Mastodon, an open source, decentralized alternative to X, is rolling out a somewhat controversial feature by adding quote posts, which will launch next week. The feature, which allows a user to quote someone else's post and re-share it with their own response or commentary, has contributed to a culture of " dunking " on X, where users often deride other people by responding with snark or insulting humor. To address this concern, Mastodon says it's implementing quote posts with safety controls.
Over the past 15 years, I briefed each of these companies about this complex issue. The first such briefing, back in December 2010, focused on my research on how Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups were using YouTube to radicalize young people in the West. At Google's invitation, I met with senior Google representatives, including its head of public relations and policy, senior policy manager, senior policy counsel and free speech attorney, at the company's Washington, D.C., office.
The word 'rules' is often defined as control or dominion over a space. When new systems emerge, rules are resisted; they represent limits. Consider the early internet. In the 1980s and 1990s, forums, chatrooms, and file-sharing sites thrived in a rule-free zone. Anything went, and few objected. But growth brought problems: spam, cybercrime, harassment, piracy, which demanded order. Out of necessity came landmark policies like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (1998) and the General Data Protection Regulation (2018).
You've probably encountered images in your social media feeds that look like a cross between photographs and computer-generated graphics. Some are fantastical-think Shrimp Jesus-and some are believable at a quick glance-remember the little girl clutching a puppy in a boat during a flood? These are examples of AI slop, or low- to mid-quality content-video, images, audio, text or a mix-created with AI tools, often with little regard for accuracy.
Instagram users are baffled after an innocuous, strawberry-adorned illustration of the words "immigrants make the country great" was flagged by the social media network and hidden by the platform's moderation tech. "We use technology or a review team to identify content that should be covered," a notice obscuring the post reads. "This post doesn't go against our Community Standards, but may contain images that some people might find upsetting." Other users encountered a "sensitive content" message on the same post. "This photo may contain graphic or violent content," it reads, even though the inoffensive post clearly doesn't.
"Following discussions with the Manhattan District Attorney's Office about concerns around untraceable firearms, we are taking additional steps to improve our content moderation efforts," Thingiverse said in a statement. "As always, we encourage our users to report any content that may be harmful."
The "incriminating" post from Monday is seen above. I also believe that those of us who are older, whiter, safer from the threats of state violence do not have the moral ground to lecture the younger, browner and blacker, more directly impacted on what they should and should not do.
The First Amendment protects social media content moderation decisions, making government intervention in these processes a violation of free speech rights.