Exclusive: Google,
Facebook quietly move toward automatic blocking of
extremist videos
Send a link to a friend
[June 25, 2016]
By Joseph Menn and Dustin Volz
SAN FRANCISCO/
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Some
of the web’s biggest destinations for watching videos have quietly
started using automation to remove extremist content from their sites,
according to two people familiar with the process.
The move is a major step forward for internet companies that are
eager to eradicate violent propaganda from their sites and are under
pressure to do so from governments around the world as attacks by
extremists proliferate, from Syria to Belgium and the United States.
YouTube and Facebook are among the sites deploying systems to block
or rapidly take down Islamic State videos and other similar
material, the sources said.
The technology was originally developed to identify and remove
copyright-protected content on video sites. It looks for "hashes," a
type of unique digital fingerprint that internet companies
automatically assign to specific videos, allowing all content with
matching fingerprints to be removed rapidly.
Such a system would catch attempts to repost content already
identified as unacceptable, but would not automatically block videos
that have not been seen before.
The companies would not confirm that they are using the method or
talk about how it might be employed, but numerous people familiar
with the technology said that posted videos could be checked against
a database of banned content to identify new postings of, say, a
beheading or a lecture inciting violence.
The two sources would not discuss how much human work goes into
reviewing videos identified as matches or near-matches by the
technology. They also would not say how videos in the databases were
initially identified as extremist.
Use of the new technology is likely to be refined over time as
internet companies continue to discuss the issue internally and with
competitors and other interested parties.
In late April, amid pressure from U.S. President Barack Obama and
other U.S. and European leaders concerned about online
radicalization, internet companies including Alphabet Inc's YouTube,
Twitter Inc, Facebook Inc and CloudFlare held a call to discuss
options, including a content-blocking system put forward by the
private Counter Extremism Project, according to one person on the
call and three who were briefed on what was discussed.
The discussions underscored the central but difficult role some of
the world's most influential companies now play in addressing issues
such as terrorism, free speech and the lines between government and
corporate authority.
None of the companies at this point has embraced the anti-extremist
group's system, and they have typically been wary of outside
intervention in how their sites should be policed.
“It’s a little bit different than copyright or child pornography,
where things are very clearly illegal,” said Seamus Hughes, deputy
director of George Washington University’s Program on Extremism.
Extremist content exists on a spectrum, Hughes said, and different
web companies draw the line in different places.
Most have relied until now mainly on users to flag content that
violates their terms of service, and many still do. Flagged material
is then individually reviewed by human editors who delete postings
found to be in violation.
The companies now using automation are not publicly discussing it,
two sources said, in part out of concern that terrorists might learn
how to manipulate their systems or that repressive regimes might
insist the technology be used to censor opponents.
“There's no upside in these companies talking about it,” said
Matthew Prince, chief executive of content distribution company
CloudFlare. “Why would they brag about censorship?”
The two people familiar with the still-evolving industry practice
confirmed it to Reuters after the Counter Extremism Project publicly
described its content-blocking system for the first time last week
and urged the big internet companies to adopt it.
[to top of second column] |
A 3D plastic representation of the Facebook logo is seen in this
illustration in Zenica, Bosnia and Herzegovina, May 13, 2015.
REUTERS/Dado Ruvic
WARY OF OUTSIDE SOLUTION
The April call was led by Facebook's head of global policy management, Monika
Bickert, sources with knowledge of the call said. On it, Facebook presented
options for discussion, according to one participant, including the one proposed
by the non-profit Counter Extremism Project.
The anti-extremism group was founded by, among others, Frances Townsend, who
advised former president George W. Bush on homeland security, and Mark Wallace,
who was deputy campaign manager for the Bush 2004 re-election campaign.
Three sources with knowledge of the April call said that companies expressed
wariness of letting an outside group decide what defined unacceptable content.
Other alternatives raised on the call included establishing a new
industry-controlled nonprofit or expanding an existing industry-controlled
nonprofit. All the options discussed involved hashing technology.
The model for an industry-funded organization might be the nonprofit National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which identifies known child
pornography images using a system known as PhotoDNA. The system is licensed for
free by Microsoft Corp.
Microsoft announced in May it was providing funding and technical support to
Dartmouth College computer scientist Hany Farid, who works with the Counter
Extremism Project and helped develop PhotoDNA, "to develop a technology to help
stakeholders identify copies of patently terrorist content."
Facebook’s Bickert agreed with some of the concerns voiced during the call about
the Counter Extremism Project's proposal, two people familiar with the events
said. She declined to comment publicly on the call or on Facebook's efforts,
except to note in a statement that Facebook is “exploring with others in
industry ways we can collaboratively work to remove content that violates our
policies against terrorism.”
In recent weeks, one source said, Facebook has sent out a survey to other
companies soliciting their opinions on different options for industry
collaboration on the issue.
William Fitzgerald, a spokesman for Alphabet's Google unit, which owns YouTube,
also declined to comment on the call or about the company's automated efforts to
police content.
A Twitter spokesman said the company was still evaluating the Counter Extremism
Project's proposal and had "not yet taken a position."
A former Google employee said people there had long debated what else besides
thwarting copyright violations or sharing revenue with creators the company
should do with its Content ID system. Google's system for content-matching is
older and far more sophisticated than Facebook's, according to people familiar
with both.
Lisa Monaco, senior adviser to the U.S. president on counterterrorism, said in a
statement that the White House welcomed initiatives that seek to help companies
“better respond to the threat posed by terrorists’ activities online.
(Reporting by Joseph Menn in San Francisco and Dustin Volz in Washington;
Additional reporting by Yasmeen Abutaleb and Jim Finkle; Editing by Jonathan
Weber and Bill Rigby)
[© 2016 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2016 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |