How Much Did WikiLeaks Damage U.S. National Security?

WikiLeaks has made multiple disclosures over the past decade, including one in March 2017 when the group released what it said were CIA technical documents on a range of spying techniques. Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images hide caption

WikiLeaks has made multiple disclosures over the past decade, including one in March 2017 when the group released what it said were CIA technical documents on a range of spying techniques.

To its supporters, the WikiLeaks disclosures have revealed a wealth of important information that the U.S. government wanted to keep hidden, particularly in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This included abuses by the military and a video that showed a U.S. helicopter attack in Iraq on suspected militants. Those killed turned out to be unarmed civilians and journalists.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, now under arrest in Britain, has often argued that no one has been harmed by the WikiLeaks disclosures.

But many in the national security community say the leaks were harmful to a broad range of people. However, they generally say the damage was limited and has faded since the first big WikiLeaks dump in 2010, which included hundreds of thousands of classified documents from the U.S. military and the State Department.

Chelsea Manning, a former Army private, spent seven years in prison for leaking the documents to WikiLeaks in 2010. Manning, who was freed two years ago, was taken back into custody last month when she refused to testify before a grand jury in a case involving WikiLeaks and Assange.

P.J. Crowley, the State Department spokesman when the WikiLeaks story erupted in 2010, said those most at risk were civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq who were secretly passing information to the U.S. military.

"A number of people went into hiding, a number of people had to move, particularly those civilians in war zones who had told U.S. soldiers about movements of the Taliban and al-Qaida," he said. "No doubt some of those people were harmed when their identities were compromised."

WikiLeaks has made multiple disclosures over the past decade, including one in March 2017 when the group released what it said were CIA technical documents on a range of spying techniques.

This revealed ways that a state-of-the art television could serve as a listening device even when it was turned off.

Larry Pfeiffer, the CIA chief of staff from 2006 to 2009, said these kinds of breaches can impose long-term costs, though they can be difficult to quantify.

"It informs the potential enemies of a technique we use, that they can now develop countermeasures against," Pfeiffer said.

This also forces the spy agency to go back to the drawing board, he added.

"Once invalidated, it now creates situations where the U.S. intelligence community is going to have to expend resources and going to have to spend both dollars and people to develop new methods," said Pfeiffer, who now heads the Michael V. Hayden Center for Intelligence at George Mason University.

On the diplomatic front, WikiLeaks shared many examples of U.S. diplomats writing in unflattering terms about foreign leaders, causing the U.S. embarrassment.

But more importantly, said Scott Anderson, a former State Department lawyer who served in Iraq in 2012 and 2013, some of these countries have vulnerable opposition leaders and human rights activists who were quietly in contact with U.S. diplomats. These private, sensitive discussions suddenly became public with the WikiLeaks dumps.

"That can really chill the ability of those American personnel to build those sorts of relationships and have frank conversations with their contacts," said Anderson, now at the Brookings Institution.

Anderson notes that the U.S. still has a program to issue visas to Afghans and Iraqis to the U.S. in return for the help they provided and in recognition of the danger they face.

Crowley pointed to the impact of leaks that upset former Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi.

"We had an ambassador in Libya, and we had to remove him from his post because he was directly threatened by Moammar Gadhafi's thugs," Crowley said.

Some countries, Crowley added, took a much more relaxed approach to the disclosures, even when they were criticized in the documents.

"One foreign minister told the U.S. secretary of state, 'You know, don't worry about it. You should see what we report about you,' " Crowley recalled.

Many of the assessments today are similar to the one offered nine years ago by Bob Gates, who served as defense secretary when the WikiLeaks disclosures took place.

"The fact is, governments deal with the United States because it's in their interest. Not because they like us, not because they trust us and not because they believe we can keep secrets," Gates said. "Is this embarrassing? Yes. Is it awkward? Yes. Consequences for U.S. foreign policy? I think fairly modest."

