chinese tech industry, foreshadowed those now being taken against Russia.

    Putin’s descent into global pariah status has been a long time coming–yet the effectiveness of these sanctions has revealed the unintended consequences of sanctions against China. As one of the last American VCs in China and the son of the U.S. Air Force pilot who flew Henry Kissinger to Beijing, I have seen firsthand the nuance of our relationship.

    To be clear, the U.S.-China relationship has significant tensions. Nevertheless, China is not Russia.

    To start, decoupling pushed China further towards technological self-sufficiency, illuminating China’s technological vulnerabilities and providing a window to bridge these gaps. The effectiveness of future sanctions will be muted compared to those now being taken against Russia. This divergence will not only be a result of the size and sophistication of the Chinese economy–but also because America gave China years of lead time to prepare.

    Sanctions on Russia were significantly strengthened precisely because America still controls Russia’s digital rails (operating systems and app stores). America’s decoupling policy needlessly made China fully aware of these vulnerabilities, spurring the Chinese to protect themselves and ultimately extend their commercial and political influence. 

    In the field of semiconductors, human talent, private and public capital, and regulatory support mobilized en masse are enabling China to leap rungs on the evolutionary ladder of chip development. A recent report claims SMIC took just two years to leap from 14 nm to 7 nm–faster than TSMC and Samsung, without the most advanced production equipment.

    The history of U.S. unilateral hardware sanctions against the Chinese is not pretty. In the 1990s, we decided to cut China’s access to US-built satellites. Other nations rushed to fill the market gap. Today, China consumes roughly 40% of the world’s chips. The Dutch, Koreans, and others will loathe abandoning this market to align with US sanctions. A former senior National Security Council official recently told me that even typical China hawks such as Japan and India were questioning the logic of the recent American action, which could actually trigger a rush from other nations to design-out U.S. products as quickly as possible, so as to not fall within the sanctions guidelines. The net effect here is clear “self-harm,” as a senior former NSC official told me this week.

    Sanctions on China have also impacted America’s ability to win hearts, minds, and wallets globally. Decoupling actually encouraged Chinese dominance in other battleground markets by forcing Chinese tech to take ownership over app stores, hardware, and operating systems that were historicaly ceded to the Americans.

    In 2019, Google forcibly removed its operating system and app store from Huawei phones after the United States Department of Commerce added the Chinese company to its trade restriction list. By 2020, Huawei announced it would use its internally built HarmonyOS on all of its hardware and would look to replace Google Play Store with its own AppGallery.

    Once American-controlled app stores are removed from emerging market phones, Chinese companies can pre-load or provide exclusive access to Chinese applications, rather than their American competitors. Imagine a Huawei, Xiaomi, Oppo, Vivo, or Techno user in Africa only able to access Didi ride-hailing affiliates instead of Uber, Alipay mobile payment partners instead of PayPal, Shein affiliated e-commerce platforms instead of Amazon, TikTok instead of Facebook, Youku instead of YouTube, iQiyi instead of Netflix, etc. Chinese companies control 78% of the African feature phone market and provide almost 70% of Africa’s 4G networks. A significant segment of the African market now uses mobile interfaces that could potentially box out American-built applications. Aside from Samsung, there is no global handset (be it a smartphone or feature phone) alternative to the Chinese-built hardware.

    Growing Chinese tech independence has also transformed U.S.-China competition across the globe. In an era where goodwill and economic ties scale exponentially through digital connectivity, decoupling hinders America’s strategic relationship with countries and global consumers, as it forces them into a binary decision on technology partnerships. Goaded by America to choose sides, many key emerging markets may elect to work with China.

    To understand the growing power of Chinese competition, look no further than TikTok. Since it entered the American market, TikTok has exploded as the dominant both social and entertainment platform. In 2021, Americans spent an average of 25.6 hours a month on TikTok. This dwarfs the average time spent by Americans on TikTok’s competitors: Facebook (16.1 hours) and Instagram (7.7 hours). Only YouTube came close at 22.6 hours a month. Who has Netflix cited as amongst their most formidable competition in a letter to shareholders? TikTok. While TikTok and Netflix deliver different products, they are competing for the same thing: your attention. Time (or to be more specific, screen time) is finite. Netflix has a $10 billion production budget. TikTok’s users generate its content for free. The more time users spend on TikTok, the less there is available for other forms of socializing or entertainment.

    TikTok isn’t just a threat to traditional American social media, entertainment, and news platforms. Google’s two-decade unchallenged dominance as a search engine is eroding, as TikTok’s native search capabilities become the go-to hub for GenZ. The company is now expanding into e-commerce and logistics, threatening American giants like Amazon. 

    The real cost of miscalculating

    TikTok’s growing dominance is emblematic of the advantage that Chinese tech has over its American counterparts in the global competition for users. The dominance of Chinese models isn’t driven just by rock-bottom production costs. Core technology innovation is what drives it, particularly as it relates to TikTok’s highly addictive algorithmic recommendation engine.

