MADRID, 6 Dic. (Portaltic/EP) –
Twitter has recognized that he has some users’ accounts were mistakenly suspended who have been victims of coordinated and malicious reporting, which has followed its new policy on private images shared without the consent of the person who appears in them.
The new Twitter policy, which allows a user report that a photo or video of you has been posted without your consent In order for it to be removed from the platform, it has experienced abuse of the reporting tool in its first days of validity.
The company has confirmed to The Washington Post who have erroneously suspended user accounts who have been the victims of coordinated reporting for malicious purposes. Those affected have been journalists and researchers opposed to the extreme right.
According to the aforementioned media, after the announcement of the new policy last Tuesday, Users linked to the far right and white supremacism urged their followers to denounce accounts belonging to users who were dedicated to identifying members of neo-Nazi groups and monitoring those attending hate demonstrations.
This led to the platform receiving a “significant number” of malicious reports as the teams of those in charge of reviewing the complaints and complying with the regulations made mistakes, with up to a dozen erroneous suspensions, as acknowledged by Twitter spokesman Trenton Kennedy.
The new regulation is actually an extension of the platform’s ‘policy on private information’, which prohibits sharing private information about a person on the Internet without their consent, a practice known as ‘doxing’.
The policy extended its ban to private photos and videos of individuals that had been published on the social network without their consent, given by the “growing misuse” of these elements “as tool to harass, intimidate and reveal people’s identities “the company explained. However, it does not affect images of public figures or individuals that may have value in the public interest.
The company assured the aforementioned media that they had already corrected the errors and that in an internal document they shared a policy review to ensure that it was used with the intention for which it was incorporated into the platform’s guidelines.
–