Greg Myre is a national security correspondent. Follow him @gregmyre1.

Excerpt from:
How Much Did WikiLeaks Damage U.S. National Security?

Who is Julian Assange? What to know about the WikiLeaks …

WikiLeaks founderJulian Assange, a sophisticated computer programmer who helped release thousands of secret materials since his site's launchin the early 2000s, was indicted on 18 counts on Thursday for his role in the release of those secret materials.

Assange hadbeen in hiding in London since 2012 as he facedextradition to Sweden on sexual assault allegations though they have since been dropped. Since 2012, Assange has feared arrest and extradition to the U.S., which announced in April a federal chargeagainst him forconspiracy to commit computer intrusion.

The 47-year-old has repeatedly defended WikiLeaks as a transparent non-profit organization, saying the public has a right to know what's going on behind "closed doors."

WIKILEAKS FOUNDER JULIAN ASSANGE ARRESTED AFTER ECUADOR WITHDRAWS ASYLUM

The burden should not shift to Mr. Assange to have to defend against criminal charges when what he has been accused of doing is what journalists do every day, Barry Pollack, a Washington lawyer for Assange, said back in November.They publish truthful information because the public has a right to know and consider that information and understand what its government and institutions are doing."

On April 11, Assange, an Australian native, was arrested at theEcuadorean embassy in London after theSouth American nation revoked his political asylum.

Here's what you need to know about the WikiLeaks mastermind.

Assange made his name after publishing thousands of military and State Department cables from Army Pvt. Chelsea Manning, for which Manning served prison time, secret CIA hacking toolsand publicizing email conversations from top Democratic Party officials.

The new indictment on Thursday saidAssange conspired with Manning to obtain and disclose classified national defense documents, including State Department cables and reports on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Prosecutors say his actions "risked serious harm" to the United States.

Ben Brandon, a lawyer representing the U.S. government, said in court earlier this month that American investigators had acquired details of communications between Manning and Assange in 2010. The two had allegedly engaged in real time discussions regarding Chelsea Mannings dissemination of confidential records to Mr. Assange.

He added that the records downloaded from a classified computer included 90,000 activity reports from the war in Afghanistan, 400,000 Iraq war-related reports, 800 Guantanamo Bay detainee assessments and 250,000 State Department cables.

For years, the U.S. Justice Department has been investigating how WikiLeaks obtained emails stolen from Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign and Democratic groups.

WikiLeaks' involvement in the email dump was discussed during Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigationinto whetherthe Trump campaign colluded with Russia during the 2016 election.

During a hearing in February, Michael CohenPresident Trump's"fixer" and former personal lawyer alleged he was in Trump's office in July 2016 when longtime adviser Roger Stone called the president.Trump then put Stone on speakerphone and Stone told himhe had communicated with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and that "within a couple of days, there would be a massive dump of emails that would damage" Clinton's campaign, Cohen claimed.

That month, WikiLeaks released thousands of emails hacked from the Democratic National Committee's server.

MOST EXPLOSIVE MOMENTS FROM MICHAEL COHEN'S HILL APPEARANCE

Stone has been indicted on charges of obstruction, making false statements and witness tampering as part of Muellers Russia probe. He has not been charged with conspiring with WikiLeaks and he vehemently denies he had any communication withAssange before the email dump.

There is no such evidence, Stonetold Fox Newsin a text message on Feb.15. Again, on Feb. 27, Stone said Cohen's claims were "not true."

In September 2018, Assange was replaced as editor-in-chief of the anti-secrecy website.Kristinn Hrafnsson, anIcelandic investigative journalist, took over the title.

I condemn the treatment of Julian Assange that leads to my new role ... but I welcome the opportunity to secure the continuation of the important work based on WikiLeaks ideals," saidHrafnsson after accepting the position, according to The Daily Dot.

