Mastodawn

Ari Soglin Nov 18, 2022

Interesting piece by @mathewi about the culture clash between journalists accustomed to Twitter & existing Mastodon instances. He reports about 45 servers are blocking people on journa.host, which I was seriously considering joining or shifting towards: https://www.cjr.org/analysis/journalists-want-to-recreate-twitter-on-mastodon-mastodon-is-not-into-it.php What do you think? How should members of the media be approaching participating or reporting on the #fediverse?

Journalists want to re-create Twitter on Mastodon. Mastodon is not into it.

<p>Ever since Elon Musk completed his $45 billion takeover of Twitter last month, there has been a steady stream of users, including a number of journalists, signing up for Mastodon, an open-source alternative. No one controls Mastodon—or rather, everyone controls their own version of it. There are thousands of servers running the software, and each […]</p>

Columbia Journalism Review

DanaBlankenhorn Nov 17, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi The point of blocking servers (as opposed to people) is in the design here. Servers that block a server tailored to journalists are free to do so, but need to be transparent with their users about it. There's going to be a lot of settling-out among users and servers as people and groups find where they're most comfortable, and we need to be patient with it. The CJR ain't

Bob Wyman Nov 17, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi The article suggests that there is something wrong with “a legacy insistence on sharing your articles, live-posting breaking news, etc.” This puzzles me.

On Mastodon, I choose who I follow and can easily avoid those who publish over-zealously or those who publish things I don't care about. Given that, why would I, or any other Mastodon user, care what is published by anyone I don't follow?

mfoster Nov 17, 2022

@bobwyman @digiphile @mathewi
The problem is servers can ban other servers, there is a group of us that is working on Self Sovereign Identities, with tools from the https://identity.foundation/, https://webnative.dev/ and https://solidproject.org/ to allow self maintained user accounts and utilities distributed p2p technologies. Decentralized self sovereign granular control social media is where the future is heading https://futureinternet.io

DIF - Decentralized Identity Foundation

Bob Wyman Nov 17, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi I have always liked the ACLU definition of Censorship:

`Censorship, the suppression of words, images, or ideas that are "offensive," happens whenever some people succeed in imposing their personal political or moral values on others.' See: https://www.aclu.org/other/what-censorship

Blocking servers seems to me to be a clear example of censorship. Rather than normalizing censorship, the goal should be to develop tools and techniques that empower users to curate their own feeds.

What Is Censorship?

American Civil Liberties Union

Lars Johannes Nov 17, 2022

@bobwyman @digiphile @mathewi Not sure who's imposing on whom in your example. If people don't like their instance, they can move. By joining an instance I agree to a certain level of curation - or not if I chose one that generally doesn't block.

Bob Wyman Nov 17, 2022

@larsjohannes @digiphile @mathewi Changing servers to avoid censorship has very high switching costs -- if only because one's identity is tied to the server. Also, censorship by server operators is likely to cover many issues. I may agree with some content filtering, but not with other filtering.

Users, not intermediaries, should control content curation. We must develop methods to make crude censorship at the server level unnecessary and undesirable.

Lars Johannes Nov 17, 2022

@bobwyman @digiphile @mathewi But that's available if you go to an instance that doesn't filter.

In any case, a better solution to the issue would be to make accounts more portable. Why would you want to forbid people joining ringfenced communities or filtering, e.g., Nazi or sexual content oriented instances? Seems to defeat the entire purpose of the architecture.

Bob Wyman Nov 17, 2022

@larsjohannes @digiphile @mathewi Informed, effective consent converts censorship into curation. The issue isn't your one's right join communities, but rather the mechanisms used for content filtering.

Server-level blocking is too crude. If nothing else, it makes it hard to know what has been blocked or why. It also means that both over and under-filtering will occur.

The architecture should enable users to curate their feeds as they wish without a necessary subordination to others' values.

Alex Howard Nov 17, 2022

@bobwyman @larsjohannes @mathewi sharp.

Lars Johannes Nov 18, 2022

@bobwyman @digiphile @mathewi I think this is something people can reasonably disagree on, but I don’t see how the architecture imposes subordination. It’s a choice people can make and their consent is no less informed than when they accept Twitter’s TOS.

