PROJECT VERITAS EXPOSES TWITTER'S
ANTI-CONSERVATIVE POLITICAL AGENDA~
TWITTER ENGINEERS TO "BAN A WAY OF TALKING" THROUGH "SHADOW BANNING"
James O'Keefe: This Is The Biggest Story We Have Ever Broken, Shadow Ban #1 Trending
On Twitter
James O'Keefe joins Alex Jones live via Skype to break down the latest
video from his organization Project Veritas that exposes Twitter's
ability to arbitrarily silence, censor, and shadow ban users.
Project Veritas Exposes Twitter’s Political Agenda
A senior engineer describes his job as a “bouncer” for Twitter as he
describes the “big brotherish” tactics used at Twitter against those it
opposes politically.
TRUMP'S TWEETS FORWARDED BY TWITTER ENGINEER/CENSOR, CLAY HAYNES (& OTHERS)
TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Twitter Engineers To "Ban a Way of Talking" Through "Shadow Banning"
In the latest undercover Project Veritas video investigation, eight
current and former Twitter employees are on camera explaining steps the
social media giant is taking to censor political content that they don’t
like.
James O’Keefe has just completed a book about this series entitled
"AMERICAN PRAVDA: My fight for Truth in the Era of Fake News." The book
will be released by St. Martin’s Press on January 16, 2018.
Pre-order the book: http://www.americanpravdabook.com
Donate: http://projectveritas.com/donate
Website: http://projectveritas.com/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ProjectVeritas
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Project_Veritas
James O'Keefe - Project Veritas Busts
Twitter Tyranny
Jack Dorsey Denies Twitter Censors Users
Twitter Engineers Create Algorithms
To Censor Opposing Political Views
Alex Jones exposes how Project Veritas has caught Twitter again, this
time admitting that their engineers create algorithms to censor
political views that oppose 'the mainstream' set at Twitter.
Project Veritas Video Exposes Twitter as Part of "American Pravda"
BY C. MITCHELL SHAW
SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/computers/item/27948-project-veritas-video-exposes-twitter-as-part-of-american-pravda;
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Project Veritas is at it again — this time exposing Twitter as part
of the “American Pravda” of fake news designed to manipulate the way
people think by controlling their access to information and being “more
than happy” to violate users’ trust to help the government.Project Veritas (veritas is Latin for truth) has already exposed major media — including CNN and the New York Times — as part of its “American Pravda” series. Now, James O’Keefe — the man behind Project Veritas — is turning his attention toward social media. In an undercover video published Tuesday, O’Keefe shows that a Twitter engineer says the company is “more than happy to help the Departmet of Justice [DOJ] in their little investigation” by turning over all of President Trump’s tweets and direct messages (Twitter’s version of private messaging) to the DOJ — “even the ones he’s deleted.”
In the video, Senior Network Security Engineer Clay Haynes is shown chatting with a young lady that he does not know is a Project Veritas undercover journalist. He also does not know he is being recorded. That recording happened on January 3. In answer to the young lady’s question, “So you’re not a Trump lover?” Haynes says, “No.” He goes on to say, “We’re more than happy to help the Department of Justice in their little investigation.”
After the undercover journalist asks, “Okay, like how” and giggles approvingly, Haynes elaborates. (As an aside, do these guys never learn?) He answers her by saying, “Basically, giving them every single tweet he’s posted — even the ones he’s deleted.” With the journalist prompting him by saying, “Okay,” Haynes continues, “Any direct messages, any mentions, oh yeah.”
He justifies his actions and those of his employer by saying, “I don’t like being part of the machine that is contributing to America’s downfall,” obviously referring to the fact that President Trump uses Twitter for its intended purpose: mass communication. It seems that since Haynes and his coworkers don’t like the message, they can manipulate the system with a clear conscience.