    In 2018, I hosted a dinner party between Peter Thiel and Zhang Yiming, the Founder of Tiktok’s parent company Bytedance. When our Chinese interlocutors questioned Thiel about Facebook’s lack of recent innovation, he pointed to a content partnership with Major League Baseball. Zhang laughed. After years of being told Chinese tech was only capable of copying American giants, this moment must have felt vindicating. It was probably as gratifying for Zhang as when Facebook’s TikTok knock-off called Lasso (where Thiel was previously a board member) sputtered and crashed in just under two years.

    American tech giants have effectively been walled off from competition since the mid-2000s. Their near-monopoly position–and the rent-seeking it once enabled–has made them complacent.

    Chinese tech can now challenge Silicon Valley in an increasing number of areas. Models popularized in the Chinese market are a challenge for U.S. tech, particularly in emerging markets. There are hundreds of other Chinese-built, funded, or inspired applications that share TikTok’s voracious ability to latch onto the minds and wallets of consumers. In addition to TikTok, e-commerce platforms such as Shein and AliExpress, short-form video app Kuaishou, and various gaming companies owned by Tencent (like Fortnite) have a combined global customer base on a scale of billions.

    American policy towards China shouldn’t turn into a self-defeating prophecy. We are not locked in a zero-sum dynamic. As the two largest economies and strategic powers in the world, America and China still have much to gain through cooperation.

    There is no path to solving the great global challenges of our time (reversing climate change, pandemic management, nuclear disarmament, avoiding global financial crisis) without China’s direct collaboration. If Russia was to resort to using tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine, no other nation could play a more pivotal role in staving off World War III than China. Decoupling is a poor policy choice for addressing these myriad and complex tensions.

    Worst of all, the loss of China as a market and increased zero-sum competition with China will reduce economic opportunities for American companies and dim American growth prospects. We will miss globalization when it’s gone.

    Ben Harburg is the managing partner of the global investment firm MSA Capital.

    The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

    More must-read commentary published by Fortune:

    [ad_2]

    Ben Harburg

    Source link

  • Musk emerging as Twitter’s chief moderator ahead of midterms

    Musk emerging as Twitter’s chief moderator ahead of midterms

    [ad_1]

    AP Business Writers — Days after taking over Twitter and a week before the U.S. midterm elections, billionaire Elon Musk has positioned himself as moderator-in-chief of one of the most important social media platforms in American politics.

    Musk has said he won’t make major decisions about content or restoring banned accounts before setting up a “content moderation council” with diverse viewpoints. But his own behavior as a prolific tweeter has signaled otherwise.

    He’s engaged directly with figures on the political right who are appealing for looser restrictions, including a Republican candidate for Arizona secretary of state who credits Musk with enabling him to begin tweeting again after his account was briefly suspended Monday.

    Musk even changed his profile to “Twitter Complaint Hotline Operator” — with a photo of himself when he was a toddler holding a telephone. But it is almost impossible for those outside of Twitter to know what strings he is pulling or whose accounts have been suspended: The company has stopped responding to media questions, except for the few that Musk answers by tweet.

    Musk’s promised interventions started last week on his first full day as Twitter’s owner. A conservative political podcaster shared examples of the platform allegedly favoring liberals and secretively downgrading conservative voices — a common criticism that Twitter’s previous leaders dismissed as inaccurate. “I will be digging in more today,” Musk responded.

    It continued when the daughter of Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson, whose provocative critiques of “politically correct” culture and feminism are popular with some right-wing activists, appealed for Musk to restore her father’s account after a tweet about transgender actor Elliot Page that apparently ran afoul of Twitter’s rules on hateful conduct.

    “Anyone suspended for minor & dubious reasons will be freed from Twitter jail,” Musk pledged. He had months earlier said in reference to Peterson that Twitter was “going way too far in squashing dissenting opinions.”

    One of Musk’s first big moves was an open letter to advertisers — Twitter’s chief revenue source — promising that he would not let Twitter descend into a “free-for-all hellscape” as he follows through with his plans to promote free speech on the platform. And he’s suggesting asking users to pay $8 for a coveted verified blue check mark as a way to diversify revenue.

    The check mark has been criticized as a symbol of elitism on the platform. But its primary purpose has been to verify that accounts in the public eye — such as politicians, brands and journalists — are who they say they are. It’s been a tool to prevent impersonation and help stem the flow of misinformation.

    But some still have their worries about Musk opening the platform to a flood of online toxicity that’s bad for their brands. General Motors has said it will suspend advertising on Twitter as it monitors the platform under Musk, and others are facing pressure to review their own plans. On Tuesday, more than three dozen advocacy organizations sent an open letter to Twitter’s top 20 advertisers, calling on them to commit to halting advertising on the platform if Twitter under Musk undermines “brand safety” and guts content moderation.

    Over the weekend, the billionaire posted — then deleted — an article that contained baseless rumors about the attack on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband. And much of his commentary in recent days has been a response to appeals from conservative voices.

