What kind of disease did Twitter have?

On August 19th, the social media platform giant Twitter suddenly made a move to make the world feel wrong: in the absence of clear administrative instructions, the US government identified and deleted the algorithm by using intelligent analysis of user behavior metadata. A promotional account for the “Chinese government agent”. As a Twitter company that strictly follows procedural justice and high-profile defending universal values, in its statement on its official website, it is clear that the deletion of the account is not based on its published content. Of course, as a coincidence, the vast majority of the deleted accounts were disclosed by illegal mobs on the streets of Hong Kong, attacks on the police, and other attacks by the mainstream media in Hong Kong. Real picture.

Platforms such as Twitter have clearly expressed their interest in becoming a 21st century Internet political warfare tool for the US government.

As the operator of the world’s largest social media platform, Twitter has refined and targeted content control in this way, which cannot but attract the attention of all parties. It is not surprising that there is jurisdiction. After all, there is no absolute freedom without any control; the object of jurisdiction is the so-called account that may be suspected of using automated procedures to brush traffic and automatically send texts. It is understandable to say nothing. On the social platform, the fake account is used to brush the traffic, and the robot program automatically sends the text, for example, sending 3,000 tweets steadily at intervals of four or five seconds. This kind of thing is too much, and it is a professional ecology, in fact, for any one. The platform is unfriendly. But the problem is that it is easy to attract attention by focusing on one direction. Is the goal of regulation to shape a better environment or to create a more obedient statement in the name of universal values?

In this sense, Twitter’s cleanup of the account this time shows that it is necessary to establish a code of conduct on this platform: wind energy, rain can enter, and Washington’s preferences are inconsistent; it meets preferences, such as a certain The famous saying of the President of the United States, even if it is a bitch, is also “the dog of ours,” so it is to be supported; in turn, it is to be suppressed, to be cleared, to be controlled. To put it bluntly, Twitter, Facebook, Google, and so on, this is a new name. After the results of the 2016 presidential election are out of control, the social giants need to give the US government and political elite a name to prove themselves. Not only the surname “capital” but also the surname “beauty.”

This action is no longer proof that companies operating in the developed countries of Europe and the United States maintain a complex, subtle and smooth relationship between the government and the business. The government protects the global interests of enterprises, and the company tacitly cooperates with the strategic needs of the country and consciously acts as a watch dog for national interests. There are clear, open and detailed technical procedures for the regulation and management of the platform. This procedure is politically-value-neutral, but during the implementation process, the media operators maintain a high degree of recognition of national interests: in the media In the above, sharp criticism that does not touch the core interests of the country is in principle tolerated.

In 2018, researchers at the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom have found through empirical research that the Chinese content of Twitter contains a large number of texts automatically generated by robot programs. The keynote is the criticism and accusation against the Chinese government. Obviously, none of the accounts that publish the text of these robot programs should be on the list that was banned. In other words, this ban was completed with a clear target and analysis and deep mining of metadata. The purpose is to restrict users from obtaining different information about the same event, and to ensure that the information obtained by the user is the information that some actors want the user to see. This is a standard information manipulation. It is a declaration that Twitter and other platforms have clearly expressed their interest in becoming a tool for the US government’s 21st century network political warfare.

For China, it is clear that we can and must make more in-depth innovations while clearly seeing the true face of the global cyberspace public opinion game. With more and more emerging powers and developing countries recognizing this, the paradox ecology and discourse power game of the entire global cyberspace will enter a new stage. What is certain is that, just like in the history of mankind, the true “millennial empire” can never exist for a long time. It is obviously impossible to control the voice of the global cyberspace by individual monopolistic super media platforms. The persistence phenomenon will eventually become a specific stage in history with the spread of technology and applications and the improvement of the governance capabilities of various countries.