Archive for the ‘Media Control’ Category

Catherine Deveney: Today’s unregulated ‘monster’ social media is rampaging out of control – Press and Journal

How fascinating when times gone by, seemingly so distant from our own, are suddenly linked to us by the unchanging threads of human nature.

1816. A rainy afternoon in Geneva. The poet, Shelley, and his wife Mary are with Lord Byron. Trapped indoors by the weather, they start writing and telling horror stories. It is Mary who pens the tale that endures into the 21st Century, a story that was a forerunner of contemporary science fiction and the inspiration for countless films: Frankenstein.

Mary Shelleys story is part of our literary heritage, yet is often misunderstood. Frankenstein is not the monster but the creator of the unnamed creature of the tale. Ironically, this creature is, at first, more humane than his hapless creator. Vulnerable and longing for acceptance, he unleashes anger only when shunned by Frankenstein. At the storys heart is the notion that we are morally responsible for what we create. How pertinent that is when applied to the modern-day monster that social media has become.

Long before Donald Trump used and abused social media to manipulate the American election (I won! I won!), or to incite violence at Capitol Hill, former executives of the giant platforms Google, Twitter, Facebook had recognised that the unregulated monster their word was rampaging out of control. In Netflixs 2020 docu-drama, The Social Dilemma, it was even described as an existential threat to humanity.

This was not the foot soldiers talking. This was the commanders: presidents, CEOs, ethicists, engineers. People who, at work, used algorithms to predict the ways in which users would click, click, click on the right buttons, but who fell victim to the technology at home, click, click, clicking themselves, despite understanding exactly the manipulations at play. We understood it consciously and we did it anyway, confessed Sean Parker, former president of Facebook. Your psychology is used against you, warned Tristan Harris, a former design ethicist at Google.

The problem is that the services we think are free are not. Funded by advertisers, they are worth trillions of dollars. For that investment, advertisers want a return. We think we choose what we do. In reality, our invisible strings are being pulled. We dance to someone elses tune without even hearing the music. Every action you take is being carefully monitored, says former Twitter executive, Jeff Seibert. What you look at; how long you look at it.

Its not just the economic implications that are frightening; its the societal consequences as Donald Trump illustrates. Selfies on Instagram, where kind commentators affirm your beauty and unkind ones criticise your sticky-out ears, have changed the psyches of a generation. In the first decade of this century, the suicide rate among 15-19-year-old girls increased by 70%. In the 10-14 age group, it soared by 151%. Chillingly, the executives admitted that many industry insiders restrict their childrens computer access and ban social media accounts.

This is not simply about being enticed to buy or sell or like or comment. It is about controlling information, manipulating truth. We have access to more information than ever before, but perhaps we also have less clarity. We absorb fake news as if its reality, says Tristan Harris. We have less and less control over who we are and what we believe.

Enter Donald Trump. Before his latest escapades, the executives described wealth being used to confuse and polarise communities, to destabilise Kenya, or cause democracy to crumble in the Philippines. But America? If we cant agree what is true, said Harris, or even that such a thing as truth exists, humanity is lost. What worried executives most? The answer was stark. Civil war. How prescient that was!

The Victor Frankensteins of social media have finally frozen Trumps accounts. There is always a societal tightrope between freedom and responsibility, but it is one we need to walk. In the New York Times, American journalist Jennifer Senior brilliantly outlined Trumps malignant narcissism and recounted how an administration official described him as a total monster. But now Trump is threatening to create his own social media platform: one lawless creature begets another.

On that rainy Geneva afternoon, Mary Shelley could have had no idea how relevant her story would be 200 years later.

The thread between her time and ours is the notion of humans as creative beings, inventive and resourceful but flawed.

Creativity without responsibility, invention without ethics, is a disaster for mankind. The sad creature of Shelleys tale only hinted at what we now have: the true stuff of nightmares.

Continued here:
Catherine Deveney: Today's unregulated 'monster' social media is rampaging out of control - Press and Journal

About 6,000 Amazon warehouse workers to vote on a union – Business Insider – Business Insider

About 6,000 Amazon warehouse workers in Alabama will vote on forming the first union in the e-commerce giant's history, according to a new petition filed with the National Labor Relations Board.

