American politicians are split on many aspects of social networks' content moderation policies, but they might find common ground on setting those policies. A bipartisan group of senators led by Brian Schatz and John Thune has introduced the Internet Platform Accountability and Consumer Transparency Act (Internet PACT), a bill that would set "clear" content moderation policies they consistently enforce. The amendment to the Communications Act would require that online services explain their moderation in an "easily accessible" usage policy, and share biannual reports with anonymized statistics for content that has been pulled, downranked or demonetized. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) would also lead development of a voluntary framework to set industry-wide practices.

The Internet PACT Act would also amend the Communications Decency Act's Section 230 to require that "large" platforms pull content within four days if deemed illegal by courts. Those big services would need systems to handle complaints and appeals, and users would need to be notified of any decisions regarding their content within three weeks. Smaller providers would have "more flexibility" in addressing complaints and illegal content, according to the senators.

The bill would also bar companies from using Section 230 as a shield when the Justice Department, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and other national regulators engage in civil actions. State attorneys general could enforce federal civil laws when used against online platforms, while the Government Accountability Office (GAO) would have to study the viability of an FTC-run program for whistleblowers from within online platform companies.

The measure theoretically addresses longstanding complaints from both sides of Congress. Democrats have argued that social media giants aren't consistent in applying their policies, and carve out exceptions for accounts that spread hate or misinformation. Republicans, meanwhile, have accused social networks of censoring conservative views while giving creators little chance to respond.

There's no certainty the Internet PACT Act will become law. The bipartisan support may help, though. Whether or not the proposed Section 230 amendments will satisfy politicians is another matter. Both Democrats and Republicans have previously called for large-scale reforms, but the changes here would be relatively limited. They would, however, pressure companies to act quickly on illegal content.

The city government of Oakland, California was hit by a ransomware attack on February 8th, and its departments can still feel the security breach's ramifications. While the local government didn't give out details about the incident, such as how much money the bad actors are demanding, it said in an announcement that the city had to take its network offline to contain the attack. That has rendered many of Oakland's non-emergency services inaccessible, such as websites that would allow residents to pay parking fines or taxes online. The city's systems meant for processing reports and issuing permits or licenses are offline, as well. 

While Oakland previously assured residents that 911 dispatch and fire emergency services weren't affected by the breach, its police department warned people that the attack has delayed response times. It's now encouraging people to file reports online for non-emergency complaints. Oakland also had to close some of its buildings and is now asking people to email government offices' service counters before coming to visit. 

However, it warns of delayed response times while it works "around the clock to implement recovery plans that will restore impacted systems as quickly and as securely as possible." According to the San Francisco Chronicle, residents are also having difficulties reaching city departments by phone and are being redirected to recorded messages, most likely due to an influx of calls. 

On February 14th, local Oakland officials declared state of emergency in an effort to combat the effects of the attack. Doing so allows them to expedite the purchase of equipment and materials needed to get government services running as usual, as well as to deploy emergency workers if needed. Although details surrounding the attack remain unclear, the city's Information Technology Department is currently working with law enforcement and a leading forensics firm to investigate the scope and severity of the issue. "This continues to be an ongoing investigation with multiple local, state, and federal agencies involved," Oakland said in an announcement, along with the promise to keep the public updated if it has more details to share.

Now that Republicans control the House of Representatives, they're preparing to grill technology giants over accusations of content censorship. The Wall Street Journal has learned that House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan has subpoenaed the CEOs of Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta and Microsoft for information on their content moderation methods. The leaders have until March 23rd to provide any communications between them and the federal government's executive branch on the subject.

Jordan's panel wants to know "how and to what extent" the federal government allegedly pressured and coordinated with companies to censor content. The requests include details about people responsible for shaping moderation policies as well as those who've talked to the executive branch. Like numerous Republican politicians, Jordan has long maintained that major tech companies censor conservative views under the guise of curbing hate speech and misinformation.

The representative notably didn't subpoena Twitter, which he likely feels is more supportive of right-wing views with Elon Musk at the helm. The social network recently reinstated Donald Trump's account (still inactive), and has been sharing internal "Twitter Files" that covered the company's sharing limits on a New York Post story on Hunter Biden as well as the decision to ban Trump following the January 6th, 2021 attack on the Capitol. While right-wing figures have portrayed the disclosure as proof of anti-conservative censorship, critics have argued the documents don't offer substantially new details, don't provide evidence of conspiracy and were given only to writers likely to share Musk's views.

We've asked the five companies for comment. Microsoft confirmed the request in a statement to Engadget, noting that it's providing documents and plans to work in "good faith" with the committee. The firms have repeatedly denied allegations of bias and insist that they're only trying to remove falsehoods and other harmful material.

Whether or not the House panel can take action is another matter. Attempts to prove an anti-conservative bias have failed so far, with multiplestudies showing no evidence of these leanings. There's also evidence that platforms like Facebook made exemptions for right-wing content that violated misinformation policies, fearing a backlash if they enforced their rules consistently.