    In a text exchange with The Associated Press, Mark Finchem, the Republican running to become Arizona’s secretary of state, said his access to the platform was restored quickly after reaching out to Musk via his personal Twitter handle. Asked why his account was suspended, Finchem said: “Perhaps you should reach out to Elon Musk. We were banned for an unknown reason, we reached out to him and 45 minutes later we were reinstated.”

    Finchem, who questions the results of the 2020 presidential election and was at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, has drawn national attention for his statements about election security and his ability to change election rules if he wins the state’s top election post next week.

    Musk tweeted Monday evening that he was “Looking into it” in response to a complaint about Finchem’s apparent suspension. The complaint came from attorney Jenna Ellis, who was a legal adviser to former President Donald Trump’s campaign. About 40 minutes later, Finchem posted a “test” tweet on his account, which was followed by a lengthier post thanking Musk for restoring his ability to use the site.

    “Thank you @elonmusk for stopping the commie who suspended me from Twitter a week before the election,” Finchem wrote in the Tweet. “Twitter is much better with you at the helm.”

    Jared Holt, a senior research manager at The Institute for Strategic Dialogue, said big social media companies have typically operated on the whims of their owners. But “that problem is especially glaring when somebody like Elon Musk takes the reins and kind of establishes himself as king of the platform, rather than an owner trying to run a coherent business,” Holt said.

    At the same time, Musk has sent mixed signals about his intentions. Despite overt examples of appealing to conservative calls and complaints about Twitter’s policies, there’s also plenty of evidence that the platform’s policies on combating misinformation are still in effect. Separately, Musk has defended Twitter’s ongoing head of trust and safety, Yoel Roth, after some conservative users called for his firing over past comments expressing liberal views.

    Roth remained on the job this week after other top executives were fired or resigned. And apart from Musk, he appeared to be the chief public voice of Twitter’s content moderation, explaining that the company spent the weekend working to remove a “surge in hateful conduct” following Musk’s takeover.

    “We’ve all made some questionable tweets, me more than most, but I want to be clear that I support Yoel,” Musk tweeted in response to a complaint from another conservative commentator. “My sense is that he has high integrity, and we are all entitled to our political beliefs.”

    Some longtime Twitter observers have expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of Musk’s planned content moderation council. In part, that’s because Twitter already has a trust and safety advisory council to address moderation questions.

    “Truly I can’t imagine how it would differ,” said Danielle Citron, a University of Virginia law professor who sits on the council and has been working with Twitter since 2009 to tackle online harms, such as threats and stalking. “Our council has the full spectrum of views on free speech.”

    Citron said she’s still waiting to hear if the council will be having its next meeting, scheduled for the day after the midterms.

    ——-

    O’Brien reported from Providence, Rhode Island.. AP Writer Bob Christie in Phoenix contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Workers flee China’s biggest iPhone factory over Covid outbreak | CNN Business

    Workers flee China’s biggest iPhone factory over Covid outbreak | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New Delhi
    CNN Business
     — 

    Foxconn, one of Apple’s largest suppliers, is wrestling with major disruption at its biggest iPhone assembly factory in China, as anxious workers reportedly flee the locked-down facility, according to social media videos.

    The Taiwanese company is racing to control a Covid outbreak at its campus in the central Chinese city of Zhengzhou.

    The exodus is putting a tremendous strain on Foxconn just before the key holiday shopping season begins and highlights how the country’s stringent zero-Covid policy is hurting international business.

    “[We] fully understand your eagerness to go back home,” Foxconn told its employees over the weekend, according to a post on Zhengzhou government’s official WeChat account.

    “For employees who voluntarily stay in the company’s factory area, the port government and the company will jointly ensure everyone’s…health and safety,” it added.

    Analysts said the chaos at Zhengzhou could jeopardize Apple and Foxconn’s output in the coming weeks. Ivan Lam, senior research analyst at Counterpoint, estimated that between 10% and 30% of iPhone 14 production could be affected in the near term if the situation did not stabilize.

    The Zhengzhou campus is the world’s biggest iPhone factory and typically accounts for as much as 85% of iPhone assembly capacity, according to Lam’s estimates.

    A Foxconn spokesperson told Chinese state media that the company is trying to boost production at other sites.

    “At present, because now is the peak production season… [there is] a large demand for workers,” a Foxconn spokesperson told Henan Daily on Monday, adding that the company was “also coordinating back-up production capacity at other sites.”

    Foxconn and Apple did not respond to a request for comment from CNN.

    Shares in Foxconn, also known as Hon Hai Precision Industry, fell 2.6% on Tuesday.

    Videos of many people leaving Zhengzhou on foot have gone viral on Chinese social media in recent days. The city, which has a population of more than 12 million, imposed sweeping lockdown measures earlier last month after identifying dozens of Covid-19 cases.

    State media has said that many Foxconn workers are among those walking miles to escape the city. Calling it a “helpless move for some employees,” a Foxconn manager told media outlet Yicai that workers are panicking over the spread of the virus at the factory and lack of access to official information.

    Foxconn said it was organizing vehicles for employees wishing to return home, according to a post on Zhengzhou government’s official WeChat account over the weekend.