The petition, filed by the Retail, Wholesale, and Department Store Union, is asking to represent the approximately 6,000 employees who work at Amazon's facility in Bessemer, Alabama. Workers, whether they wish to be represented by the union or not, will receive their ballots on February 8. Voters must return their ballots by March 29. Ballot counting will be held on a video conferencing platform and will begin on March 30.

Read more: Over 600 Amazon warehouse workers at 148 facilities could have gotten COVID-19, but total numbers are hard to determine because Amazon hasn't been telling its warehouse workers about all cases, multiple employees say

Eligibility extends to all sorts of positions, such as lead fulfillment associate and temporary warehouse associates, but excludes all truck drivers, professional employees, and engineers, as well as others. Anyone who has worked an average of at least four hours a week in the past 13 weeks is eligible to vote.

According to the petition, the Retail, Wholesale, and Department Store Union requested in November to represent about 1,500 employees until Amazon asked for that pool to expand and cover 6,000 employees.

In a statement to Insider, Amazon spokesperson Heather Knox said the company works "hard to support our teams and more than 90% of associates at our Bessemer site say they would recommend Amazon as a good place to work to their friends. We don't believe the RDWSU represents the majority of our employees' views. Our employees choose to work at Amazon because we offer some of the best jobs available everywhere we hire, and we encourage anyone to compare our total compensation package, health benefits, and workplace environment to any other company with similar jobs."

Representatives for the BAmazon Union did not immediately respond to Insider's requests for comment.

The employees will vote via mail, which Amazon fought against, pushing instead for an in-person vote held in a parking lot adjacent to the facility, the petition noted. Amazon also wanted to use the company's Distance Assistant and other company-owned equipment to conduct the election, which the petitioner said could cause a conflict of interest.

Read more: Leaked memo shows Amazon is warning employees to 'be vigilant' around their safety as far-right threats to blow up data centers emerge after Parler ban

The petition signals the start of a large labor battle. As the Washington Post notes, union voting usually involves dozens or hundreds of workers this involves nearly 6,000.

Amazon has historically been a staunch opponent of its workers unionizing. The firm listed, but quickly removed, a job opening in 2020 for an analyst that would monitor employee's efforts to organize.

A Motherboard report from September found that Amazon had been using a tool to monitor dozens of private and public social media groups to find drivers that were organizing strikes or protests. And in November, reports surfaced that Amazon had hired detectives with the infamous Pinkerton spy agency to monitor European workers' labor union organizing efforts.

See original here:
About 6,000 Amazon warehouse workers to vote on a union - Business Insider - Business Insider

Review: Logitechs Circle View Doorbell with HomeKit Secure Video is ready to rule the roost – 9to5Mac

The HomeKit doorbell scene has finally grown wings and one of the most compelling options is Logitechs new Circle View Doorbell. Its got a sharp and simple design, HomeKit Secure Video support, face recognition, and an impressive price point particularly if youre willing to handle the installation yourself. Join along for our full review of this Logitech HomeKit doorbell, the first true consumer option with HKSV.

The Logitech Circle View Doorbell launch was a very welcome surprise back in December with HomeKit Secure Video support and a solid price of $199. The only other doorbell on the market with HomeKit Secure Video (HKSV) at the time of writing is the Robin ProLine but thats really more of a commercial product with pricing around $600.

The Netatmo Smart Video Doorbell, Yobi B3 (review), and Arlo smart doorbells feature HomeKit but include compromises like no HKSV. With a competitive price, HKSV, and features like face recognition, I think the Logitech Circle View is positioned to own the smart doorbell market among Apple users, heres why

Note: before buying the Logitech Circle View Doorbell, make sure to use the compatibility checker to confirm it will work in your home.

This Logitech HomeKit doorbell is made with a high-quality plastic build with a clean and minimal black design and features a glass faceplate on the front. I think it will look good on the front porch of almost any style of home.

The camera lens sits up top, the integrated LED sits in the middle, with an illuminated ring doorbell button at the bottom.

The backside has the HomeKit code and two pins that connect the doorbell to the standard or angled mount with the hardwiring of your existing (or new) doorbell setup.

Theres a double rubber seal around the edge of the doorbell to keep rain and snow out and the microphone, speaker, and microUSB (used for the set up process) at the bottom.