Elon Musk's SpaceX may be willing to supply Ukraine with Starlink service as it repels the Russian invasion, but it's not thrilled with every use of the satellite internet technology. Operating chief Gwynne Shotwell tells guests at a Federal Aviation Administration conference that SpaceX objects to reported uses of Starlink to control military drones. While the company doesn't mind troops using satellite broadband for communication, it doesn't mean for the platform to be used for "offensive purposes," Shotwell says.

The executive adds that SpaceX can limit Ukraine's ability to use Starlink with combat drones, and has already done so. The company hasn't explained how it curbs use in the field.

Ukraine says it's not alarmed. National security council secretary Oleksiy Danilov tells The Washington Post the country doesn't rely solely on Starlink for military operations, and may only need to "change the means of attack" in some cases. Interior ministry advisor Anton Gerahchenko, meanwhile, argues that Ukraine "liberate[s]" rather than attacking, and that Starlink has saved "hundreds of thousands of lives."

Starlink has proved important to life in Ukraine since the Russian invasion began last year. The country uses the service to connect civilians, government agencies and military units that can't rely on terrestrial internet access. For drones, this could let Ukraine coordinate reconnaissance flights, long-distance targeting and bomb attacks.

SpaceX has a contentious relationship with Ukraine. The firm was quick to provide Starlink terminals soon after the war began, albeit with US government help. Musk complained that it was becoming too expensive to fund service indefinitely, but changed his mind soon after. And while Ukraine struck a deal in December to get thousands more terminals with EU assistance, that came just weeks after a steep price hike.

As promised, Meta has restored former president Donald Trump's Facebook and Instagram accounts, two years after it suspended him from both platforms. The company previously said it would apply extra "guardrails" to his accounts to "deter repeat offenses."

Meta, like Twitter and other services, kicked Trump off of its platforms in January 2021 after he praised those participating in the Capitol Hill insurrection. The company initially locked the accounts for 24 hours over two policy violations before it suspended him indefinitely. Meta's Oversight Board was among those who criticized the handling of the ban. 

The company later said Trump's accounts would remain suspended for two years, after which it would reassess things. In late January, it emerged that Trump would soon regain access to the platforms, not long after it was reported that he had pushed Meta to restore his accounts. 

By 2:30PM ET, Trump, who is running for the White House for a third time, had not posted anything on either platform. He has an agreement with his "free speech" app Truth Social, whereby he has to share social media posts there first and can't plop them anywhere else for at least six hours. Twitter restored Trump's account on its service late last year, but he hasn't returned to what was once his favored social media platform either. Maybe he's still too butthurt about that one thing Chrissy Teigen wrote about him.

A former Twitter employee has shed new light on the company’s dealings with the White House while former President Donald Trump was in office. Anika Navaroli, a former senior member of Twitter’s US Safety Policy, testified at a House Oversight Committee hearing that her team had received a request to remove a tweet making fun of the former president.

She revealed the previously unreported interaction during hearing with former Twitter executives’ over their handling of a 2020 New York Post story about Hunter Biden’s laptop. Republicans on the committee have equated Twitter's initial decision to block links to the story with “censorship,” and criticized the company for its interactions with government officials.

But Navaroli revealed that Twitter had also received at least one request, in 2019, from the Trump White House regarding a tweet they wanted removed. The tweet came from Chrissy Teigen, who had called the president a “pussy ass bitch,” in response to comments he had made about her and her husband. According to Navaroli, someone from the White House “reached out to ask that this tweet be removed” and that her team had to evaluate whether the tweet violated the company’s “insults policy.” She said they ultimately determined the tweet did not, and it remained up.

Earlier in the hearing, Navaroli also revealed that Twitter had on at least one occasion changed its policies in order to avoid taking action against a tweet from Trump. She said that the company had removed internal “moderation guidance” that used “go back to where you came from” as an example of language that would break its rules after Trump had used the phrase in reference to New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and other lawmakers. She said a more senior executive, former trust and safety head Del Harvey, “overrode” her assessment that the tweet broke Twitter's rules.

The hearing wasn’t the first time members of Congress have heard from Navaroli. She previously spoke with the committee investigating the January 6th attack about her efforts to warn Twitter officials about threats leading up to the attack. "Twitter leadership bent and broke their own rules in order to protect some of the most dangerous speech on the platform," she said in her opening statement.

Turkey may be blocking access to Twitter, two days after a pair of catastrophic earthquakes struck the area. Thousands of people are still trapped in buildings in Turkey and Syria, where the death toll is approaching 12,000.

According to Bloomberg, people in Turkey started having trouble accessing Twitter on Wednesday afternoon. Some have resorted to VPNs to use the service. Kemal Kilicdaroglu, the leader of Turkey's main opposition party, has accused the government of blocking Twitter.