    The company has also quadrupled daily bonuses for workers at the plant this month, it said in a post on its official WeChat account on Tuesday.

    While these disruptions will impact iPhone production in the near term, analysts say it may not dent Apple’s iPhone shipments in the key holiday season.

    “I think in one to two weeks, things will get back to normal, given the current status,” Lam said.

    “They still have a lot of alternative production sites,” he said, adding that Foxconn had already begun shifting production to other facilities in China, such as in the southern province of Guangdong. “Things are under control now.”

    And, as Beijing shows few signs of moving away from its rigid Covid policies, Apple has started to boost production in other countries, including India, to reduce its dependence on China.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Democrats Keep Falling for ‘Superstar Losers’

    Democrats Keep Falling for ‘Superstar Losers’

    [ad_1]

    In the early 2000s, the Japanese racehorse Haru Urara became something of an international celebrity. This was not because of her prowess on the track. Just the opposite: Haru Urara had never won a race. She was famous not for winning but for losing. And the longer her losing streak stretched, the more famous she grew. She finished her career with a perversely pristine record: zero wins, 113 losses.

    American politics doesn’t have anyone quite like Haru Urara. But it does have Beto O’Rourke and Stacey Abrams. The two Democrats are among the country’s best known political figures, better known than almost any sitting governor or U.S. senator. And they have become so well known not by winning big elections but by losing them.

    Both Abrams and O’Rourke have won some elections, but their name recognition far surpasses their electoral accomplishments. After serving 10 years in the Georgia House of Representatives, Abrams rose to prominence in 2018, when she ran unsuccessfully for the governorship. O’Rourke served three terms as a Texas congressman before running unsuccessfully for the Senate, then the presidency. And they are both running again this year, Abrams for governor of Georgia, O’Rourke for governor of Texas. They are perhaps the two greatest exponents of a peculiar phenomenon in American politics: that of the superstar loser.

    The country’s electoral history is littered with superstar losers of one sort or another. Sarah Palin parlayed a vice-presidential nomination into a political-commentary gig, a book deal, and a series of short-lived reality-TV ventures. The landslide defeats that Barry Goldwater and George McGovern suffered made them into ideological icons. I’m talking about something a little more specific: candidates who become national stars in the course of losing a state-level race. There have been far fewer of these. There was William Jennings Bryan, who lost a race for the Senate in 1894, then ran unsuccessfully for the presidency three times. And there was the greatest of all the superstar losers, the one-term representative from Illinois whose unsuccessful Senate campaign nonetheless propelled him to the presidency two years later: Abraham Lincoln.

    But never before has such small-scale loserdom so often been sufficient to achieve such large-scale stardom. Apart from Abrams and O’Rourke, there have also been other examples in recent years. Jaime Harrison made an unsuccessful bid for the DNC chairmanship, then an unsuccessful bid to unseat Lindsey Graham in South Carolina, and then a second bid, this time successful, for the DNC chairmanship. MJ Hegar, a Texas Democrat, lost a close House race in 2018, then a not-so-close Texas Senate race in 2020. Amy McGrath likewise used a close loss for a House seat, hers in Kentucky, to launch a Senate campaign against Mitch McConnell that ended in a 20-point loss. This, it seems, is the golden age of the superstar loser.

    Superstar loserdom has not been historically tracked, so it’s hard to say with certainty whether it’s really on the rise. But the general sense among the experts I spoke with was that it is. “I do think it is something that we’ve seen more of,” John Pitney, a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College, told me. Why, exactly, is a complicated question, the answer to which involves various conspiring forces, some technological, some political, some demographic.

    Let’s start with Lincoln. His 1858 Senate race against Stephen Douglas produced some of the most celebrated rhetoric in American political history, but without the advent of shorthand, stenographers could not have taken down the hours-long Lincoln-Douglas debates word-for-word. Without the country’s new railroad and telegraph networks, those transcripts could not have been transmitted all across the country.

    “Earlier in the century, Lincoln couldn’t possibly have become a national figure,” Pitney told me. “He might have made the same brilliant arguments, but nobody outside of Illinois would have ever heard them.” In that sense, his superstar loserdom—and his eventual ascent to the presidency—must be credited as much to the technological advances of the preceding decades as to the power of his speeches.

    The same might be said of today’s superstar losers. Online fundraising platforms such as ActBlue and WinRed give even state-level candidates the ability to draw support from—and build a following among—donors all across the country, a phenomenon that David Karpf, a political scientist at George Washington University, told me has nationalized local and state races.

    Candidates also have other tools to thrust themselves into the spotlight in a way they never have before—cable TV, podcasts, social media. Both Abrams and O’Rourke are skilled at using social media, and he in particular is a master of the viral moment (see his interruption of a press conference that Governor Greg Abbott held after the Uvalde shooting or his recent outburst at a heckler). Even when the campaign ends, no one can stop you from posting. Unlike a generation ago, “there are lots of avenues in the media today for former candidates to keep having their views known and to continue to be a spokesperson,” Seth Masket, a political scientist at the University of Denver, told me. (Neither the Abrams campaign nor the O’Rourke campaign agreed to an interview for this story.)