Another part of the video — filmed last week — shows Haynes talking to an undercover and disguised James O’Keefe, who asks him about Twitter “helping the Department of Justice in their little investigation.” Haynes, was not willing to comment. James O’Keefe, you see — even in disguise — is not a young lady.
But his previous statements paint a pretty damning picture. “So, what we can do on our side is actually very terrifying,” he told the female undercover journalist, going on to explain, “We have full access to every single person’s account, every single direct message, deleted direct message, deleted tweets — I can tell you who exactly logged in from where, what username and password, when they changed their password.” He also said that one reason Twitter keeps those logs is that “it helps us detect a pattern of history.”
Haynes described the practice as “very, very dangerous,” and “very, very creepy Big Brother-ish.” No doubt.
And while many conservatives — including ostensibly President Trump — use Twitter on a daily basis, Haynes made it clear that there is no room for the conservative mindset at the company. “I’m a bleeding-heart liberal,” he said, adding, “I think it comes with the territory.”
In the “internal reviews” held at Twitter about banning President Trump’s account, Haynes said he “wasn’t the only one that basically said that if we let this maniac — something along the lines of, if we let this maniac continue, we would have a hard time finding another job.”
While the left-leaning philosophy of Twitter is not breaking news, the degree to which the company would be “more than happy to help the Department of Justice with their little investigation” is chilling. Especially considering that a senior engineer at the company realizes that the methods for doing that are “very, very dangerous,” and “very, very creepy Big Brother-ish.”
O’Keefe ends the video by pointing out that while it is not known whether Twitter has been subpoenaed for that information, it shouldn’t really matter. After all, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey tweeted Twitter’s support of Apple last year when Apple refused to comply with an order to break into the iPhone of San Bernardino terrorist Syed Farook because of the privacy implications involved. That tweet said, “We stand with @tim_cook [Apple’s CEO] and Apple (and thank him for his leadership)!”and carried a link to Tim Cook’s open letter explaining his company’s decision. Apparently that was then and this is now.
Also, that was a terrorist and this is President Trump. And while Apple was right to stand its ground and Twitter was right to support Apple, right appears to have nothing to do with Twitter being “more than happy” about violating a user’s trust if that user is @realDonaldTrump. Because this isn’t about right; it’s about the Left.
This is a developing story and The New American will keep our readers updated.
_______________________________________________________
Project Veritas Hidden Video:
Twitter Employees Admit to Political Censorship
BY C. MITCHELL SHAW
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Former and current Twitter employees are caught on camera
admitting they censor political views they disagree with — without the
censored users even realizing it.In the second undercover video in three days, Project Veritas has continued to expose Twitter as part of the “American Pravda.” While the first video showed a senior engineer at Twitter saying that the company is “more than happy to help the Department of Justice with their little investigation” into President Trump, this video helps explain why that may be.
The new hidden camera video — published Thursday — features “nine current and former Twitter employees” admitting to “steps the social media giant is taking to censor political content that they don’t like,” according to Project Veritas.
The video opens with a montage of damning quotes before showing those quotes in context. Far from being less daming when seen in context, they are more so. The video — showing current and former Twitter employees admitting to the practice — focuses on something called “shadow banning.” Imagine if Twitter wanted to silence you. If they ban you outright — suspend or delete your account — it would be obvious and you may take to another platform to denounce the company for censorship. But what if they simply press the digital “mute button” on your tweets? Your account is still “active” and you can still post, but no one except you will ever see it.
Olinda Hassan is a policy manager in Twitter’s Trust and Safety department, which she describes as “controversial.” Her team makes the rules and regulations for the platform’s millions of users. They are the gatekeepers. As Hassan explained, Twitter is “working on” a way to silence certain people and ideas on the platform. “Yeah, it’s something we’re working on — where we’re trying to get the shi**y people not to show up,” she told the undercover journalist, adding, “It’s a product thing we’re working on.”
