Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

WikiLeaks wants to create a database of verified Twitter users and who they interact with

That would include a lot of journalists — and Donald Trump.

UN Panel Rules That Wikileaks Founder Is Arbitrarily Detained
UN Panel Rules That Wikileaks Founder Is Arbitrarily Detained
Carl Court/Getty Images

WikiLeaks tweeted Friday that it wanted to build a database of information about Twitter’s verified users, including personal relationships that might have influence on their lives.

Then, after a number of users sounded the alarm on what they perceived to be a massive doxxing effort, WikiLeaks deleted the tweet, but not before blaming that perception on the “dishonest press.”

In a subsequent series of tweets on Friday, WikiLeaks Task Force — a verified Twitter account described in its bio as the “Official @WikiLeaks support account” — explained that it wanted to look at the “family/job/financial/housing relationships” of Twitter’s verified users, which includes a ton of journalists, politicians and activists.

This tweet has since been deleted.
This tweet has since been deleted.
Twitter

The point, the WikiLeaks account claims, is to “develop a metric to understand influence networks based on proximity graphs.” That’s a pretty confusing explanation, and the comment left a number of concerned Twitter users scratching their collective heads and wondering just how invasive this database might be.

The “task force” attempted to clarify what it meant in a number of subsequent tweets, and it sounds like the database is an attempt to understand who or what might be influencing Twitter’s verified users. Imagine identifying relationships like political party affiliation, for example, though it’s unclear if the database would include both online and offline relationships users have. (We tweeted at WikiLeaks and will update if we hear back.)

WikiLeaks mentioned an artificial intelligence software program that it would use to help compile the database and suggested it might be akin to the social graphs that Facebook and LinkedIn have created.

It was all rather vague, which didn’t help with user concern on Twitter. But WikiLeaks claims the proposed database is not about releasing personal info, like home addresses.

Still, it was an unsettling proclamation for many on Twitter, and followed just a few days after WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange told Fox News that American media coverage is “very dishonest.” It’s a descriptor President-elect Donald Trump famously uses, too.

It seems possible that the point of looking into verified Twitter users — many of whom are journalists — is so that WikiLeaks can rein in the “dishonest media.”

What could be interesting, though, is that building a database would also mean looking into the relationships influencing Trump, who is also verified on Twitter.

Some of those relationships are already publicly known. The Wall Street Journal, for example, has reported that more than 150 institutions hold Trump’s business debts. But many journalists and politicians have complained of lack of transparency from Trump, like his failure to release his tax returns. These critics may welcome a closer look at the powers influencing the next Commander in Chief.

Even if WikiLeaks were to move forward with this database, it seems like it would have to store the project off of Twitter. The social communications company tweeted out a statement shortly after the original WikiLeaks tweet: “Posting another person’s private and confidential information is a violation of the Twitter Rules.”

Twitter has already said that it will not allow anyone, including government agencies, to use its services to create surveillance databases and has a policy against posting another person’s private information on the service.

It’s unclear if WikiLeaks could even promote the project on Twitter without its accounts getting suspended. The social network previously suspended another user, Guccifer 2.0, after publishing personal information about congress members on a third-party website and then promoting it on Twitter.

Additional reporting by Tess Townsend.


This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

More in Technology

Podcasts
Are humanoid robots all hype?Are humanoid robots all hype?
Podcast
Podcasts

AI is making them better — but they’re not going to be doing your chores anytime soon.

By Avishay Artsy and Sean Rameswaram
Future Perfect
The old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemicThe old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemic
Future Perfect

Glycol vapors, explained.

By Shayna Korol
Future Perfect
Elon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wantsElon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wants
Future Perfect

It’s not about who wins. It’s about the dirty laundry you air along the way.

By Sara Herschander
Life
Why banning kids from AI isn’t the answerWhy banning kids from AI isn’t the answer
Life

What kids really need in the age of artificial intelligence.

By Anna North
Culture
Anthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque messAnthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque mess
Culture

“Your AI monster ate all our work. Now you’re trying to pay us off with this piece of garbage that doesn’t work.”

By Constance Grady
Future Perfect
Some deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapySome deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapy
Future Perfect

A medical field that almost died is quietly fixing one disease at a time.

By Bryan Walsh