    It would be wrong, though, to chalk up the staying power of superstar losers entirely to their social-media dexterity or telegenic appeal. In the end, “politics is a lot of What have you done for me lately?” Julia Azari, a political scientist at Marquette University, told me. And both Abrams and O’Rourke are also top-notch party builders. O’Rourke may not have secured a Senate seat in 2018, Azari said, but he has been credited with helping Democrats pick up seats in the Texas statehouse. Abrams, meanwhile, has founded an organization to protect voting rights and raised millions of dollars to organize and register voters. Largely as a result, she has been hailed as the driving force behind Democrats’ 2020 success in Georgia. “Anyone can tweet,” Azari said. “But the two of them behind the scenes, I think, have actually walked the walk and helped other people win, helped other people develop their campaign apparatus.”

    Even though Abrams and O’Rourke have been helpful to their party, the golden age of superstar loserdom is closely tied to our current era of what Azari has called “weak parties and strong partisanship.” For one thing, vilification of the opposition allows challengers to especially despised candidates to quickly become household names. Even in extreme-long-shot races, donors have shown a willingness to pour vast amounts of money into these boondoggles. McGrath burned $90 million on the way to her 20-point loss. Harrison raised $130 million in his Senate race and fared only slightly better. In his contest against Ted Cruz, O’Rourke raised $80 million, including $38 million in a single quarter, the most of any Senate candidate in history—all to no avail.

    Whether because they outperform expectations or because of what they’re up against, these candidates and their supporters are then able to frame the losses as moral victories. Sometimes, as for Abrams supporters, that means framing a defeat as the outcome of an unjust system. Other times, as for O’Rourke supporters, that means framing an unexpectedly good performance in an unfavorable state as a sign of things to come. This, perhaps, is one reason superstar loserdom has so far skewed Democratic, political scientists told me: Democrats desperately want to take advantage of some red states that have been trending purple. Or perhaps the disparity is a product of our post-Trumpian moment. Or perhaps something else entirely.

    For now, polls suggest that things are not looking great for either O’Rourke or Abrams. Superstar-loser status, it seems, does not convert easily into electoral wins. Still, this is likely far from the end of superstar loserdom. Both Abrams and O’Rourke emerged during the 2018 midterms cycle, when Democratic voters energized by opposition to Donald Trump turned out in large numbers to break Republicans’ stranglehold on Congress. This year, Republican voters energized by opposition to Joe Biden will probably turn out in large numbers to break Democrats’ majority in Congress. This election could produce Republicans’ answer to Abrams and O’Rourke. But John James, the Michigan conservative who has made two failed bids for the Senate and was the one contemporary Republican superstar loser political scientists mentioned to me, seems poised to win his congressional race this year.

    A meaningful defeat may be the most Abrams and O’Rourke can hope for: not so much superstar losers as losers with legacies. But losers have a special utility. Winners have to deal with the unglamorous minutiae of actual governance. They have to figure out how to translate campaign promises into concrete policies. They make mistakes, and people get disillusioned, and approval ratings decline. Losers are spared these indignities. Politically speaking, they don’t survive long enough to let anyone down. Unsullied by compromise, losers can be made into lodestars. Look at Goldwater or McGovern. Everyone, it turns out, can get behind a lost cause.

    [ad_2]

    Jacob Stern

    Source link

  • Elon Musk now owns Twitter. Here’s what he could change | CNN Business

    Elon Musk now owns Twitter. Here’s what he could change | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN Business
     — 

    After spending months attempting to get out of his deal to buy Twitter, Elon Musk officially owns the hugely influential platform. Now the question is: What will he actually do with it?

    Musk’s takeover — which was finalized Thursday night, a source familiar with the matter told CNN — not only has the potential to create upheaval for Twitter

    (TWTR)
    employees but also for the hundreds of millions of people around the world who use the platform daily. It could also impact the upcoming US midterm elections, if Musk makes good on his promise to restore the accounts of users who were previously banned from the platform, most notably former US President Donald Trump, and limit the company’s content restrictions.

    In the first weeks after agreeing to buy the company in April, and before his initial move to bail on the deal, Musk repeatedly stressed that his goal was to bolster “free speech” on the platform and work to “unlock” Twitter’s “extraordinary potential.” The Tesla CEO suggested he would rethink Twitter’s approach to content moderation and permanent bans, with potential impacts on civil discourse and the political landscape. He also talked about his desire to rid the platform of bots, even as he later made the number of bots central to his argument to abandon the deal.

    During Tesla

    (TSLA)
    ’s earnings call last week, Musk acknowledged that although finalizing the $44 billion deal meant “overpaying” for the social media firm, “the long-term potential for Twitter, in my view, is an order of magnitude greater than its current value.” He added that he believes Twitter has “languished for a long time, but has an incredible potential.”

