Erdogan Furious as Twitter Removes Turkish Suspicious Influence Accounts

On Friday, Twitter Security announced it has permanently removed 32,200 accounts linked to the People’s Republic of China, Russia, and Turkey for various violations of Twitter’s platform manipulation policies.  

Twitter said it detected the Turkish network of 7,340 accounts in early 2020, as well as involved accounts employing “coordinated inauthentic activity” aimed at a domestic Turkish audience.  

“Based on our analysis of the network’s technical indicators and account behaviours, the collection of fake and compromised accounts was being used to amplify political narratives favorable to the AK Parti, and demonstrated strong support for President Erdogan,” the social media platform said.  

“These compromised accounts have been repeated targets of account hacking and takeover efforts by the state actors identified above. The broader network was also used for commercial activities, such as cryptocurrency-related spam,” Twitter explained. 

The major account take-down has infuriated Turkish President Reccep Tayyip Erdogan. The strong-man president slammed the removal and said Twitter’s accusations were untrue. 

“(This) has demonstrated yet again that Twitter is no mere social media company, but a propaganda machine with certain political and ideological inclinations,” Erdogan’s communications director Fahrettin Altun said.  

Turkish cyber rights expert Yaman Akdeniz said the network appeared to be made up of relatively inactive bots and requires further investigation.  

“But it makes it official that bots are used in Turkey for political purposes,” he told Reuters.  

Twitter said it has shared details of the disabled accounts with research partners Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) and the US-based Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO) for further evaluation. 

Outside of the Turkish network, the bulk of the freshly-disabled accounts were linked to China. Twitter removed a new network 23,750 accounts that comprised the “core network,” and an additional 150,000 accounts that were “amplifiers.” 

“They were Tweeting predominantly in Chinese languages and spreading geopolitical narratives favorable to the Communist Party of China (CCP), while continuing to push deceptive narratives about the political dynamics in Hong Kong,” Twitter revealed.   

The social media platform explained Friday’s take-down is part of its “site integrity efforts,” adding it is “the most critical work we do at Twitter to protect the public conversation.”

 

‘Big Tech’ Leverages its Monopoly, Halting Innovation

Many did not welcome Facebook’s move to start labeling state-controlled news posts as a step toward protecting media consumers from “fake news.” The far-reaching implications of the move could change the media landscape. “It’s not just about funding, it’s where can a government exert editorial control over the entity?” Facebook’s Head of Cyber Security, Nathaniel Gleicher asked.

Much reporting contrasted the move with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s unwillingness to censor incorrect content published by US President Donald Trump. Several outlets openly wondered how Facebook could be promoting anti-fake news measures while not stopping the often outrageously false statement by Trump.

Corporate control

The reason for the disparity appears to be that Facebook’s new labels have little to do with stopping false news, and instead concern increasing corporate control over media. By labeling state influence over broadcasters while ignoring corporate influence over many of Facebook’s preferred news sources, they legitimize these sources and hide the influence of big business on social media.

Applying universal labels to indicate outside influence for all media outlets would lead to CNN having the label “owned by AT&T Telecom,” the Washington Post “fully owned by Amazon owner Jeff Bezos,” or almost all US media outlets carrying the label “receives large investments from weapons manufacturers.”

Because Facebook only applies the label to state control, this entrenched corporate control remains conveniently hidden. By not labeling these corporate-funded outlets, they appear free of any biased influence. The result is a return to the days when television ruled and corporate media exercised full control of news narratives.

Growing trend

The developments at Facebook are just one in a plethora of examples of how Silicon Valley’s tech giants have stopped innovating and have started leveraging their monopolies. During the rise of companies like Google, Facebook, and Twitter, the term “tech start-up” became almost mythical and started a global craze of trying to find “unicorns,” the next billion dollar-valued tech firm.

But as these companies got bigger, the mantra changed. The idea of small and nimble companies, competing by introducing new innovations, started to fade as the industry’s pioneers grew exponentially in size and influence. Suddenly the focus of start-ups changed from boasting creative operations and small business values to being large companies trading in user data.

Instead of developing new innovations, these companies now buy up any potential competitor before they pose a threat. The purchases of Whatsapp, Instagram, and Waze are examples of acquisitions that actively aimed to stop innovation and prevent competition. The “big data” hegemony has led developers to aim for a quick payout when their innovations are inevitably swallowed up by one of tech’s big companies.

With Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Twitter as examples, big tech is expanding with almost no barriers to growth. The value of all small tech firms around the world combined is now less than Apple’s valuation alone. Without effective monitoring and regulation of these monopolies, soon we could be reverting back to a corporate-controlled and distributed media narrative, reminiscent of the days of television.