Twitter is instituting a user-based "jury" type system of moderation

[Dennis Donovan]

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/twitter-launches-birdwatch-forum-combat-misinformation-n1255552

Jan. 25, 2021, 12:56 PM EST
By Ben Collins and Brandy Zadrozny

Twitter unveiled a feature Monday meant to bolster its efforts to combat misinformation and disinformation by tapping users in a fashion similar to Wikipedia to flag potentially misleading tweets.

The new system allows users to discuss and provide context to tweets they believe are misleading or false. The project, titled Birdwatch, is a standalone section of Twitter that will at first only be available to a small set of users, largely on a first-come, first-served basis. Priority will not be provided to high-profile people or traditional fact-checkers, but users will have to use an account tied to a real phone number and email address.

“Birdwatch allows people to identify information in Tweets they believe is misleading or false, and write notes that provide informative context," Twitter Vice President of Product Keith Coleman wrote in a press release. "We believe this approach has the potential to respond quickly when misleading information spreads, adding context that people trust and find valuable."

While Birdwatch will initially be cordoned off to a separate section of Twitter, the company said “eventually we aim to make notes visible directly on Tweets for the global Twitter audience, when there is consensus from a broad and diverse set of contributors.”

-/snip-

[WhiskeyGrinder]

1. Lmaooooooo this is super meta.

Twitter has already shown how effective relying on the crowd is. Anything to avoid accountability and protect minority voices, I guess.

[DonaldsRump]

2. Sounds like they're copying DU!

I think the jury system on DU is generally fabulous. It really keeps the discussions on point without getting kooky or vitriolic or spammy etc. And it's democratic, in both senses of the word!

[Squinch]

3. I think it's great when the participants are of good faith. It didn't work very well

at Discussionist. Mouth breathers made quick work of taking over that site through the jury system.

[DonaldsRump]

5. Fair enough. I don't really contribute to a forum besides DU

so perhaps you're right: DUers are a wonderful bunch, and perhaps that's why this forum works so well.

(PS: what's a mouthbreather? )

[Squinch]

7. Lol. It's like a knuckle dragger. In this usage, it's a right wing imbecile.

[DonaldsRump]

8. Got it!

Not many of those on DU!

[greenjar_01]

4. Horrible

Jury system moderation is the absolute worst. Easily gamed by bad actors, and a relinquishment of responsibility by owners/management.

Terrible idea.

[BGBD]

6. This is going to

get really nazi really quickly...

I'm going to predict that this is a massive failure and never makes it to full deployment. Seriously, nazis are going to get in these comments and it's going to get bad.

[nykym]

9. I have a bad feeling about this Indy

Priority will not be provided to high-profile people or traditional fact-checkers,
but users will have to use an account tied to a real phone number and email address.

Do they have protections in place for those on the jury?

[Hermit-The-Prog]

10. See also, slashdot.