    Musk’s plans for boosting Twitter’s value could involve cutting down its workforce, something he’s hinted at before. Previous reporting suggested that he’d planned to cut 75% of staff, although he is said to have told Twitter staff this week that’s not the case. Either way, anxieties are running high. Musk immediately fired CEO Parag Agrawal, CFO Ned Segal and policy head Vijaya Gadde.

    In private and public statements over the past six months, Musk has tossed out a wide range of other possible changes for the platform, from enabling end-to-end encryption for Twitter’s direct messaging feature to suggesting this week that Twitter become part of an “everything” app called X, possibly in the style of popular Chinese app WeChat.

    There have been more far-fetched suggestions, too. In one text exchange with his brother Kimbal Musk, revealed last week in court documents, the two appeared to discuss the possibility of asking users to pay for each tweet they post with small amounts of the cryptocurrency DogeCoin.

    Now that Musk has completed the deal, some of those theoretical changes could soon become reality. Here’s what users should know:

    For years under former CEO and co-founder Jack Dorsey, Twitter emphasized its work to bolster “healthy conversations.” The company banned many accounts promoting abuse and spam, added labels for false or misleading information, and banned the misgendering of transgender people.

    Under Musk’s ownership, Twitter could unwind steps taken to make the platform more palatable for its most vulnerable users, typically women, members of the LGBTQ community and people of color, according to safety experts.

    Musk has said Twitter, under his leadership, would have more lenient content moderation policies. “If in doubt, let the speech exist,” Musk said in one on-stage interview in April. “If it’s a gray area, I would say, let the tweet exist. But obviously in the case where there’s perhaps a lot of controversy, you would not necessarily want to promote that tweet.”

    Musk on Thursday sought to reassure advertisers that he doesn’t plan to turn the platform into a “free-for-all hellscape” despite his promises to reduce content moderation. The remarks follow questions about whether advertisers might leave the platform for fear of their paid posts ending up alongside potentially objectionable content.

    “In addition to adhering to the laws of the land, our platform must be warm and welcoming to all, where you can choose your desired experience according to your preferences,” he said in an open letter posted to Twitter. Allowing all legal speech may not be so straight forward — content rules vary across the world and, in Europe, the new Digital Services Act imposes high moderation standards.

    Musk has also said he wants to make Twitter’s algorithm open source and make it more transparent to users when, for example, a tweet has been emphasized or demoted in their feed. (Leaders at Twitter have previously expressed support for moving in that direction, and the company often makes clear when it is demoting certain tweets or types of content.)

    But the most striking early change could come from who is and is not allowed on a Musk-owned Twitter.

    Musk has said he thinks Twitter should be more “reluctant to delete things” and “very cautious with permanent bans.” That could mean a long list of controversial far right figures and conspiracy theorists, among others, soon find their way back on the platform.

    Musk, for his part, has focused on bringing back one of Twitter’s most prominent former users: Trump.

    “I do think it was not correct to ban Donald Trump, I think that was a mistake,” Musk said in May. “I would reverse the perma-ban. … But my opinion, and Jack Dorsey, I want to be clear, shares this opinion, is that we should not have perma-bans.”

    Dorsey tweeted following Musk’s May remarks that he does “agree” there shouldn’t be permanent bans on Twitter users. “There are exceptions … but generally permanent bans are a failure of ours and don’t work,” he said.

    Trump has said he does not want to rejoin Twitter and will instead remain on his own social media platform, Truth Social.

    But if Trump were to accept a Musk offer to return to Twitter, it could restore a significant following he hasn’t had since being banned from the platform in January 2021, just as the 2024 US Presidential race ramps up. On Truth Social, Trump has only 4 million followers; on Twitter, he reached an audience of more than 88 million followers.

    Another notable change is simply who may be making these sensitive decisions.

    Musk has a mixed reputation in the tech industry. He is undoubtedly one of the most ambitious and successful innovators and entrepreneurs of this era. But he has also courted controversy, often from his own Twitter profile, where he has more than 100 million followers.

    Over the years, Musk has used Twitter to make misleading claims about the Covid-19 pandemic, to make a baseless accusation that a man who helped rescue children from a cave in Thailand was a sexual predator, to mock people who display their gender pronouns on the platform, and to make countless jokes involving the numbers 420 and 69. He has also tweeted a (since deleted) photo comparing Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to Adolf Hitler and has compared the now-ousted Agrawal to Joseph Stalin.

    Musk also previously sought to remove a Twitter account dedicated to tracking the movements of his private jet by offering to pay off the college freshman running the account (the account owner declined).

    The same day he sent his letter to Twitter attempting to revive the deal, Musk was widely panned for comments he made on the platform about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. He suggested making Crimea, a region Russia invaded and annexed from Ukraine in 2014, “formally part of Russia.” Most followers responded “no” to his poll and Ukraine’s Ambassador to Germany Andrij Melnyk replied in a tweet: “F— off is my very diplomatic reply to you.” In a followup tweet, an apparently frustrated Musk seemed to blame the results of his poll on a “bot attack.”

    Until now, Twitter has, at least to some extent, been accountable for its policy decisions to advertisers, shareholders and its board. But those guardrails won’t necessarily exist under Musk’s leadership.

