Two Cheers For Unfiltered Information

from the unfiltered-speech-can-be-good dept

In the early hours of December 31st, 2019 weeks before the coronavirus was recognized as a budding pandemic, Taiwanese Centers for Disease Control Deputy Director Luo Yijun was awake, browsing the PTT Bulletin Board. A relic of 90s-era hacker culture, PTT is an open source internet forum originally created by Taiwanese university students. On the site's gossip board, hidden behind a warning of adult content, Yijun found a discussion about the pneumonia outbreak in Wuhan. However, the screenshots from WeChat posted to PTT described a SARS-like coronavirus, not the flu or pneumonia. The thread identified a wet market as the likely source of the outbreak, indicating that the disease could be passed from one species to another. Alarmed, Luo Yijun warned his colleagues and forwarded his findings to China and the World Health Organization (WHO). That evening, Taiwan began screening travelers from Wuhan, acting on the information posted to PTT.

A niche Internet forum, not the WHO or Chinese Communist Party (CCP), notified Taiwan, and the world more broadly, of the seriousness of COVID-19 – the disease caused by the new coronavirus. The same day, Wuhan’s Municipal Health Commission described the disease as pneumonia and cautioned against assumptions of human-to-human transmission. While Chinese health authorities downplayed the seriousness of the outbreak, a lightly governed website helped information about the disease to escape China’s Great Firewall. As viral misinformation inspires skepticism of free speech in the west and conservative legal scholars express admiration for China’s system of information control, this episode illustrates the value of unfiltered speech.

PTT’s gossip board is not fact checked by experts, and while the board has some rules, it is a place for gossip rather than verified information or news. The forum is governed far more liberally than contemporary social media platforms with extensive community standards and tens of thousands of paid moderators. While bulletin boards have largely fallen out of favor with western Internet users, PTT probably is most comparable to 4chan, the Something Awful forums, or Hackernews. In the past, it has hosted leaked government surveillance proposals, and Chinese officials have recently complained about the site as a source of abusive speech about the WHO.

There is a real difference between lightly governed or unmoderated spaces, essentially ruled by the First Amendment (which inevitably play host to the good, the bad, and the ugly) and platforms that are specifically curated to highlight vulgar or illiberal content. 4chan contains image boards dedicated to fashion, travel, umpteen forms of Japanese animation, and /pol, a board for politically incorrect conversation that receives an outsized amount of attention in mainstream media. The Daily Stormer is a blog for white nationalists. We must resist the urge to condemn ungoverned fora alongside badly governed forums simply because both provide platforms for noxious speech.

Because the Daily Stormer is specifically curated to highlight neo-Nazi speech, we can safely assume that it won’t host valuable information. Its gatekeepers explicitly select fascistic speech for publication before the content goes live and are unlikely to grant a platform to anything else. It certainly isn’t a hangout for anonymous epidemiologists. 4chan, on the other hand, contains its fair share of extremist speech but the platform is not moderated by fascists, nor, for the most part, anyone at all. 4chan hosts almost any sort of speech; despite being unverified, useful information may still be posted there. Due to its lack of formal gatekeeping, users’ comments are not screened for either accuracy or good taste. As a result of 4chan’s norm of anonymous participation, prominence, and popularity with particularly active internet trolling communities in the mid-aughts, the site gained a reputation as an informational free-for-all, rendering it a useful dumping ground for both leaks of authentic nonpublic information and unhinged conspiracy.

Even as its prominence has diminished, 4chan’s reputation ensures that it remains a popular space to share privileged information, often in concert with other essentially unmoderated publication services such as Pastebin. Last year, News of Jeffrey Epstein’s death was first leaked on the site. While it can be difficult to prove the veracity of any one claim, the existence of such a place--an ungoverned information clearinghouse--has undeniable value. Ungoverned fora allow arguments, assertions, and media to be freely shared and considered without giving undue authority to unproven assertions.

Because users participate anonymously or pseudonymously, they cannot rely upon, and subsequently do not risk, their permanent personal reputations and credentials. Likewise, it is the very popularity of these message boards as information clearinghouses that makes them attractive to bad actors. If you want to publish a sensitive message, for good or for ill, lightly moderated platforms are good tools for the job.