As mentioned above, youll want to make certain the Logitech Circle View Doorbell will work with your existing wired doorbell setup before buying it. You can do that here. Otherwise you may need a to do full rewire/doorbell setup and/or hire an electrician.

I would say if youve done even some minor electrical work around your home like replacing switches, outlets, light fixtures, youll probably feel comfortable installing this HomeKit doorbell yourself. Otherwise, Logitech offers pro installation for $100 ($299 total).

Your mileage may vary, but I think most self-installers should be able to do this in around 30-60 minutes.

Heres a look at everything included in the box with the Logitech HomeKit doorbell:

On the setup card shown above, you get a link to detailed installation instructions as well as a second HomeKit code for your doorbell.

Logitech has done nice job with the web instructions, here are the main steps:

The one thing I didnt see explicit direction on was how your existing wiring secures to the back of the Logitech mounting plate (unless I missed it somehow). Essentially its just a pressure activated wiring harness that you push your wires into.

Heres a look at the options when setting up this HomeKit Secure Video-enabled doorbell:

Youve got control over how streaming and recording works, whether youd like to use face recognition, and more.

You can opt to use HomePod as your doorbell chime, your actual chime, or both. You also get a motion sensor and light sensor that you can use to create Home app automations.

Ive been using the Logitech HomeKit doorbell for a couple of weeks now and its been consistently reliable with good picture quality.

If you opt to use the face recognition it works via access to the Photos app and/or you can the unidentified recent visitors that will show up in the Settings of the Logitech Circle View Doorbell in the Home app. This makes it easy to add or hide less frequent visitors.

In addition to live face recognition in the Home app for iPhone, iPad, Mac, and Apple TV, HomePod also gives an audio announcement of the people that are recognize at your doorstep.

Heres a look at picture quality and more:

I do have our porch lights come on each night as part of a HomeKit automation but the integrated LED in the Logitech Circle View is quite bright and offers good visibility even if your porch doesnt have other lighting.

Its easy to view past recordings with the calendar integration at the top of the Logitech Doorbell viewer in the Home app (shown above). With HomeKit Secure Video you can have 1 camera set up if you have at least a 200GB iCloud storage plan, or 5 if you have the 2TB plan. That offers a 10-day recording history that actually doesnt eat up any of your iCloud storage. Another great benefit of HKSV is end-to-end encryption for all your video recordings.

If you havent used HomeKit Secure Video before, its seamless to set activity zones to dial in what triggers alerts. This is also where you can add names to unidentified faces, control the Night Vision Light, and more.

The one thing that I would offer some constructive criticism on would be the camera resolution. It would have been awesome to have seen something higher than the 1200 x 1600 HD (3:4 portrait) thats included here. I dont think its a deal-breaker at all, the Robin ProLine features just 720p, and the Netatmo and Yobi B3 have 1080p (with 9:16 portrait orientation).

But I think Logitech could have really set the Circle View Doorbell even further apart from the competition with 1500 x 2000 or higher.

All in all, I think this Logitech HomeKit doorbell is the best option on the market for Apple users. Youre getting nicely designed hardware, HomeKit Secure Video and all the features it brings, a good HD resolution with HDR and night vision all at a very competitive price of $199.

For comparison, the commercial-esque Robin ProLine models that offer HKSV run around $500-700. Netatmos Smart Video Doorbell sells for $299 and it lacks HKSV. The Yobi B3 sometimes can be found under $200 but like Netatmo, no HKSV and same thing for Arlos wired video doorbell. If youre willing to forgo HKSV, Arlos wired version may be the one tempting HomeKit doorbell at around $100.

If youve been waiting for a compelling HomeKit doorbell experience to upgrade from your dumb doorbell or a non-HomeKit smart doorbell, I think the Logitech Circle View Doorbell is definitely worth picking up. You can find it direct from Logitech as well as at Apple.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Check out 9to5Mac on YouTube for more Apple news:

Go here to see the original:
Review: Logitechs Circle View Doorbell with HomeKit Secure Video is ready to rule the roost - 9to5Mac

A Co-Founder of The Intercept Says She Was Fired for Airing Concerns – The New York Times

The documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras said in an open letter published on Thursday that she had been fired by First Look Media for publicly criticizing how the company reacted to its failure to protect the identity of an anonymous source who is now in prison.