    [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

  • Retail banking trends to look out for in 2023

    Retail banking trends to look out for in 2023

    [ad_1]

    ITMs and VTMs are popular retail banking innovations among community banks.

    What’s on the horizon for retail banking? We spoke with two community banks that have ramped up their services to meet—and exceed—the changing expectations of customers.

    By William Atkinson


    According to a new report from PwC titled “Retail Banking 2025 and Beyond” (see sidebar), the retail banking industry is undergoing tremendous change—but, of course, community bankers already know that.

    “A few years ago, it was a fairly straightforward business, but today, technology and innovation, increasing competition, regulatory complexity, embedded finance, consolidation and evolving customer expectations are placing immense pressure on traditional business models,” the report said.

    This intricate and evolving web of trends influences who consumers trust and how they prefer to conduct their financial lives. It also forces banks to address the fundamental question of what a financial institution is—and what value it provides.

    So how are retail banks meeting this challenge?

    Community banks are constantly looking to the future and identifying what customers want. One such bank is $1.7 billion-asset One Community Bank (OCB) in Oregon, Wis. It has introduced a plethora of new retail banking initiatives in the past couple of years, including online account opening for anyone in the state of Wisconsin. The community bank offers a variety of deposit offerings through its online account platform, which can easily be accessed from its website.

    “We do thousands of video banker transactions every year. Clients appreciate the longer hours and the convenience of not needing to leave their cars but still being able to get service with a personal touch.”
    —Jeff Versluys, One Community Bank

    “Importantly, as we have created and launched new promotional products with preferred rates, we have made those products available in the online platform,” says Jeff Versluys, executive vice president and chief retail officer for OCB. The initiative is working. “The number of accounts that have been opened via this new channel has significantly exceeded our expectations.”

    In addition, several of OCB’s locations in Dane County boast interactive teller machines (ITMs). Most are outside in the drive-thrus, but its new Middleton bank, which is situated in a walking community, has an ITM in the entry vestibule that’s accessible after hours.

    “These can be used as ATMs but also offer video banker service,” Versluys says. “We do thousands of video banker transactions every year. Clients appreciate the longer hours and the convenience of not needing to leave their cars but still being able to get service with a personal touch.”

    More VTMs to benefit customers

    Gorham Savings Bank in Gorham, Maine, has also found that upgrading its teller machines has enhanced customers’ banking experience. By expanding its video teller machine (VTM) fleet, it efficiently provides extended banking hours to customers. “Every branch location now has a VTM, and we have added a terminal at a coffee shop in a community where we don’t have a branch, to add convenience for our customers,” says Dan Hancock, chief deposit officer.

    The $1.5 billion-asset community bank piloted its VTM initiative several years ago, and it has expanded significantly over the past year.

    “The primary objective was to extend banking hours for our customers,” Hancock says. “Our VTMs are open from 7:30 a.m. until 6 p.m. Monday through Friday, and the addition of the offsite terminal has helped to fill in a gap in our service area, giving our customers added convenience.”

    By hiring a digital engagement specialist to help customers make the best use of mobile and digital services, Gorham Savings has increased the use of these products.

    Overall, customer reaction to the community bank’s many initiatives has been positive. “We have seen an increase in mobile and digital usage, like other banks,” Hancock says, “but these initiatives have helped expand that engagement from balance inquiries and funds transfers to more complex needs like money management and managing debit card security.

    “In addition,” he continues, “our offsite VTM has become one of our busiest terminals, so customers have appreciated being able to conduct their banking with a video teller instead of driving to a branch, and because they are speaking to a live person, the experience is more personal than using an ATM.”

    Reaching customers

    Of course, successful retail banking requires more than just technology. Earlier this year, OCB introduced its Colleague Banking Initiative (CBI). “We don’t take it for granted that a colleague will choose to do their banking with OCB,” Versluys says. “Many do bank with us, of course. However, to increase the number of colleagues who are also clients, we decided to educate and incentivize. As a result, we have been able to increase the percentage of ‘colleague/clients’ by 20%.”

    “During COVID, we [built] a resource team that could connect customers with community resources to help them with a wide range of needs. We are now in the process of building out this knowledge and skill set in our branch teams.”
    —Dan Hancock, Gorham Savings Bank

    To achieve this, the community bank employed multiple strategies. First, it offered incentives to both new colleague/clients and those colleagues who were already customers before the initiative. The incentives included one PTO day for the current year and every year that the colleague remains a client, as well as drawings for $100 gift cards. Second, OCB created a dedicated CBI support team to help colleagues with banking questions, open new accounts and protect the privacy of their information. Third, it conducted multiple town hall live video sessions to help spread the word on CBI and answer questions.

    As always, financial education plays a key role in deepening customer relationships. It’s an important focus for Gorham Savings Bank, which provides its customers with access to tools and resources to help them improve their financial wellness.