Although these platforms may spread disinformation, if read with a healthy dose of skepticism the content they carry is not per-se dangerous. Crucially, they fail differently than, in this case, Chinese state health authorities, which had political reasons to downplay the seriousness of the outbreak. Rather than providing filtered, authoritative information that can cause widespread harm if incorrect, such as the WHO recommendations against mask use published throughout March, open fora host many unfiltered claims that, without supporting evidence, carry little authority whatsoever. A healthy information ecosystem will contain both trustworthy authorities, and bottom up information distribution networks that can correct institutional failures. In a world in which seemingly authoritative sources are not trustworthy, unfiltered platforms will gain credence, for good and ill.

However, as Luo Yijun’s late night discovery on PTT demonstrates, unverified information can inform and illuminate, especially in the absence of trustworthy authoritative information. Furthermore, if used effectively, open-source information hosted on ungoverned platforms can enhance the capability and legitimacy of traditional institutions, such as the Taiwanese CDC. Liberally governed platforms are often blamed for their role in transmitting falsity and hate but seldom lauded when they facilitate the spread of life-saving information.

Will Duffield is a Policy Analyst at the Cato Institute

Filed Under: free speech, information sharing, taiwan, unfiltered information, unmoderated information
Companies: ptt


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Koby (profile), 29 May 2020 @ 12:01pm

    Is it?

    Because the Daily Stormer is specifically curated to highlight neo-Nazi speech, we can safely assume that it won’t host valuable information. Its gatekeepers explicitly select fascistic speech for publication before the content goes live and are unlikely to grant a platform to anything else.

    The Daily Stormer doesn't sound to me like an unfiltered platform. It sounds like a very filtered platform, designed to publish and promote the viewpoint of its owner(s), which is a view that most of us detest. I consider open and unfiltered platforms to be far superior to this one.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Godfree (profile), 29 May 2020 @ 3:47pm

    this episode illustrates the value of unfiltered speech.?

    This episode illustrates the value of filtered speech and the damage unfiltered speech can wreak in critical circumstances.

    One example: at least 140,000 Wuhanese fled the city, fearful that SARS (far more lethal than Covid-19) had, as Dr. Li incorrectly stated in his tweet, 'returned'.

    Chinese health authorities spent weeks tracking and tracing the absconders, a task that greatly added to the cost and time involved in containing the outbreak.

    Or, looked at another way, NO information about the virus, however timely, did any good whatever for the 100,000 who have died in the USA and the hundreds of thousands elsewhere.

    Information by itself is sterile.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2020 @ 6:33pm

    Yes.... that is more garbage I wouldn't willingly allow near me.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2020 @ 7:38pm

    The problem is, a small group of angry unemployed idiots with intertube access can turn any unfiltered channel into a Daily Stormer (or Pravda, or Weekly Jihad, or Alien Abduction Hourly, or Measles-Advocates, or whatever).

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    ECA (profile), 30 May 2020 @ 2:40pm

    Conspiracy or not..

    I love the logic of how things Can or have to happen.
    How did it spread?
    Where to?
    Then How did it get out of China?

    In conspiracy, China crated it and shipped it out..
    In some basic Logic, it spread to a few people that went to other areas, Contacted a few representatives from Corps that were leaving the area, and it went from there..
    Each person on the planes, probably infected at least a few, by just being there. Then When those person went home, all those that had contacted it Became ill, and spread it more..

    Pick either one.
    The problem in all of this is What it shows.
    In the past the USA Gov. has tested what would happen and if something like this could be restricted/quarantined. With a 99% Fail.
    Even with basic Science, it can be easily explained. The World used to be Traveled at a max speed of 20mph, and it took time to get from HERE to THERE.. NOW we can travel at over 200mph, and the World is Much smaller in the time it takes to get from Here to there.
    So, it dont really matter Where/when Something started. It CAN take less then 1-2 days to get around the world. Not days, weeks, years..
    The big part in this is...Who are the ones covering the most Area, in flights, to get around the world. Those are the targets to select, and those that NEED to be diagnosed, every time they come home.

    Why havent our Airlines, ever decided to have ways to monitor those coming from other countries? Including our president and the corp reps, that goto other countries??
    (a few int. Air ports, Iv been told, DO, do this.)

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt

Tech & COVID is a new project by
Techdirt, with sponsorship from

Essential Reading
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.