The source, Reality Winner, was working as a linguist for the National Security Agency when she provided top secret government documents to The Intercept, an investigative website owned by First Look Media that was founded by Ms. Poitras and the journalists Glenn Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill.

Ms. Winner was arrested on June 3, 2017, two days before The Intercept published an article based on material she had provided headlined Top-Secret N.S.A. Report Details Russian Hacking Effort Days Before 2016 Election. She was sentenced to more than five years in federal prison in 2018.

Betsy Reed, the editor in chief of The Intercept, conceded in a July 2017 note to readers that the publication had not done enough to protect Ms. Winners identity.

In the open letter, Ms. Poitras said the company had not responded to the fallout from the story with sufficient transparency.

Ms. Poitras left The Intercept in 2016 but continued to work on film projects and consult for First Look Media until her firing on Nov. 30. She accused the company of retaliating for her criticisms of the company in an interview with The New York Timess media columnist, Ben Smith.

In that interview, Ms. Poitras faulted First Look Medias investigations for its own failure to give sufficient protection to Ms. Winner and accused the company of engaging in a cover-up and a betrayal of core values.

She returned to that criticism in the letter, which she posted Thursday on the website of her production company, Praxis Films.

Instead of conducting an honest, independent and transparent assessment with meaningful consequences, First Look Media fired me for speaking out, exposing the gulf between the organizations purported values and its practice, she wrote.

Ms. Poitras added that the focus of her criticism was not that a source was exposed journalists make mistakes, sometimes with serious consequences, she wrote but that the publications investigations into its handling of the Winner story were inadequate.

First Look Media disputed Ms. Poitrass account, saying it had declined to renew her contract because she was working on projects outside the company. It also has defended its investigations.

We did not renew Laura Poitrass independent contractor agreement because, despite our financial arrangement, she has not been active in any capacity with our company for more than two years, First Look Media said in a statement. This is simply not a tenable situation for us or any company. For this and only this reason, her contract was not renewed in 2021. Any implication that our decision was based on her speaking to the press is false.

The Intercept was started in 2014, with funding from the eBay founder Pierre Omidyar, after Ms. Poitras and Mr. Greenwald published blockbuster reports on National Security Agency secrets leaked by Edward J. Snowden. Their work earned the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service, and Ms. Poitras won an Academy Award for best documentary feature for Citizenfour, the 2014 film she directed on Mr. Snowden.

Mr. Greenwald left The Intercept in October, claiming an article he had written on Joseph R. Biden and his son Hunter had been censored by his editors, an accusation the publication denied.

Read the original here:
A Co-Founder of The Intercept Says She Was Fired for Airing Concerns - The New York Times

Facebook and Twitter Face International Scrutiny After Trump Ban – The New York Times

LONDON In Sri Lanka and Myanmar, Facebook kept up posts that it had been warned contributed to violence. In India, activists have urged the company to combat posts by political figures targeting Muslims. And in Ethiopia, groups pleaded for the social network to block hate speech after hundreds were killed in ethnic violence inflamed by social media.

The offline troubles that rocked the country are fully visible on the online space, activists, civil society groups and journalists in Ethiopia wrote in an open letter last year.

For years, Facebook and Twitter have largely rebuffed calls to remove hate speech or other comments made by public figures and government officials that civil society groups and activists said risked inciting violence. The companies stuck to policies, driven by American ideals of free speech, that give such figures more leeway to use their platforms to communicate.

But last week, Facebook and Twitter cut off President Trump from their platforms for inciting a crowd that attacked the U.S. Capitol. Those decisions have angered human rights groups and activists, who are now urging the companies to apply their policies evenly, particularly in smaller countries where the platforms dominate communications.

When I saw what the platforms did with Trump, I thought, You should have done this before, and you should do this consistently in other countries around the world, said Javier Pallero, policy director at Access Now, a human rights group involved in the Ethiopia letter. Around the world, we are at the mercy of when they decide to act.

Sometimes they act very late, he added, and sometimes they act not at all.

