Twitter’s campaign to foster healthier conversations on its platform with the aid of academics is itself facing an allegation of anti-Trump bias.
In a blog post Thursday Twitter announced that it is working with experts to measure “healthy conversation” on the platform. A six-strong-group of academics will analyze “echo chambers” that form around political discussions on Twitter and “incivility and intolerance” on the microblogging site.
“In the context of growing political polarization, the spread of misinformation, and increases in incivility and intolerance, it is clear that if we are going to effectively evaluate and address some of the most difficult challenges arising on social media, academic researchers and tech companies will need to work together much more closely,” said Dr. Rebekah Tromble, assistant professor of political science at Holland’s Leiden University in a statement. “This initiative presents an important and promising opportunity for Twitter and our team of researchers to share expertise and work on solutions together.”
However, a number of the academic’s previous tweets have been highly critical of the Trump administration.
Apparently no amount of boot licking guarantees Trump's loyalty. #ScaramucciOut
— Rebekah Tromble (@RebekahKTromble) July 31, 2017
Trump quintupled down on his commitment to white nationalists. They're just about all he's got left. Bannon ain't goin nowhere. https://t.co/qkg7mKx7vw
— Rebekah Tromble (@RebekahKTromble) August 16, 2017
Gross negligence by Congressional Republicans. Putting party before country. It's despicable. #resist https://t.co/7jh1pKEmfE
— Rebekah Tromble (@RebekahKTromble) February 14, 2017
Trump on protests that killed 0: Crack down! Bring them to their knees!
Trump on radical-right slaying of 6 Muslims: <crickets>#resist
— Rebekah Tromble (@RebekahKTromble) February 2, 2017
This is the Trump Team. Every last one of them. From top to bottom. https://t.co/TBQyriUNYM
— Rebekah Tromble (@RebekahKTromble) July 13, 2017
Dr. Patricia Rossini and Dr. Jennifer Stromer-Galley of Syracuse University are also involved in the project. Both academics have also slammed Trump on Twitter.
Why Donald Trump when you can Trump Donald? pic.twitter.com/ELweBl5oL5 https://t.co/4fggKBIBr1 #TrumpDonald
— Patrícia Rossini, PhD (@patyrossini) January 30, 2017
https://twitter.com/patyrossini/status/756313474054094848
https://twitter.com/patyrossini/status/756325233632616456
Trump's proposed budget includes cutting Corporation for Public Broadcasting — the best source for news out there. Of course. #smallhands
— Jenny Stromer-Galley (@profjsg) March 16, 2017
Trump looks cruelty in the face and demands more of it. Time's cover captures that well. https://t.co/E3VJWudELd. The executive order is not a solution. Constant vigilance is still needed.
— Jenny Stromer-Galley (@profjsg) June 21, 2018
Science says: Low informed voters go for Trump. https://t.co/bQMXYGAR0r #election360
— Jenny Stromer-Galley (@profjsg) November 8, 2016
Another researcher involved in the project, Dr. Nava Tintarev of Delft University of Technology in Holland, has also attacked Trump on Twitter. – READ MORE
[divider][/divider]Twitter’s censorship problem looks like it’s here to stay.
The company faced a sharp backlash last week after a Vice News investigation revealed that Twitter was hiding several prominent Republicans from its search bar.
At the center of the company’s censorship problem is its decision to penalize “bad-faith actors,” who aren’t actually in violation of any rules but still threaten “healthy conversation.”
Much the sorting between good and bad actors on Twitter is done by an algorithm which takes into account criteria like whom you follow and tweet at, and who follows and tweets at you.
Twitter didn’t penalize the congressmen because of anything they said, but because the “wrong” accounts were engaging with their tweets, two Twitter executives conceded in a blog post Thursday. The Republicans were guilty of being followed by the wrong people.
The company is still burying accounts it deems “bad-faith actors,” while remaining opaque about who does or doesn’t fit that classification — and which accounts follow or retweet you are still part of the criteria.
Twitter, which once described itself as the “free speech wing of the free speech party,” has aggressively stepped up its speech policing in other ways.
The company in June acquired Smyte, a tech company whose specialties include fighting cyberbullying, “hate speech” and trolling. Twitter’s third-party partners include the Southern Poverty Law Center, a left-wing nonprofit known for labeling pedestrian conservative organizations as “hate groups.” – READ MORE
[give_form id=”79809″] [contentcards url=”http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2018/07/31/twitter-brings-in-anti-trump-academics-to-combat-bias.html” target=”_blank”]