Photo by Edgar on Unsplash

原始文章

來源: Trust as a Service (TaaS): A Vision for Twitter

在分析傳統媒體公司和新時代媒體公司所佔據的市場空間時，客戶購買的必要先決條件之一是信任。 沒有信任，人們就無法消費媒體源，尤其是當該媒體源聲稱是新聞和訊息的提供者時。

When analyzing the market space inhabited by both traditional and new-age media companies one of the necessary prerequisites for customer buy-in is Trust. Without trust, people can not consume a media source especially when that media source purports to be a purveyor of news and information.

根據蓋洛普的說法，美國人對大眾媒體機構的信任度已經下降。 所有政治人口的信任度都在下降，民主黨是唯一的例外； 這是一個顛覆的成熟行業。 輸入 Twitter 和 馬斯克（Elon Musk）。

According to Gallup, American trust in mass media institutions has tanked. Trust is down across all political demographics with the Democrats being the sole exception; this is an industry ripe for disruption. Enter Twitter and Elon Musk.

Twitter 的核心是為其用戶群提供信任即服務 (TaaS)。 Twitter 正試圖向其受眾推銷這樣一種想法，即我們可以委託它在其平台上主持重要對話，**而無需採取不道德的節制策略來審查被視為“不適當”的訊息。**此外，Twitter 正試圖證明它可以在多大程度上採取行動 作為“信任經紀人”，因為在 Twitter 上發生的對話可以建立或破壞人們、機構和其他實體的信任。

Twitter, at its core, is offering Trust as a Service (TaaS) to its user base. Twitter is trying to sell its audience on the idea that we can entrust it to host important conversations on its platform without engaging in unethical moderation tactics to censor information deemed ‘inappropriate.’ In addition, Twitter is attempting to prove to what extent it can act as a “trust broker” since conversations that happen on Twitter can make or break trust in people, institutions, and other entities.

從歷史上看，我們擁有現在的“傳統媒體”，它通過告訴我們可以信任和不可以信任的人來促成信任。 正如 Malcolm X 指出的那樣，集中的信託經紀寡頭讓一小群人能夠控制敘事，以至於可以塑造有罪和無罪的觀念。 現在我們已經到了一個地步，正如蓋洛普早些時候所表明的那樣，Legacy Media 未能適應互聯網帶來的日益提高的透明度以及帶有偏見的報導，從而毀掉了自己的聲譽。

Historically, we had what is now a ‘Legacy Media’ that brokered trust by telling us who we could and could not trust. As Malcolm X noted, centralized trust brokerage oligarchies gave a small group of people the ability to control the narrative to such an extent that perceptions of guilt and innocence could be shaped. Now we have reached a point, as shown earlier by Gallup, where Legacy Media has destroyed its own reputation by failing to adapt to the increasing levels of transparency that came with the Internet and through biased reporting.

Twitter 已成為即時新聞更新的場所。 當您可以從直接來源聽到並看到“群眾的智慧”在傳播訊息中發揮作用時，就沒有競爭了。 如上圖所示，傳統媒體格式中的任何內容都會被延遲、審查較少並且充滿偏見。 當觀眾看到一個讓普通人直接與訊息和知名人物互動的免費平台時，破舊的媒體環境如何希望競爭？ 這真的無法競爭。

Twitter has become the place for real-time news updates. There’s no competition when you can hear from direct sources and watch the “wisdom of the crowd” play out in disseminating information. Anything in a traditional media format is delayed, less scrutinized, and riddled with bias as indicated by the above chart. When audiences are presented with a free platform that lets regular people directly interact with information and prominent figures, how can a decrepit media landscape hope to compete? It can not.

年復一年，這些媒體更像是資金過多的 Twitter 策劃工具（在最壞的情況下是宣傳媒體），而不是新聞和訊息的實際傳播者。 更不用說在 Twitter 上發布新聞與其他人報導新聞之間存在的時差，如下圖所示。

With each passing year, such outlets act more as overfunded Twitter curation tools (and as propaganda outlets in the worst of cases) than actual disseminators of news and information. Not to mention the lag that exists between the time that news breaks on Twitter and when the news is reported by everyone else which the below cartoon illustrates.

年復一年，《紐約時報》和《華盛頓郵報》等傳統媒體越來越依賴社交媒體來製作內容。 當像 Twitter 這樣的網點存在時，人們可以從直接來源獲取新聞並通過人群的智慧對訊息進行分析，Legacy Media 競爭的可行方式就會逐漸減少。 所有這一切都引出了一個問題，即 Twitter 正在做些什麼來將自己作為 TaaS 進行營銷，從而贏得用戶群的信任。

With each year that passes, Legacy Media outlets like the New York Times and Washington Post become increasingly dependent on social media to produce their content. When outlets like Twitter exist where people can get news from direct sources and analysis of information occurs through the Wisdom of the Crowd, there are gradually fewer and fewer viable ways for Legacy Media to compete. All of this begs the question as to what Twitter is doing to market itself as a TaaS so it can earn the trust of its user base.