However, WikiLeaks confirmed in a tweet at the time that Assange would remain publisher. It's unclear ifHrafnsson's role is permanent.

Fox News' Talia Kaplan, Ann W. Schmidt, Frank Miles, Lukas Mikelionis and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Follow this link:
Who is Julian Assange? What to know about the WikiLeaks ...

Julian Assange – WikiLeaks, Arrest & Facts – Biography

(1971-)

Julian Assange used his genius IQ to hack into the databases of many high profile organizations. In 2006, Assange began work on WikiLeaks, a website intended to collect and share confidential information on an international scale, and he earned the Time magazine "Person of the Year" title in 2010. Seeking to avoid extradition to Sweden over sexual assault allegations, Assange was granted political asylum by Ecuador and holed up at the country's embassy in London in 2012. In 2016, his work again drew international attention when WikiLeaks published thousands of emails from U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee. After his asylum was rescinded in April 2019, Assange was indicted in the U.S. for violating the Espionage Act.

Julian Assange was born on July 3, 1971, in Townsville, Queensland, Australia. Assange had an unusual childhood, as he spent some of his early years traveling around with his mother, Christine, and his stepfather, Brett Assange. The couple worked together to put on theatrical productions. Brett Assange later described Julian as a "sharp kid who always fought for the underdog."

The relationship between Brett and Christine later soured, but Assange and his mother continued to live a transient lifestyle. With all of the moving around, Assange ended up attending roughly 37 different schools growing up, and was frequently homeschooled.

Assange discovered his passion for computers as a teenager. At the age of 16, he got his first computer as a gift from his mother. Before long, he developed a talent for hacking into computer systems. His 1991 break-in to the master terminal for Nortel, a telecommunications company, got him in trouble. Assange was charged with more than 30 counts of hacking in Australia, but he got off the hook with only a fine for damages.

Assange continued to pursue a career as a computer programmer and software developer. An intelligent mind, he studied mathematics at the University of Melbourne. He dropped out without finishing his degree, later claiming that he left the university for moral reasons; Assange objected to other students working on computer projects for the military.

In 2006, Assange began work on WikiLeaks, a website intended to collect and share confidential information on an international scale. The site officially launched in 2007 and it was run out of Sweden at the time because of the country's strong laws protecting a person's anonymity. Later that year, WikiLeaks released a U.S. military manual that provided detailed information on the Guantanamo detention center. WikiLeaks also shared emails from then-vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin that it received from an anonymous source in September 2008.

In early December 2010, Assange discovered that he had other legal problems to worry about. Since early August, he had been under investigation by the Swedish police for allegations that included two counts of sexual molestation, one count of illegal coercion, and one count of rape. After a European Arrest Warrant was issued by Swedish authorities on December 6, Assange turned himself in to the London police.

Following a series of extradition hearings in early 2011 to appeal the warrant, Assange learned on November 2, 2011, that the High Court dismissed his appeal. Still on conditional bail, Assange made plans to appeal to the U.K. Supreme Court.

According to a New York Times article, Assange came to the Ecuadorean Embassy in London in June 2012, seeking to avoid extradition to Sweden. That August, Assange was granted political asylum by the Ecuadorean government, which, according to the Times, "protects Mr. Assange from British arrest, but only on Ecuadorean territory, leaving him vulnerable if he tries to leave the embassy to head to an airport or train station."

The article went on to say that the decision "cited the possibility that Mr. Assange could face 'political persecution' or be sent to the United States to face the death penalty," putting further strain on the relationship between Ecuador and Britain, and instigating a rebuttal from the Swedish government.

In August 2015 the lesser sexual assault allegations from 2010 with the exception of rape were dropped due to statute of limitation violations by Swedish prosecutors. The statue of limitations on the rape allegations will expire in 2020.

In February 2016, a United Nations panel determined that Assange had been arbitrarily detained, and recommended his release and compensation for deprivation of liberty. However, both the Swedish and British governments rejected those findings as non-binding, and reiterated that Assange would be arrested if he left the Ecuadorian embassy.

