Tag: labels’
Nutrition Labels: Decoding Food Packaging
Nutrition Labels: Decoding Food Packaging
Plaion reportedly consolidating its gaming labels, plans for layoffs
Twitter starts putting labels on tweets with restricted reach
It should now be easier to deduce whether Twitter has restricted the visibility of a tweet over a possible violation of the company’s hateful conduct policy. Twitter has started applying a label to tweets that it believes breaks those rules, as it recently pledged to do.
When Twitter detects a tweet that may violate the policy, it will limit the reach of the post and apply a label that reads “Visibility limited: this tweet may violate Twitter’s rules against hateful conduct.” The company plans to expand the labels to include more types of policy violations in the coming months.
🚫Censorship
🚫Shadowbanning
✅Freedom of speech, not reach.Our new labels are now live. https://t.co/a0nTyPSZWY
— Twitter Safety (@TwitterSafety) April 24, 2023
Twitter says it may limit the visibility of rulebreaking tweets by excluding them from search results, as well as from the For You and Following timelines. Such tweets may be downranked in replies and it may not be possibly to reply to them, retweet them, bookmark them or pin them to profiles.
Twitter noted that it may incorrectly label a tweet as one that violates its rules, so the authors of such tweets can effectively appeal the decision by providing feedback. However, the company said it may not acknowledge the feedback or restore the tweet’s typical reach.
The company is taking a looser approach to moderation under current owner Elon Musk as it has adopted a “Freedom of Speech, not Freedom of Reach” philosophy. For instance, it quietly updated the hateful conduct policy this month to lift a ban on misgendering and deadnaming transgender people.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/twitter-starts-putting-labels-on-tweets-with-restricted-reach-201509292.html?src=rss
After NPR left the platform, Twitter removed all ‘government-funded media’ labels
Twitter has removed labels describing certain media outlets as “government funded” or “state affiliated,” after falsely implying they were government propaganda machines.
Fierce backlash from editorially independent media outlets like NPR and the BBC ensued after Elon Musk’s Twitter inaccurately classified them as controlled by their governments. But after the organizations were forced to prove their independence and combat the threat of public mistrust, it all seems to be a moot point since the labels no longer exist.
Earlier this April, Twitter added a label to NPR’s Twitter page describing it as “US state-affiliated media,” which Twitter defined as “outlets where the state controls editorial content through funding or political pressure,” per Gizmodo. The label put NPR in the same category as China’s Xinhua News and Russia’s RT and Sputnik which are widely considered to be government-controlled propaganda machines.
Following an email exchange with NPR reporter Bobby Allyn who told Twitter CEO Elon Musk that NPR only receives one percent of government funding, Musk changed the label to “Government Funded Media.” The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), and Voice of America also had the new “Government Funded” label, despite also being editorially independent.
The slightly different semantic classification was still unacceptable for NPR, and it left the platform. Efforts to “tarnish the independence of any public media institution are exceptionally harmful and set a dangerous precedent,” said NPR CEO John Lansing.
But now, after all that, Musk has decided to drop media labels altogether. “This was Walter Isaacson’s suggestion,” Musk told NPR’s Allyn in an exchange. Isaacson, an author and journalist who wrote Steve Jobs’ biography is working on a biography of Musk.
And that’s probably as much of an explanation as we’ll ever get.
Twitter removes ‘government-funded’ news labels after NPR and other flubs
After weeks of truly stupid antics, Twitter has removed “government-funded media” labels on all accounts, from NPR to the Chinese state-affiliated Xinhua News. Twitter even appears to have deleted its web page explaining the “government-funded media” labels. This whole saga started when Twitter labeled NPR as “state-affiliated,” a designation that Twitter reserves for publications where […]
Twitter removes ‘government-funded’ news labels after NPR and other flubs by Amanda Silberling originally published on TechCrunch
An AI-generated song featuring The Weeknd and Drake went viral. Now music labels are scrambling
Record labels demand streaming providers block AI music scraping
Universal Music Group wants music streaming platforms like Apple Music and Spotify to block AI services from scraping melodies and lyrics. The group, representing about one-third of the record industry, says AI companies like OpenAI are training their algorithms on its artists’ intellectual property without authorization or compensation.
Music Labels Win Legal Battle Against Youtube-dl’s Hosting Provider
“YouTube-DL’s services have enabled users to stream rip and download copyrighted music without paying. The Hamburg Regional Court’s decision builds on a precedent already set in Germany and underscores once again that hosting stream-ripping software of this type is illegal. “We continue to work globally to address the problem of stream ripping, which is draining revenue from those who invest in and create music,” Moore adds. Interestingly, the open source youtube-dl code remains available on the Microsoft-owned developer platform GitHub. Whether the music companies have any plans to target the problem at this source is unknown.
Uberspace’s legal representative German Society for Civil Rights (GFF) informs TorrentFreak that the decision doesn’t come as a total surprise since the court already declared YouTube’s “rolling cipher” to be an effective technical protection measure in an earlier case. That said, the defense believes that the order, which effectively amounts to a blanket ban on youtube-dl, failed to take the software’s potentially legitimate uses into account. In addition, GFF believes that the court’s decision severely restricts the hosting provider’s freedom to operate. “If web hosts have to delete an entire website on demand of the rightsholders even in complex situations with no legal precedent, this poses a threat to the business model of web hosts and ultimately to the free flow of information on the Internet.” Uberspace says it will appeal the judgement and GFF is confident the hosting provider will ultimately prevail.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.