New Twitter 繼承的一大包袱是一種技術產品，它仍然使用任意標準來進行懲罰。 正如所記錄的那樣，Twitter 上的審核過程仍然存在缺陷。 可以作為潛在解決方案的一些建議是：

• 修復部分帳號無法申訴的bug
• 取消永久封鎖（或要求人工審核以發布永久封鎖）
• 減輕大規模報告活動的保障措施

A large burden inherited by New Twitter is a technical product that still dishes out punishments using arbitrary criteria. As documented, there continue to be flaws in the moderation process on Twitter. Some suggestions that could act as potential solutions are:

• Fix the bug where some accounts are unable to appeal
• Remove permanent suspensions (or require human review to issue a permanent ban)
• Safeguards to mitigate mass reporting campaigns

雖然賦予新註冊用戶權力很重要，但認識到帳號建立可能被濫用的惡意方式也很重要——即被機器人和那些專門建立替代帳號以報告意識形態競爭對手的人濫用。 除了限制新建立的帳號報告用戶的能力（甚至可能將此能力鎖定給 Twitter Blue 訂閱者）之外，該部門的一個潛在解決方案可能是做一些類似於 Reddit Karma 系統的事情，用戶需要滿足某些 Karma 門檻才能 使用某些 Twitter 功能，其中包括報告工具。

While it’s important to empower newly registered users, it is also important to recognize the malicious ways account creation can be abused - namely by bots and those creating alt accounts specifically to report ideological rivals. Along with restricting the ability of freshly made accounts to report users (perhaps even locking this ability to Twitter Blue subscribers), a potential solution in this department could be to do something akin to the Reddit Karma system where users need to meet certain Karma thresholds to use certain Twitter features which would include reporting tools.

已經採取了一些措施來糾正之前 Twitter 所有權下的失誤。 #FreedomFridays 是一個有趣的傳統，一些被不公平地禁止的帳號會被恢復。 通過馬斯克 (Elon Musk) 進行的民意調查，Twitter 用戶可以在某種程度上影響公司政策。 這與其他公司的運作方式形成鮮明對比，也不同於之前的所有權實施政治驅動的政策，如“性別歧視”禁令，同時在其平台上採取相對較少的措施打擊兒童內容。

Some steps are already being taken to correct missteps taken under previous Twitter ownership. #FreedomFridays have been a fun tradition where some accounts that were unfairly banned get reinstated. Via polls conducted by Elon Musk, Twitter users can, to some extent, influence company policy. This is in stark contrast to how other companies operate and different from prior ownership implementing politically driven policies like the ‘misgendering’ ban while doing relatively little to combat child content on its platform.

馬斯克 (Elon Musk) 最重要的決定之一是發布 “推特”文件，該文件揭示了一家大型科技社交媒體公司和政府勾結幕後發生的事情。 通過這樣做，他為科技公司的透明度設定了新標準。

One of the most important decisions from Elon Musk was to release the Twitter Files that revealed what went on behind the scenes of a major tech social media company and government collusion. By doing so, he set new standards for what transparency should look like from tech companies.

洩露的消息表明，類似的事件也發生在其他公司，如 Facebook、微軟、Verizon、Reddit、Pinterest 等。 推特文件顯示，在其之前的所有權下，推特作為機構的一個部門運作。

Leaked messages indicate similar events were occurring at other companies such as Facebook, Microsoft, Verizon, Reddit, Pinterest, and others. The Twitter Files revealed that under its previous ownership, Twitter operated as an arm of the institutions.

要想作為 TaaS 取得成功，New Twitter 必須發揮反抗力量的作用，抵制傳統媒體扼殺其平台對話的壓力，並通過賦予公民新聞權力以取代舊寡頭在信任中介中的作用。

To succeed as a TaaS, New Twitter must act as a defiant force by resisting pressure from Legacy Media to stifle conversations on its platform and by empowering citizen journalism in order to displace the role of old oligarchies in trust brokering.

股癌 Telegram

• 對媒體來說最重要的就是信任感
• 美國人民（或全球人民）對媒體信任快速下滑
• 傳統媒體由於資金來源等原因，常常有立場
• 社群媒體快速且有拼湊能力，需要的是一個好的平台
• 好的平台就是要盡可能地降低 "決定者" 的裁決權限
• TaaS 的觀念，trust as a service

連一些以前是共識的 “真相” 近年也開始被挑戰：膽固醇過高不要吃蛋、膠原蛋白是騙人的、深蹲膝蓋不能超出腳尖等等。

先不講媒體，就連查核機構這種高大上組織，也開始給人抓包選擇性查核。所以追尋 “有公信力” 的單位，就跟什麼都要別人負責一樣，巨嬰。

對於做股票的來說，每天 memo 和消息傳來傳去，裡面一堆假的。不只市場派，連公司派都可以放話唬爛，假營收、假稼動率、假大單，被騙就是自己承擔而已。有時一個謊言一開始是真的，最後狀況改變才變假的；反之，被澄清的假消息最後成真的也不少。

Reference

• Trust as a Service (TaaS): A Vision for Twitter