On May 19, 2017, Sweden said it would drop its rape investigation of Assange. While today was an important victory and important vindication, the road is far from over, he told reporters from the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. The war, the proper war, is just commencing.

Assange was granted Ecuadorian citizenship in December 2017, but his relationship with his adopted country soon soured. In March 2018, the government cut off his internet access on the grounds that his actions endangered "the good relations that the country maintains with the United Kingdom, with the rest of the states of the European Union, and other nations."

Assange and WikiLeaks returned to the headlines during the summer of 2016 as the U.S. presidential race was narrowing to two main candidates, Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump. In early July, WikiLeaks released more than 1,200 emails from Clinton's private server during her tenure as secretary of state. Later in the month, WikiLeaks released an additional round of emails from the Democratic National Committee that indicated an effort to undermine Clinton's primary opponent, Bernie Sanders, leading to the resignation of DNC chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

In October, WikiLeaks unveiled more than 2,000 emails from Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, which included excerpts from speeches to Wall Street banks. By this point, U.S. government officials had gone public with the belief that Russian agents had hacked into DNC servers and supplied the emails to WikiLeaks, though Assange repeatedly insisted that was not the case.

On the eve of the election, Assange released a statement in which he declared no "personal desire to influence the outcome," noting that he never received documents from the Trump campaign to publish. "Irrespective of the outcome of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election," he wrote, "the real victor is the U.S. public which is better informed as a result of our work." Shortly afterward, Trump was declared the winner of the election.

In April 2019, after Ecuador announced the withdrawal of Assange's asylum, the WikiLeaks founder was arrested at the London embassy. Shortly afterward, it was announced that U.S. authorities had charged Assange with conspiring with former Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning to break into a classified government computer at the Pentagon.

On May 1, Assange was sentenced to 50 weeks in prison for skipping bail back in 2012, when he found refuge in the Ecuadorean Embassy.

Steeper charges arrived on May 23, when Assange was indicted in the U.S. on 17 counts of violating the Espionage Act for obtaining and publishing secret military and diplomatic documents in 2010. However, the indictment raised questions about First Amendment protections and whether investigative journalists could also find themselves facing criminal charges.

In January 2021, a UK judge ruled that Assange could not be extradited to the U.S. to face trial on charges for violating the Espionage Act, citing that the WikiLeaks founder was a suicide risk.

Rumors of a relationship between Assange and actress Pamela Anderson surfaced after the former Baywatch star was spotted visiting the Ecuadorian embassy in late 2016. "Julian is trying to free the world by educating it," she later told People. "It is a romantic struggle I love him for this."

In April 2017, Showtime announced that it would air the Assange documentary Risk, which had premiered at the 2016 Cannes Film Festival but updated with events related to the U.S. presidential election.

We strive for accuracy and fairness.If you see something that doesn't look right,contact us!

See the rest here:
Julian Assange - WikiLeaks, Arrest & Facts - Biography

What is Open Source Software? – SourceForge Articles

Open source software (OSS) is a type of computer software that is made freely available to the public with minimal restrictions. OSS allows anyone to access, modify and distribute the code for any purpose, including commercial purposes. Open source software includes web browsers, operating systems, and many other applications.

Open source software has become increasingly popular over the years due to its ability to provide users with high-quality solutions while allowing developers to innovate without expensive proprietary licenses. OSS also eliminates some of the risks associated with purchasing costly licensed products that may not be compatible with a users system or needs. As open source projects are created by volunteers from around the world and are typically distributed for free or at very low cost, users can benefit from quick responses to bugs and feature requests as well as tailor-made solutions that meet their specific requirements.

Open source software provides users with more control over their technology investments while offering them reliable solutions at a much lower cost than proprietary counterparts. With its widespread availability, improved security features and innovation potential, open source has quickly become one of the preferred methods for creating powerful applications across many industries.