David Kaye, a law professor and former United Nations monitor for freedom of expression, said political figures in India, the Philippines, Brazil and elsewhere deserved scrutiny for their behavior online. But he said the actions against Mr. Trump raised difficult questions about how the power of American internet companies was applied, and if their actions set a new precedent to more aggressively police speech around the world.

The question going forward is whether this is a new kind of standard they intend to apply for leaders worldwide, and do they have the resources to do it? Mr. Kaye said. There is going to be a real increase in demand to do this elsewhere in the world.

Facebook, which also owns Instagram and WhatsApp, is the worlds largest social network, with more than 2.7 billion monthly users; more than 90 percent of them live outside the United States. The company declined to comment, but has said the actions against Mr. Trump stem from his violation of existing rules and do not represent a new global policy.

Our policies are applied to everyone, Sheryl Sandberg, Facebooks chief operating officer, said in a recent interview with Reuters. The policy is that you cant incite violence, you cant be part of inciting violence.

Twitter, which has about 190 million daily users globally, said its rules for world leaders were not new. When it reviews posts that could incite violence, Twitter said, the context of the events is crucial.

Offline harm as a result of online speech is demonstrably real, and what drives our policy and enforcement above all, Jack Dorsey, Twitters chief executive, said in a post on Wednesday. Yet, he said, the decision sets a precedent I feel is dangerous: the power an individual or corporation has over a part of the global public conversation.

There are signs that Facebook and Twitter have begun acting more assertively. After the Capitol attack, Twitter updated its policies to say it would permanently suspend the accounts of repeat offenders of its rules on political content. Facebook took action against a number of accounts outside the United States, including deleting the account of a state-run media outlet in Iran and shutting down government-run accounts in Uganda, where there has been violence ahead of elections. Facebook said the takedowns were unrelated to the Trump decision.

Many activists singled out Facebook for its global influence and not applying rules uniformly. They said that in many countries it lacked the cultural understanding to identify when posts might incite violence. Too often, they said, Facebook and other social media companies do not act even when they receive warnings.

In 2019 in Slovakia, Facebook did not take down posts by a member of Parliament who was convicted by a court and stripped of his seat in government for incitement and racist comments. In Cambodia, Human Rights Watch said the company was slow to act to the involvement of government officials in a social media campaign to smear a prominent Buddhist monk championing human rights. In the Philippines, President Rodrigo Duterte has used Facebook to target journalists and other critics.

After a wave of violence, Ethiopian activists said Facebook was being used to incite violence and encourage discrimination.

The truth is, despite good intentions, these companies do not guarantee uniform application or enforcement of their rules, said Agustina Del Campo, director of the center for studies on freedom of expression at University of Palermo in Buenos Aires. And oftentimes, when they attempt it, they lack the context and understanding needed.

In many countries, theres a perception that Facebook bases its actions on its business interests more than on human rights. In India, home to Facebooks most users, the company has been accused of not policing anti-Muslim content from political figures for fear of upsetting the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his ruling party.

Developments in our countries arent addressed seriously, said Mishi Choudhary, a technology lawyer and founder of the Software Freedom Law Center, a digital rights group in India. Any takedown of content raises the questions of free expression, but incitement of violence or using a platform for dangerous speech is not a free speech matter but a matter of democracy, law and order.

But even as many activists urged Facebook and Twitter to be more proactive to protect human rights, they expressed anger about the power the companies have to control speech and sway public opinion.

Some also warned that the actions against Mr. Trump would cause a backlash, with political leaders in some countries taking steps to prevent social media companies from censoring speech.

Government officials in France and Germany raised alarms over banning Mr. Trumps accounts, questioning whether private companies should be able to unilaterally silence a democratically elected leader. A draft law under consideration for the 27-nation European Union would put new rules around the content moderation policies of the biggest social networks.

Barbora Bukovsk, the senior director for law and policy at Article 19, a digital rights group, said the risk was particularly pronounced in countries whose leaders have a history of using social media to stoke division. She said the events in Washington provided momentum in Poland for a draft law from the ruling right-wing nationalist party that would fine social media companies for taking down content that is not explicitly illegal, which could allow more targeting of L.G.B.T.Q. people.

These decisions on Trump were the right decisions, but there are broader issues beyond Trump, Ms. Bukovsk said.

View original post here:
Facebook and Twitter Face International Scrutiny After Trump Ban - The New York Times