Ultimately, without a centralized content moderator, it seems a reasonable way for smaller instances to keep some of the worst people at bay without unmanageable transaction costs that blocking case by case would mean for them or individuals.

Eric J. Korpela Nov 18, 2022

@bobwyman (I've pointed this out before on most social networks.) A server you do not own is not yours. We cannot force our ideas of acceptable content on the people who pay the bills and do the work. As long as the blocking criteria are explicit (check "About this server" usually) there's no problem, AFAIC.

I chose a mostly wide open server (that gets blocked by some some servers because is it considered too wide open to potentially unacceptable content). Other people may want something else. Don't like your server? alias and move.

It also allows long posts.

I understand the desire to enforce a "you must distribute my posts using your time and money" policy. It's not workable on Mastodon.

Eric J. Korpela Nov 18, 2022

@bobwyman Have you looked at the mastodon.social blocked server list? https://mastodon.social/about

Bob Wyman Nov 18, 2022

@SETIEric I understand that no writer has a right to be distributed by others, however, it seems to me that a writer's followers should have a right to receive the writer's posts if that is what they wish.

How are the users of a server harmed if one of them follows someone not followed by others on the same server?

Eric J. Korpela Nov 18, 2022

@bobwyman The people who provide the resources (for free, generally) get to decide how they are used. If you try to change that, fewer people are going to provide those resources for free.

Bob Wyman Nov 18, 2022

@SETIEric
So, Money Talks. On Mastodon, just like on Twitter, Facebook, etc.

Eric J. Korpela Nov 18, 2022

@bobwyman Have you ever been anywhere where money doesn't talk? I want to live in Star Trek's pansexual multicultural communist utopia, but I don't. I live in late stage capitalist dystopia. If someone is giving you something for free and not making you pay through advertising, you generally don't try to get them to make major changes unless you're going to help pay the bills.

One difference from twitter and facebook is if you can't find a server with rules you like, you can set up a mastodon server at home or rent a mastodon server cloud instance for $6 a month. Of course, even then you can't force every other server to carry your content.

Then again, I wouldn't want child porn to show up on any machine in my home. So I would have a block list.

sabertooth salmon Nov 18, 2022

@digiphile @bobwyman @larsjohannes @mathewi is it censorship though? If I join an instance I know blocks a journalist instance I’m probably doing that for a reason, just like if I join a server that blocks adult material or something else I don’t like. Not everyone trusts journalists and knowing that their instance keeps things private from the media may be reassuring

Dianne Hackborn Nov 18, 2022

@Smiledonichyths @digiphile @bobwyman @larsjohannes @mathewi The way I am seeing it: I like to be on the part of the fediverse without Nazis, and that is accomplished by the servers I use blocking Nazi servers.

If some people running other servers have an issue with journalists and want to make their slice of the fediverse without them, then fine for them. Those people wouldn't have followed you anyway.

sparkies Nov 18, 2022

@bobwyman @larsjohannes @digiphile @mathewi you’re acting like the blocking that instance admins do is arbitrary and somehow hidden or disingenuous to the users of that instance. this is flatly untrue. every instance i’m involved with at least is very clear and transparent about which servers they’re blocking and why. if you don’t like that your server was blocked, tough. the members of blocking instances can seek you out if they’re interested and otherwise you can deal with it. you aren’t owed a path to everyone else’s eyes, regardless of their wishes, just because you have a press pass.

MikeySanchez Nov 18, 2022

@larsjohannes @bobwyman @digiphile @mathewi
Lars comment has helped me understand the Mastodon experience a little better. Thank you

Lars Johannes Nov 18, 2022

@mechmaniac85 Thanks for the kind words.

Karim Zidan Nov 17, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi Being blocked by 45 servers out of the thousands on Mastodon has not impacted my experience on here in the slightest. Far more remain welcoming and understanding of our role as journalists. Those who lock us out are the same ones who likely have something to hide.

Lars Johannes Nov 17, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi

My preference (as a consumer) would be for journos to join large instances and let their work (or absence thereof) speak for itself. If you give me the option to block a large chunk of the outrage economy that for some reason passes as journalism nowadays the temptation is very high to just block all of it.