It's not clear why the Turkish government might want to prevent access to Twitter amid such devastation. The social media service is still a valuable disaster response tool and users have also been sharing images of the destruction caused by the earthquakes. Twitter does not have a communications team that can be reached for comment.

This would not be the first time that Turkey has stopped residents from accessing social media services. It has also done so during cross-border military operations and terror attacks. In 2014, Turkey temporarily banned Twitter. Users were sharing voice recordings and documents that purportedly showed corruption within then-prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's sphere of influence. Erdoğan became Turkey's president later that year and he remains in power. His government has faced criticism for its response to this week's disaster.

People in Pakistan can once again use Wikipedia, three days after the country blocked the website over content that regulators deemed "sacrilegious." As TechCrunch notes, prime minister Shehbaz Sharif ordered officials to unblock Wikipedia after determining that the ban was “not a suitable measure to restrict access to some objectionable contents/sacrilegious matter on it.” Sharif's office said in a statement that the "unintended consequences of this blanket ban" outweighed the "benefits."

The Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) "degraded" access to Wikipedia last Wednesday, warning the site's operators that they had 48 hours to remove certain content or face repercussions. Wikipedia apparently demurred and the PTA blocked the site in Pakistan on Friday.

Meanwhile, Sharif is establishing a cabinet committee to "explore and recommend alternative technical measures for removal or blocking access to objectionable content posted on Wikipedia and other online information sites, in view of our social, cultural and religious sensitivities, on the touchstone of proportionality." The committee is also being tasked with offering other suggestions aimed at "controlling unlawful content in a balanced manner." 

Sharif asked the committee to provide the cabinet with recommendations within one week. That doesn't give the committee members much time to fully assess and analyze the many, many considerations that go into content moderation.

Don't worry if the lack of a federal tax credit put you off from buying certain Tesla Model Y variants or other EVs — they might now qualify. The Treasury Department has revised its classification standard to treat more vehicles as SUVs rather than sedans, raising the price threshold from $55,000 to $80,000 and making more EVs eligible for the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) full $7,500 credit under the Inflation Reduction Act. As Autoblogexplains, that should cover five-seat versions of the Model Y (only seven-seaters qualified before) as well as the Cadillac Lyriq, Ford Mustang Mach-E, Ford Escape Plug-in Hybrid and VW ID.4.

The Treasury expanded the classification by using the Environmental Protection Agency's public-oriented Fuel Economy Labeling standard rather than the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE). This will help treat crossovers "consistently," the department says. This also helps the credit classifications line up with what you see both on the car label and the US government's FuelEconomy.gov website.

You can claim the full amount for any qualifying EV bought and put into service in 2023, including those that weren't eligible under the CAFE standard. Any vehicle that could receive the credit before will still pass muster, the Treasury says.

The change of heart comes after the IRS invited public comments on a proposed change. Tesla chief Elon Musk encouraged input from his Twitter followers soon afterward. It's unclear how much of a role Tesla's fanbase played, but the decision isn't surprising. Under the old criteria, some of the best-known EVs didn't qualify. The credits were meant to spur EV adoption and further the Biden administration's climate goals — that was going to be harder if customers couldn't get deals on the most popular models.

TikTok is facing yet another call from a prominent lawmaker for the app’s ban, Colorado Senator Michael Bennet, a Democrat who sits on the Senate Intelligence Committee, sent a letter to Apple and Google urging the companies to ban TikTok from their respective app stores.

In the letter, Bennet says that “TikTok, in its current form, [is] an unacceptable threat to the national security of the United States.” The letter, addressed to Apple CEO Tim Cook and Google CEO Sundar Pichai, repeats many of the same points that have been raised by other lawmakers seeking to ban the app.

Specifically, Bennet raises the possibility that TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, could be compelled to “use its influence to advance Chinese government interests,” via TikTok. “Like most social media platforms, TikTok collects vast and sophisticated data from its users, including faceprints and voiceprints,” Bennet writes. “Unlike most social media platforms, TikTok poses a unique concern because Chinese law obligates ByteDance, its Beijing-based parent company, to ‘support, assist, and cooperate with state intelligence work.’”

TikTok has long denied that such scenarios could play out, and has attempted to downplay its ties to China. In a statement to CNN the company said Bennet’s letter “relies almost exclusively on misleading reporting about TikTok, the data we collect, and our data security controls.”

Apple and Google didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

While it seems unlikely either company would take such a drastic step based on a letter from one senator, it highlights the mounting pressure and scrutiny on TkTok. The company has spent the last two years negotiating with the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) in order to secure its ability to continue to operate in the US. But that process is reportedly stalled, and the company has been waging a new charm offensive in an attempt to win over critics.

TikTok has also been sharing more details around its partnership with Oracle to safeguard US user data and comply with US regulators’ concerns. But lawmakers seem to be in no rush to let TikTok off the hook. The app has already been banned from federal devices, and numerous state governments have passed bans of their own. TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew is scheduled to testify at his first Congressional hearing next month,