In recent years, open source software has become increasingly essential for businesses looking to maximize their success and remain competitive. In the ever-evolving world of technology, open source software provides companies with the flexibility, scalability, and cost savings necessary to remain agile and successful. Open source software is a key factor in helping organizations develop innovative products quickly and efficiently.

Open source software is becoming more popular as it helps organizations increase their efficiency by leveraging existing resources to create new products and services. By using open source code from other developers, companies can quickly build applications without needing to reinvent the wheel. This allows them to focus on developing new ideas instead of wasting time reinventing the same thing multiple times.

Additionally, open source software allows businesses to access vast amounts of knowledge that they may not have access to otherwise. Open source projects often involve collaboration between many different contributors who share their combined knowledge on how best to solve a particular problem or task. This shared knowledge base greatly expedites development processes while also allowing organizations to benefit from the experience of others who are familiar with similar technologies or coding practices.

Open source software also offers tremendous cost savings compared to proprietary solutions. Since most open source projects are free of charge or offered at vastly reduced costs compared to commercial alternatives, companies can drastically reduce their overhead when sourcing software for business needs. Not only does this save money upfront but it also eliminates ongoing licensing fees associated with commercial products which can really put a strain on company finances in the long run.

Finally, open source projects tend be more secure than proprietary offerings due to their transparency and openness anyone can look at the projects codebase for potential security issues or bugs before deciding whether or not its suitable for use in business environments. Additionally since open source projects tend receive regular contributions from community members around the world theres usually someone available immediately who can fix any security issues that arise quickly and efficiently something that may not be possible with proprietary solutions where users must wait until an official patch is released by the vendor before any security issue is resolved completely.

All things considered its easy see why open source matters so much in todays tech landscape increasing efficiency while reducing costs makes adopting open sources solutions an attractive option for many businesses looking maximize success while minimizing expenses.

There are countless examples of open source software, including many popular and widely-used programs. Some of the most well-known open source software includes:

And many more. View and compare over 500,000 open source projects using SourceForges open source software directory.

There are several advantages to using open source software. Some of the key advantages include:

Further reading: Compare open source vs. closed source software.

See original here:
What is Open Source Software? - SourceForge Articles

Aviation milestone: artificial intelligence flew a modified F-16 fighter jet for over 17 hours – Fox News

  1. Aviation milestone: artificial intelligence flew a modified F-16 fighter jet for over 17 hours  Fox News
  2. Artificial Intelligence Flies Fighter Jet for the First Time  Popular Mechanics
  3. Artificial Intelligence Successfully Piloted The X-62 VISTA  The Aviationist

Read the original post:
Aviation milestone: artificial intelligence flew a modified F-16 fighter jet for over 17 hours - Fox News

What’s next for quantum computing | MIT Technology Review

For years, quantum computings news cycle was dominated by headlines about record-setting systems. Researchers at Google and IBM have had spats over who achieved whatand whether it was worth the effort. But the time for arguing over whos got the biggest processor seems to have passed: firms are heads-down and preparing for life in the real world. Suddenly, everyone is behaving like grown-ups.

As if to emphasize how much researchers want to get off the hype train, IBM is expected to announce a processor in 2023 that bucks the trend of putting ever more quantum bits, or qubits, into play. Qubits, the processing units of quantum computers, can be built from a variety of technologies, including superconducting circuitry, trapped ions, and photons, the quantum particles of light.

IBM has long pursued superconducting qubits, and over the years the company has been making steady progress in increasing the number it can pack on a chip. In 2021, for example, IBM unveiled one with a record-breaking 127 of them. In November, it debuted its 433-qubit Osprey processor, and the company aims to release a 1,121-qubit processor called Condor in 2023.

