Matt Taibbi

Rank 23 of 47
|
Score 29
6/6/2024, 1:37:13 PM
X
In reply to:
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
617d
22. Execs talked about confronting congress and the ASD with “our knowledge” – that the Hamilton dashboard was fake – and trying to “reorient” all parties to more “accurate” statements. Most of all, “We should reach out privately to maintain the relationship,” Monje said.
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
617d
21. “It’s also a comms play for ASD,” said Horne, a future National Security Council spokesperson under Joe Biden. They wanted to tread lightly: ASD’s advisory council contained former heads or deputy heads of the CIA, NSA, and DHS, John Podesta, and future Biden security…
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
617d
20. But senior executives realized neither HPSCI nor Hamilton’s sponsor, the Alliance for Securing Democracy, was interested in hearing their reports. True or false, the Russia bot story was a public relations boon for everyone – “a comms play for the members,” Monje said.
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
617d
19. CRY RUSSIA Some Twitter execs wanted to go public: “The sooner we can get it out there that this was an organic movement, the better… It signals to other members that they will look foolish if they cry 'Russia!' every time something happens on social media that they…
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
617d
18. Therefore, when Twitter in early 2018 received questions from Democrats on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) claiming Russia was boosting hashtags like #SchumerShutdown and #ReleaseTheMemo, Twitter knew they were bogus.
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
617d
17. Hamilton accounts “strongly preference pro-Trump accounts… to assert that Russia is expressing a preference for Trump.”
It was a scam: Gather pro-Trump users. Declare them Russian. Then, watch topics the accounts follow/share. Finally, announce: “Russia loves Trump!”

The statement and accompanying images discuss internal communications among Twitter executives regarding the Hamilton 68 dashboard and its claims of Russian interference in social media hashtags. The content touches on issues of transparency, misinformation, and the relationship between social media companies and government entities.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement and images suggest an effort to correct misinformation, which aligns with the principle of striving to do no harm with words and actions. However, the private nature of the communications and the suggestion to maintain relationships privately could be seen as lacking full transparency. [+1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The communications respect the privacy and dignity of others by not engaging in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. However, the internal nature of the discussions and the suggestion to handle matters privately may raise questions about the transparency of the process.
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The intent to correct misinformation and promote accurate information aligns with promoting understanding, empathy, and compassion. However, the private handling of the situation may not fully promote public understanding. [+1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The internal communications show a willingness to engage in constructive dialogue and avoid personal attacks, adhering to the principle of constructive criticism and dialogue. [+1]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The discussions reflect an effort to use influence responsibly by addressing misinformation, but the private nature of the communications may limit the perceived integrity and transparency of the actions.