Now, the 45 (out of 12k) instances actually blocking that instance seem to be niche groups unrelated to news like pooper.social.

Ricard Torres 📷Nov 17, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi Good piece!

I think it's too dangerous for the journalist to huddle in the same instance. They are looking for some sort of "verification" by being in that instance, but that's just too easy to block.

Granted, you can block individual users instead. In any case this, doesn't seem very decentralized to have them all in one instance.

Why not spread around and use the built-in verification system?

Bob Stepno Nov 17, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi

Theory1: Journalism companies (TV, newspapers) mostly missed the #cluetrain that online could preserve (1994) or revive (2022?) their presence as a host of #local #community, by being part of the conversation -- not just using a new medium as a pipe to deliver its same old stuff.

Theory2: Communication-&-community-savvy online-natives see "journalists" as vampires lurking on servers to suck in info & search for things to "report" sensationally & for ad-supported profit.

Alex Howard Nov 17, 2022

@BobStep @mathewi reasonable hypotheses

Steve Yelvington Nov 17, 2022

@digiphile @BobStep @mathewi

Yup. Debodevem, as they say in Chicago.

sabertooth salmon Nov 18, 2022

@BobStep @digiphile @mathewi as a non-journalist, exactly. If I had a penny for every a viral tweet about something I’ve seen that immediately had some media person in the comments asking if they could use the video I’d be rich, and so probably would be the person who did the video. It comes off as vampiric and predatory. Also I’ve seen journalists outright steal tweets and informative threads with no credit for articles.

Bob Stepno Nov 18, 2022

@Smiledonichyths @digiphile @mathewi

Agreed. Reprehensible behavior and damaging to the reputation of what is left of the profession. So painful to watch the click-addiction, SEO sensationalism, and shallow "social media reporter" performance feeding the 24/7 news clock at understaffed "legacy" media and younger online-only sites.

Meanwhile, only praise to those who manage to do original on-the-scene and investigative reporting and well-crafted clear concise writing in spite of it all.

Bob Stepno Nov 18, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi
Theory3: Non-profit news websites need better funding to support honest "watchdog" reporting on government and business, as well as day-to-day storytelling about life and art on a local level and around the world... without clickbait speed, sex & sensationalism. But maybe independent open-source, syndicated (RSS?) (anarcho-syndicalist?), creative, funny, chaotic, multi-faceted, multi-federated, online media can help.

Bob Stepno Nov 18, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi
I must confess I have heard the term "anarcho-syndicalism" spoken aloud maybe twice in my life, most recently by @Rushkoff ... Beyond the kind of sources you see linked to the term's Wikipedia page, I haven't made a study of it, or of anything to do with political economics. Mea culpa.

I've read more about RSS, which coincidentally were my father's initials, and which "just works" as an open-standard without being anyone's billionaire-building product. (Thanks, @davew )

creatinglake Nov 17, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi agreed, it is a structural problem. Users should be able to determine who to block, not instance owners without user consent. We are collecting data from Mastodon users like you to identify, and ideally solve, the main pain points of using Mastodon and the Fediverse. We can image an way for journalists to access the fediverse on your terms, like a Substack for the Fediverse (with upgrades). https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1nzivsBDx8L_am5F9rySr7d7dCbDTdMTcsBjhUYODYy4/edit

Mastodon User Experience Survey

In an effort to improve Mastodon and help independent decentralized social media compete with big tech companies we’d like to better understand what challenges you’ve had joining and using Mastodon. This survey is being conducted by the Mosaic Foundation, a non-profit with the mission to build digital infrastructure for a new era of democratic societies. Resulting datasets will be shared with the public, but no personal information will be shared.

Google Docs

Alex Howard Nov 17, 2022

@creatinglake @mathewi thank you for sharing this

Not Social Nov 18, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi @creatinglake

What incentive is there for an instance owner to keep incurring the cost of maintaining their instance if we take away their ability to curate the content on their instance?