Norai went on to say that “discretion” — which he described as “I guess how you felt about a particular matter,” plays a huge role in what content gets banned at Twitter. As an example, Norai said, “If they [a user] said, ‘This is pro-Trump, I don’t want it because it offends me,’” the next step would be, “I say, ‘I banned this whole thing’ and it goes over here and you’re like, “Oh, you know what? I don’t like it, too. You know what? Mo’s right. Let it go.’”
So, based on a Twitter employee not liking something because it’s pro-Trump, an entire account can be banned. How’s that inclusive environment working out for you, Twitter?
Because Norai said that during his time at Twitter, left-leaning posts that were tagged as possibly offensive were allowed to remain. “It would come through checked and then I would be like, ‘You know what? This is okay. Let it go.’”
Twitter has a “lot of unwritten rules,” Norai said. Those rules largely dealt with what content was acceptable and what content was not. Here is a clue: Conservative content was removed while liberal content was allowed to stay.
Pranay Singh is a Direct Messaging engineer at Twitter. He said that the suspension of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s Twitter account may have been because of “the U.S. government pressuring” Twitter. He said, “They do that.” In fact, he said it happens “all the f***ing time.” In Assange’s case, he said the U.S. government doesn’t like “people messing with their politics, and [Assange] has sh*t on a lot of people.”
As for the tactic of shadow banning a user, Abhinav Vadrevu, a former software engineer at Twitter, said, “One strategy is to shadow ban so that you have ultimate control.” He added, “The idea of a shadow ban is that you ban someone, but they don’t know they’ve been banned because they keep posting, but no one sees their content.” On the psychological side of the equation, this creates a situation where the users just think their posts — their ideas — aren’t appealing to anyone. “So they just think no one is engaging with their content when in reality, no one is seeing it,” Vadrevu said.
Vadrevu admitted that the practice “is risky” because “people will figure that sh** out.” He also said that it would cause “bad press” and that “it’s like, unethical in some way, you know? So, I don’t know.” Clearly.
Another former Twitter engineer, Conrado Miranda, told an undercover journalist that shadow banning as a way of political censorship is “a thing.” It happens at Twitter. As he explained the process, “we have a bunch of filters removing some tweets” and “kicking out some of them.”
Singh helped explain the types of tweets that are likely not to make the cut. “Just go to a random (Trump) tweet and just look at the followers,” he said. Those followers will “all be like guns, God, ’Merica, like and with the American flag and like, the cross.” He said the way to get rid of those users — all of whom he assumes are bots, not real users, because, “Like who says that? Who talks like that?” — is to “just delete them.” But since “there are hundreds of thousands of them” and that volume can’t be handled by people, “you got to, like, write algorithms to do it for you.”
So, Twitter’s response to posts and users it doesn’t agree with is to assume they are not real and turn a few lines of computer code loose to delete them without any human verification process. It appears that posts that are anti-gun, anti-God, anti-America, with rainbow flags and pentagrams would escape that vetting process, even if they were posted by bots. Smooth, Twitter, smooth.
Perhaps most shocking is the statement by Steven Pierre, a software engineer at Twitter. Speaking on hidden camera, he said that Twitter is developing a way to automate the whole process of what gets seen and what doesn’t. “Every single conversation is going to be rated by a machine” that will decide whether the conversation is “positive” or “negative.” If it’s negative, “They may have a point, but it will just, like, vanish,” he said. When asked whether this would “ban certain mindsets,” he said no. “It’s going to ban, like, a way of talking.” Twitter, where never is heard a discouraging word — or an honest word.
If that isn’t Pravda, nothing is. Between filtering, banning, shadow banning, and manipulating what users see, Twitter is dangerously close to a thought-control platform. In its first video on Twitter, released Tuesday, Project Veritas showed Clay Haynes, a senior network security engineer at Twitter, saying, “I don’t like being part of the machine that is contributing to America’s downfall,” obviously referring to the fact that President Trump uses Twitter for its intended purpose: mass communication. If he meant that, he should quit his job, because Twitter is clearly part of that machine.
