Twitter moves to actively seek out terrorist supporters

[rooster59]

Twitter moves to actively seek out terrorist supporters

TAMI ABDOLLAH, Associated Press


WASHINGTON (AP) — Twitter is now using spam-fighting technology to seek out accounts that might be promoting terrorist activity and is examining other accounts related to those flagged for possible removal, the company announced Friday.

The move signaled efforts by Twitter to automatically identify tweets supporting terrorism, reflecting increased pressure placed by the U.S. government for social media companies to respond to abuse more proactively. Child pornography has previously been the only abuse that was automatically flagged for human review on social media, using a different kind of technology that sources a database of known images.

Twitter also said Friday it has suspended more than 125,000 accounts for threatening or promoting terrorist acts, mainly related to Islamic State militants, in the last eight months. Social media has increasingly become a tool for recruitment and radicalization that's used by the Islamic State group and its supporters, who by some reports have sent tens of thousands of tweets per day.

Tech companies are dedicating increasingly more resources to tracking reports of violent threats. Twitter said Friday that it has increased the size of its team reviewing reports to reduce their response time "significantly." The San Francisco-based company also changed its policy in April, adding language to make clear that "threatening or promoting terrorism" specifically counted as abusive behavior and violated its terms of use.

In January, the White House made good on President Barack Obama's promise to reach out to Silicon Valley to tackle the use of social media by violent extremist groups. Those particularly include the Islamic State group, which inspired attackers who killed 14 in San Bernardino, California, last December.

A post on one of the killers' Facebook pages that appeared around the time of the attack included a pledge of allegiance to the leader of the Islamic State group.

Facebook found the post — which was under an alias — the day after the attack. The company removed the profile from public view and informed law enforcement. But such a proactive effort is fairly uncommon.

The Obama administration sent several top officials to San Jose, California, including FBI Director James Comey, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and National Security Agency Director Mike Rogers.

Among issues discussed was how to use technology to help speed the identification of "terrorist content," according to a copy of the White House briefing memo obtained by The Associated Press.

"We recognize that identifying terrorist content that violates terms of service is far more difficult than identifying images of child pornography, but is there a way to use technology to quickly identify terrorist content? For example, are there technologies used for the prevention of spam that could be useful?" the memo stated.

Since late 2015, Twitter began using "proprietary spam-fighting tools" to find accounts that might be violating their terms of service by promoting terrorism, sending them to be reviewed by a team at Twitter. That group also now looks into other accounts similar to those reported to them by other users.

Twitter said it has already had seen results, "including an increase in account suspensions and this type of activity shifting off of Twitter."

But it also noted that there is no "magic algorithm" for identifying terrorist content, which is why even humans reviewing the material are ultimately making judgment calls "based on very limited information and guidance." Free speech and local law in an area can also complicate matters.

"Like most people around the world, we are horrified by the atrocities perpetrated by extremist groups. We condemn the use of Twitter to promote terrorism," Twitter said in a statement released Friday. It said it would continue to "engage with authorities and other relevant organizations to find solutions to this critical issue and promote powerful counter-speech narratives."

-- (c) Associated Press 2016-01-06

[ezzra]

Here's one company that take it's civil and morals responsibilities seriously, and look beyond

the Monterey gains only.... many more, many more should emulate them....

[klauskunkel]

shouldn't that piece of news have been kept quiet? As in: don't tell the terrorists, or they won't use Twitter and then there will be less intel...

[Steely Dan]

I wonder whether any of our esteemed members may be affected? After all support for terrorism comes in various guises, believing in an extreme ideology being one, but arguably the use of universal equivalence is another in suggesting all ideologies or cultures are equally good or bad gives succor to the worst.

[Scott]

Off-topic post and reply removed.

[Grouse]

Twitter should be applauded

I hope other "social media" outfits follow suit.

No doubt GCHQ are doing astonishing things in the background also

[Morch]

shouldn't that piece of news have been kept quiet? As in: don't tell the terrorists, or they won't use Twitter and then there will be less intel...

No way such a policy would go unnoticed, so officially keeping it under wraps would be useless.

There's a lot to be said in favor of allowing intel targets a venue (or even creating it), but Twitter is just too big and mainstream (as far as social media goes).

The terrorists gain more by using it then the intel value represented by monitoring traffic.

In the same way, news items regarding certain social media tools being encrypted to a degree that surveillance is problematic, should be taken with a grain of salt.

[arjunadawn]

I wonder whether any of our esteemed members may be affected? After all support for terrorism comes in various guises, believing in an extreme ideology being one, but arguably the use of universal equivalence is another in suggesting all ideologies or cultures are equally good or bad gives succor to the worst.

I do not have the answer, only an observation. Its clear that some mechanism must be employed to filter such ideology from the social space but my concern is on the backside, the upstream end of this- where Twitter and other derive their sense of threat. We can all agree that something needs to be done but do we all agree or even consider the mechanisms of the data points that are used to determine what constitutes terror or its assistance? I ask because the current US administration has consistently downplayed the actual and immediate threat and over the years has instead elevated what constitutes aiding terrorism to some very dubious areas; in fact, much of it looks very domestic. Journalists cried foul not long ago in the US when it was realized that under legislation they too could be considered aiding and abetting simply by association related to their work, contacts, interviews. This issue was never cleared up. Also, the US administration has consistently been broadening the term "terrorism" in the US to have now nearly lost meaning.

As the current administration currently pushes once more to broaden this definition to include all manner of opposing "right" thinking there should be oversight and agreement as to what constitutes the threats we are really trying to tamp down. Its unquestionably a step in the right direction but without citizen oversight, its a slippery slope.

Edit: Once a practice like this is employed and proven beneficial it only takes crisis or pretext to broaden its application. This is my concern.

[Steely Dan]

I wonder whether any of our esteemed members may be affected? After all support for terrorism comes in various guises, believing in an extreme ideology being one, but arguably the use of universal equivalence is another in suggesting all ideologies or cultures are equally good or bad gives succor to the worst.

I do not have the answer, only an observation. Its clear that some mechanism must be employed to filter such ideology from the social space but my concern is on the backside, the upstream end of this- where Twitter and other derive their sense of threat. We can all agree that something needs to be done but do we all agree or even consider the mechanisms of the data points that are used to determine what constitutes terror or its assistance? I ask because the current US administration has consistently downplayed the actual and immediate threat and over the years has instead elevated what constitutes aiding terrorism to some very dubious areas; in fact, much of it looks very domestic. Journalists cried foul not long ago in the US when it was realized that under legislation they too could be considered aiding and abetting simply by association related to their work, contacts, interviews. This issue was never cleared up. Also, the US administration has consistently been broadening the term "terrorism" in the US to have now nearly lost meaning.

As the current administration currently pushes once more to broaden this definition to include all manner of opposing "right" thinking there should be oversight and agreement as to what constitutes the threats we are really trying to tamp down. Its unquestionably a step in the right direction but without citizen oversight, its a slippery slope.

Edit: Once a practice like this is employed and proven beneficial it only takes crisis or pretext to broaden its application. This is my concern.

A very good well thought out post indeed. Long before the Internet things were far simpler. The consensus view from both left and right was that ones own culture was superior to others in every way. My Country right or wrong is an alien concept now to the left. What constitutes terrorism, or indeed treason was far clearer say sixty years ago. Unfortunately moral equivalence has become so widespread it is difficult to say where this ends and treason begins, even within the top strata of government. Little point censoring Twitter if those who rule us have no clear view as to what side they are on.