Wired: A Saudi Prince’s Attempt to Silence Critics on Twitter. “IN 2014, MOHAMMED bin Salman’s uncle, King Abdullah, was nearing death. For more than 60 years, the Saudi crown had been passed from one son of the kingdom’s founder to the next, the heir being determined by a combination of seniority and consensus of the surviving brothers. Mohammed’s father, Crown Prince Salman, was set to inherit the throne upon Abdullah’s death. But anonymous Twitter users were spreading claims that Salman had dementia, and that presented a problem for Mohammed: If the rumors became accepted as fact by Saudis and foreigners, Salman’s brothers might feel pressure to elevate one of his rivals, cutting the Salman clan off from its claim to the throne and dashing Mohammed’s hopes of one day inheriting the crown.”
Bangladesh Post: Govt to set up digital archive on Bangabandhu. “The government will set up a digital archive on Bangabandhu to inform the new generation about different aspects of the life and ideology of Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, reports BSS. The information was revealed on Thursday in a meeting of Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s Birth Centenary Celebration National Implementation Committee in the capital, said a press release. “
CNET: Twitter, you’ll crimp world leaders’ tweets? Good luck with that. “Hey, @jack, can we talk some more? Two years ago, I asked seven questions about how you handled harassment, arguing, among other things, that you need to more clearly spell out enforcement policies for ‘newsworthy’ people, including the president of the United States. I wanted to know what rules and standards you’d hold them to.”
The Daily Beast: Why Trump’s Tweets Aren’t Going Anywhere. “Twitter will allow world leaders to post tweets that violate its terms of service, but will enforce new rules about sharing those tweets, the company announced Tuesday.”
TechXplore: Study explores interactions between world leaders on social media. “Researchers at the University of Southern California (USC) have recently carried out a study investigating the interactions among different world leaders and influential political figures on social media. Their findings, pre-published on arXiv, provide interesting new insight about how government actors use social media, which could help to better understand the role of new technologies in diplomatic exchanges.”
CNET: New tool debunks deepfakes of Trump and other world leaders. “Deepfakes of world leaders may be easier to debunk using a new detection method, according to an academic paper Wednesday. Researchers created profiles of the unique expressions and head movements made by powerful people — like Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and US presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren — when they talk. That ‘soft biometric model’ helped detect a range of deepfakes, the kind of manipulated videos powered by artificial intelligence that have sprung up lately featuring Mark Zuckerberg and others.”
University of Colorado Boulder thesis: World Leaders a-Twitter: Communication Platforms and Agenda-Building During the 2018 NATO Summit. “Twitter is a thriving microblogging service with growing prominence in the political sphere. In this study, I examine the differences between Twitter communications and verbal communications by three heads of state and government in relation to the most recent NATO Summit in July 2018. Through a three-step analysis, including descriptive statistics, content and tone analysis, and comparative analysis, the study investigates Twitter’s influence on content and tone and its agenda-building capacity for face-to-face summits.”
Twitter Blog: World Leaders on Twitter. “Twitter is here to serve and help advance the global, public conversation. Elected world leaders play a critical role in that conversation because of their outsized impact on our society. Blocking a world leader from Twitter or removing their controversial Tweets would hide important information people should be able to see and debate. It would also not silence that leader, but it would certainly hamper necessary discussion around their words and actions.” I’m reading this as “we’re holding world leaders to LOWER standards of behavior because they are world leaders” which seems bizarre to me.