But this year IBM is also expected to debut its Heron processor, which will have just 133 qubits. It might look like a backwards step, but as the company is keen to point out, Herons qubits will be of the highest quality. And, crucially, each chip will be able to connect directly to other Heron processors, heralding a shift from single quantum computing chips toward modular quantum computers built from multiple processors connected togethera move that is expected to help quantum computers scale up significantly.

Heron is a signal of larger shifts in the quantum computing industry. Thanks to some recent breakthroughs, aggressive roadmapping, and high levels of funding, we may see general-purpose quantum computers earlier than many would have anticipated just a few years ago, some experts suggest. Overall, things are certainly progressing at a rapid pace, says Michele Mosca, deputy director of the Institute for Quantum Computing at the University of Waterloo.

Here are a few areas where experts expect to see progress.

IBMs Heron project is just a first step into the world of modular quantum computing. The chips will be connected with conventional electronics, so they will not be able to maintain the quantumness of information as it moves from processor to processor. But the hope is that such chips, ultimately linked together with quantum-friendly fiber-optic or microwave connections, will open the path toward distributed, large-scale quantum computers with as many as a million connected qubits. That may be how many are needed to run useful, error-corrected quantum algorithms. We need technologies that scale both in size and in cost, so modularity is key, says Jerry Chow, director at IBMQuantum Hardware System Development.

More:
What's next for quantum computing | MIT Technology Review

Censorship on social media? It’s not what you think – CBS News

Watch the newCBS Reportsdocumentary, "Speaking Frankly | Censorship," in the video player above.

Musician Joy Villa's red carpet dresses at the past three years' Grammy Awards were embellished with pro-Trump messages that cemented her as an outspoken darling of the conservative movement. With over 500,000 followers across Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, Villa refers to her social media community as her "Joy Tribe," and a few years ago she enlisted them to help wage a public battle against what she claimed was YouTube's attempt to censor her.

"I had released my 'Make America Great Again" music video on YouTube, and within a few hours it got taken down by YouTube," Villa told CBS Reports. "I took it to the rest of my social media. I told my fans: 'Hey listen, YouTube is censoring me. This is unfair censorship.'"

Villa saw it as part of a pattern of social media companies trying to shut down conservative voices an accusation that many other like-minded users, including President Trump himself, have leveled against Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter in recent years.

But those who study the tech industry's practices say that deciding what content stays up, and what comes down, has nothing to do with "censorship.""There is this problem in the United States that when we talk about free speech, we often misunderstand it," said Henry Fernandez, co-chair of Change the Terms, a coalition of organizations that work to reduce hate online.

"The First Amendment is very specific: It protects all of us as Americans from the government limiting our speech," he explained. "And so when people talk about, 'Well, if I get kicked off of Facebook, that's an attack on my free speech or on my First Amendment right' that's just not true. The companies have the ability to decide what speech they will allow. They're not the government."

A YouTube spokesperson said Villa's video wasn't flagged over something she said, but due to a privacy complaint. Villa disputed that, but once she blurred out the face of someone who didn't want to be seen in the video, YouTube put it back online, and her video remains visible on the platform today.

"At YouTube, we've always had policies that lay out what can and can't be posted. Our policies have no notion of political affiliation or party, and we enforce them consistently regardless of who the uploader is," said YouTube spokesperson Alex Joseph.

While Villa and others on the right have been vocal about their complaints, activists on the opposite side of the political spectrum say their online speech frequently ends up being quashed for reasons that have gotten far less attention.

Carolyn Wysinger, an activist who provided Facebook feedback and guidance about minority users' experience on the platform, told CBS Reports that implicit bias is a problem that permeates content moderation decisions at most social media platforms.

"In the community standards, white men are a protected class, the same as a black trans woman is. The community standards does not take into account the homophobia, and the violence, and how all those things intersect. It takes all of them as individual things that need to be protected," said Wysinger.

The artificial intelligence tools that automate the process of moderating and enforcing community standards on the sites don't recognize the intent or background of those doing the posting.