    This began with its launch of Personal Finance, a software program that helps customers budget, track spending and manage savings goals. “We then expanded that by hiring a financial wellness coach to provide more personalized advice and guidance,” Hancock says. “During COVID, we expanded that approach by building a resource team that could connect customers with community resources to help them with a wide range of needs. We are now in the process of building out this knowledge and skill set in our branch teams.”

    Expanding availability

    Recently, Gorham Savings Bank began offering Smart Start, a Bank On-certified checking account to provide everyone in its community with access to safe and affordable banking.

    “Part of our mission as a bank is to promote financial wellness, and we felt a responsibility to help our customers through challenging times,” says Hancock. “Since then, inflation has had a big impact, and being able to provide tools and advice to help customers adjust their budgets has been helpful.”


    Retail banking of the future

    Both One Community Bank (OCB) in Oregon, Wis., and Gorham Savings Bank in Gorham, Maine, have done a lot to expand their retail banking efforts, but they also have plans for the future.

    “In keeping with our vision, which is to be ‘the Best Billion-Dollar Bank in the World,’ we must keep innovating to best serve our clients,” says Jeff Versluys, executive vice president and chief retail officer for OCB. “That means we’re looking at things like expanding the use of ITMs and enhancements to our core banking systems, including our online and mobile platforms. We want to continually make our client-facing systems easier to use and feature-rich.”

    OCB is a big believer in developing the digital technologies that will serve its clients, but it also believes physical locations matter. “Earlier this year, we opened a new branch in Middleton, Wis.,” Versluys says. “We are actively looking at additional communities in Dane County and hope to have another new bank to open in 2023. In the future, we also will consider expanding into other parts of the state.”

    For Gorham Savings Bank, one area of future interest is new partnerships. “We are continuing to explore relationships with fintechs, especially as it relates to fraud prevention and providing more value to our customers,” says chief deposit officer Dan Hancock.


    Looking even further into the future

    For community bank leadership teams, now is the time to better understand upcoming retail banking trends and prepare for a rapidly changing environment. A 2022 PwC report, “Retail Banking 2025 and Beyond,” cites an “urgent call to action” for retail banks. It points to three priority areas where banks should act immediately and proactively to adapt: tech-powered transformation, data-enabled customer focus and broad-based trust.

    PwC’s analysis suggests several possibilities for how the next decade could unfold. According to the report, “Now is the time to consider radical future-facing scenarios to prepare to build the capabilities and resilience that will be necessary to thrive in tomorrow’s far more dynamic environment.”


    William Atkinson is a writer in Illinois.

    [ad_2]

    Lauri Loveridge

    Source link

  • Rebeca Romero Rainey: Navigating the digital movement

    Rebeca Romero Rainey: Navigating the digital movement

    [ad_1]

    Photo by Chris Williams

    “The habits of our customers change, and we’re constantly walking beside them, transforming our services to meet their needs.”

    Digital transformation. Those words have been bandied about with increasing fervor, fueled by a heightened sense of urgency. Yet, while the digital movement has increased pace, it’s more of an evolution than a revolution.

    When I think about this concept of “going digital” in our industry, I’m struck by the fact that it involves continual change over time. The habits of our customers change, and we’re constantly walking beside them, transforming our services to meet their needs. It’s never been about being on the bleeding edge or doing what everyone else is doing, but about better addressing the interests of our distinct communities.

    And in today’s shifting landscape, it’s more important than ever to make sure we’re evaluating our offerings with blinders off. How honestly are we assessing our products and services? How are we ensuring our channels and tools are meeting customer needs? If we’re still updating our technology plans once every three years like we’ve always done, is that enough?

    While these questions are challenging, there is information surrounding us that can help shed light on the right responses. For example, consider your transaction volume: How are payments clearing today versus three to five years ago and why? Or listen at account opening: What questions are being raised relative to your products? Also consider your customer service center, teller insights and other channels: What inquiries are coming through? What are customers asking for at the frontline?

    map pin

    Where I’ll Be

    I’ll be in our D.C. offices, hosting our colleagues. We’ll first welcome new state association executives for dialogue around shared goals, and later in the month, our Preferred Service Providers will join us for discussions and networking.

    These findings will give you greater insights into where technology is meeting needs and where you may need to shift to meet new digital expectations. When and how you do this depends on your audience. Customers are transforming at different paces, so analyzing the steps you can take to have the greatest impact will enable you to be strategic in product planning and create efficiencies for your bank in the process.

    So, as you read this issue, I encourage you to think of the articles as resources in your digital evolution. In addition, ICBA Bancard has produced a digital transformation white paper and workbook to guide community banks more specifically in their evaluation process of digital payments and strategies. These tools are available to ICBA members and can be downloaded on our website.

    No matter what approach you take, now’s the time to make sure you’re considering what’s next for your customers’ digital journey. Shifting your tech plans and processes to keep pace with the changing environment will guarantee that you can support customers in new ways, maintaining the same level of service they seek and expect.


    Rebeca Romero Rainey
    President and CEO, ICBA
    Connect with Rebeca @romerorainey

    [ad_2]

    Lauri Loveridge

    Source link