Not Social Nov 18, 2022

@mathewi @digiphile @creatinglake

The user owns their account and are free to migrate it to any instance they wish, while the instance owner owns the instance and they get to moderate the instance as they wish.

Trying to reign in the tools instance owners have is going to lead us back to a centralized system, and all the problems that led to the great migration.

creatinglake Nov 18, 2022

@notsocial @mathewi @digiphile I am not suggesting that instance owners be reigned in, but perhaps we can have single user instances. My understanding is that it's not that easy to move an account to another instance and if one does they lose all of their posts.

creatinglake Nov 18, 2022

@notsocial @digiphile @mathewi what about single user instances that each user pays for?

Not Social Nov 18, 2022

@mathewi @digiphile @creatinglake I agree with this, the knowledge gap for an average user to spin up their personal mastodon instance is large. A paid click to launch service would be great, but probably not with mastodon software as the platform, given a lot of the behind of the scene features admins get, most users don’t care about.

Though the issue of moderation still remains, it just gets shifted to the host provider.

Not Social Nov 18, 2022

@creatinglake @mathewi @digiphile I think you would still end up with personal views guiding what sort content host providers want stored on their servers. E.g. One host providers views of what hate speech encompasses would be different from others.

creatinglake Nov 18, 2022

@notsocial @mathewi @digiphile agree with almost all of that. Why can't a single person do moderation for their single user instance in the Fediverse? I am prepared to do my own moderation.

Not Social Nov 18, 2022

@creatinglake @mathewi @digiphile True you might be, but the data your instance downloads resides on the host provider’s hard drives. That is where the issue lies.

A good example of such a conflict in moderation is hosting of truth social and gap instances, where very few host providers wanted their business.

Not Social Nov 18, 2022

@creatinglake @digiphile @mathewi So as a host provider, do you allow instances you host to be able to pull material from those sites and run the risk of being accused of having hateful material or possibly illegal content on your drives, or do you block them and play it safe. I.e. moderate for all instances on your servers.

Robb Montgomery Nov 17, 2022

@mathewi @digiphile https://robbmontgomery.com/mastodon-a-quick-start-guide-for-journalists/

Mastodon: A Quick Start Guide for Journalists - Robb Montgomery

Five easy steps for mastering #Mastodon - A guide for journalists during the #TwitterMigration. Tips to get you started on the right path.

Robb Montgomery

LordPhantom (Mathew)Nov 17, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi I guess people never learn the lesson about banning things. We should welcome journal.host - At least we know they are journalists, rather than forcing them to make fake accounts on other instances.

Jeremy Nov 18, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi My understanding is that the bans of journa.host are at least as much about anti-semitic usernames and (as in the case of the article you've linked here) an apparent association with kiwifarms - one of the links in the article is to a tool produced and maintained by that group. For a lot of folks that (understandably, in my view) raises too many alarm bells to ignore, especially in combo with a group not necessarily on board with fediverse norms.

Ed Oswald Nov 18, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi Meh, I looked at the servers blocking, and I didn't recognize a single one. We have to remember the concept here is federation, not a single network. Not worried.

https://gigatexal.blog -he/him Nov 18, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi where and what you join matters. If the host / node you join platforms journalists that are anathema to other admins it could get blocked or disconnected. But will likely be peered or connected to others. For the greater proportion of admins to block a whole node would be for that node to consistently break norms and become a bad actor.

Per Funke Nov 18, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi
Maybe blocking whole servers isn't a good approach. If the allegedly bad guys start moving to other servers this way of fixing the problem could be disruptive to the whole environment. I've survived 2015-2022 on Twitter by blocking unwanted accounts. It should work on mastodon also.

Corb_The_Lesser Nov 18, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi I'm not a member of the media but it's a strong negative for me if anonymous people block my access to accounts I want to follow.

Lance Homer Nov 18, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi Good article. I am glad to see many of the journalists that I followed on Twitter here on Mastadon. My assumption is that people like myself will establish themselves on instances that don’t block Journa.Host.

IndieArtisans Nov 18, 2022

@digiphile @mathewi They're throwing out the babies with the bath water. Hopefully this will incentivize legitimate news agencies to set up their own instances.