For instance, Wysinger said, "I have been flagged for using imagery of lynching. ... I have been flagged for violent content when showing images about racism and about transphobia."

According to the platforms' recent transparency reports, from April to June 2020, nearly 95% of comments flagged as hate speech on Facebook were detected by AI; and on YouTube 99.2% of comments removed for violating Community Standards were flagged by AI.

"That means you're putting these community standards in place and you have these bots who are just looking for certain specific things. It's automated. It doesn't have the ability for nuanced decision-making in regards to this," said Wysinger.

Biases can be built into the algorithms by the programmers who designed them, even if it's unintentional.

"Unfortunately tech is made up of a homogenous group, mostly White and Asian males, and so what happens is the opinions, the experiences that go into this decision-making are reflective of a majority group. And so people from different backgrounds Black, Latino, different religions, conservative, liberal don't have the accurate representation that they would if these companies were more diverse," said Mark Luckie, a digital strategist who previously worked at Twitter, Reddit and Facebook.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has said he believes the platform "should enable as much expression as possible," and that social media companies "shouldn't be the arbiter of truth of everything that people say online."

Nonetheless, a recent Pew Research Center survey found that nearly three-quarters of U.S. adults believe social media sites intentionally censor political viewpoints. In the last two years, two congressional hearings have focused on the question of tech censorship.

"We hear that there is an anti-conservative bias on the part of Facebook or other platforms because conservatives keep saying that," said Susan Benesch, executive director of the Dangerous Speech Project, an organization based in Washington D.C. that has advised Facebook, Twitter, Google and other internet companies on how to diminish harmful content online while protecting freedom of speech.

But she adds, "I would be surprised if that were the case in part because on most days the most popular, most visited groups on Facebook and pages on Facebook are very conservative ones."

She said she also finds it interesting that "many conservatives or ultra-conservatives complain that the platforms have a bias against them at the same time as Black Lives Matter activists feel that the platforms are disproportionately taking down their content."

A 2019review of over 400 political pages on Facebook, conducted by the left-leaning media watchdog Media Matters, found conservative pages performed about equally as well as liberal ones.

But reliable data on the subject is scarce, and social media platforms are largely secretive about how they make decisions on content moderation.

Amid ongoing criticism, Facebook commissioned an independent review, headed by former Republican Senator Jon Kyl, to investigate accusations of anti-conservative bias. Kyl's 2019report detailed recommendations to improve transparency, and Facebook agreed to create an oversight board for content removal decisions. Facebook said it "would continue to examine, and where necessary adjust, our own policies and practices in the future."

According to Fernandez, the focus should be on requiring tech companies to publicly reveal their moderation rules and tactics.

Benesch points out, "We have virtually zero oversight regarding take-down, so in truth content moderation is more complicated than just take it down or leave it up," referring to the fact that, to date, there has been little publicly available data provided by tech companies to allow an evaluation of the process.

"Protecting free expression while keeping people safe is a challenge that requires constant refinement and improvement. We work with external experts and affected communities around the world to develop our policies and have a global team dedicated to enforcing them," Facebook said in a statement.

And a statement from Twitter said, "Twitter does not use political ideology to make any decisions whether related to ranking content on our service or how we enforce our rules. In fact, from a simple business perspective and to serve the public conversation, Twitter is incentivized to keep all voices on the service."

Meanwhile users like Wysinger struggle with mixed feelings about social media sites that promise connection but sometimes leave them out in the cold.

"Whether we like it or not, we are all on Facebook and Instagram and Twitter all day long, and when they take us off the banned list, I don't know anyone who doesn't post a status on Facebook right away, after the ban is lifted: 'I'm back y'all!'," said Wysinger.

"It's like an abusive relationship, you can't even leave the abusive relationship because you become so used to and dependent on it."

Go here to read the rest:

Censorship on social media? It's not what you think - CBS News