How you can help transform the internet into a place of trust | Claire Wardle

Prevodilac: Ivana Korom Lektor: Ivana Krivokuća

No matter who you are or where you live,

Bez obzira na to ko ste ili gde živite,

I'm guessing that you have at least one relative

pretpostavljam da imate barem jednog rođaka

that likes to forward those emails.

koji voli da prosleđuje one mejlove.

You know the ones I'm talking about --

Znate o kojima govorim -

one sa sumnjivim tvrdnjama ili video-snimcima zavera.

the ones with dubious claims or conspiracy videos.

And you've probably already muted them on Facebook

I verovatno ste ih već blokirali na Fejsbuku

for sharing social posts like this one.

zbog toga što dele objave poput ove.

It's an image of a banana

Ovo je slika banane

with a strange red cross running through the center.

kroz čiju sredinu ide čudan crveni krst.

And the text around it is warning people

A tekst oko slike upozorava ljude

not to eat fruits that look like this,

da ne jedu voće koje ovako izgleda,

suggesting they've been injected with blood

jer je navodno u njega ubrizgana krv

contaminated with the HIV virus.

zaražena virusom HIV-a.

And the social share message above it simply says,

A poruka iznad jednostavno kaže:

"Please forward to save lives."

„Molim vas, prosledite da biste spasili živote.“

Now, fact-checkers have been debunking this one for years,

Ljudi koji se bave proveravanjem činjenica opovrgavaju to godinama,

but it's one of those rumors that just won't die.

ali ovo je jedna od onih glasina koja jednostavno ne nestaje.

A zombie rumor.

Zombi glasina.

And, of course, it's entirely false.

I naravno, potpuno je lažna.

It might be tempting to laugh at an example like this, to say,

Možda vas vuče da se nasmejete ovakvom primeru i kažete:

"Well, who would believe this, anyway?"

„Ko bi uopšte poverovao u to?“

But the reason it's a zombie rumor

Ali ovo je zombi glasina

is because it taps into people's deepest fears about their own safety

zbog toga što zadire u najdublje ljudske strahove o ličnoj bezbednosti,

and that of the people they love.

kao i o bezbednosti onih koje vole.

And if you spend as enough time as I have looking at misinformation,

I ako posmatrate dezinformacije onoliko dugo koliko ih ja posmatram,

you know that this is just one example of many

znate da je ovo samo jedan od mnogih primera

that taps into people's deepest fears and vulnerabilities.

koji zadiru u najdublje ljudske strahove i osetljivosti.

Every day, across the world, we see scores of new memes on Instagram

Svakog dana širom sveta vidimo gomile novih memova na Instagramu

encouraging parents not to vaccinate their children.

koji podstiču roditelje da ne vakcinišu svoju decu.

We see new videos on YouTube explaining that climate change is a hoax.

Na Jutjubu vidimo snimke koji govore da su klimatske promene prevara.

And across all platforms, we see endless posts designed to demonize others

Na svim platformama viđamo objave koje su napravljene da demonizuju druge

on the basis of their race, religion or sexuality.

na osnovu njihove rase, religije ili seksualnosti.

Welcome to one of the central challenges of our time.

Dobro došli u jedan od glavnih izazova našeg vremena.

How can we maintain an internet with freedom of expression at the core,

Kako da održimo internet koji u srži nosi slobodu govora,

while also ensuring that the content that's being disseminated

dok u isto vreme vodimo računa da sadržaj koji se plasira

doesn't cause irreparable harms to our democracies, our communities

ne uzrokuje nepopravljivu štetu našim demokratijama, zajednicama,

and to our physical and mental well-being?

i našem fizičkom i mentalnom blagostanju?

Because we live in the information age,

Živimo u informacijskom dobu,

yet the central currency upon which we all depend -- information --

a ipak, glavna valuta od koje svi zavisimo - informacija -

is no longer deemed entirely trustworthy

se više ne smatra vrednom poverenja

and, at times, can appear downright dangerous.

i ponekad deluje potpuno opasno.

This is thanks in part to the runaway growth of social sharing platforms

To je delom zbog neobuzdanog rasta društvenih platformi

that allow us to scroll through,

koje nam omogućavaju da listamo,

where lies and facts sit side by side,

gde se laži i činjenice nalaze jedne pored drugih,

but with none of the traditional signals of trustworthiness.

bez ikakvih uvreženih znakova sigurnosti.

And goodness -- our language around this is horribly muddled.

I zaboga, i naš jezik oko ovoga je neverovatno haotičan.

People are still obsessed with the phrase "fake news,"

Ljudi su još uvek opsednuti frazom „lažne vesti“,

despite the fact that it's extraordinarily unhelpful

uprkos činjenici da ona uopšte ne pomaže

and used to describe a number of things that are actually very different:

i koristi se da objasni nekoliko stvari koje su zapravo veoma različite:

lies, rumors, hoaxes, conspiracies, propaganda.

laži, tračeve, prevare, zavere, propagandu.

And I really wish we could stop using a phrase

I volela bih da prestanemo da koristimo frazu

that's been co-opted by politicians right around the world,

koju su političari širom sveta prisvojili,

from the left and the right,

i levica i desnica,

used as a weapon to attack a free and independent press.

i koriste je kao oružje da napadaju slobodnu i nezavisnu štampu.

(Applause)

(Aplauz)

Because we need our professional news media now more than ever.

Sada su nam profesionalni mediji potrebniji nego ikad.

And besides, most of this content doesn't even masquerade as news.

Osim toga, većina ovih sadržaja se ne i pretvara da su vesti.

It's memes, videos, social posts.

To su memovi, snimci, društvene objave.

And most of it is not fake; it's misleading.

I većina nije lažna nego obmanjujuća.

We tend to fixate on what's true or false.

Imamo tendenciju da se uhvatimo za lažno ili istinito.

But the biggest concern is actually the weaponization of context.

Ali najveća briga je zapravo pretvaranje konteksta u oružje.

Because the most effective disinformation

Jer najubedljivija dezinformacija

has always been that which has a kernel of truth to it.

je oduvek bila ona koja u sebi sadrži zrno istine.

Let's take this example from London, from March 2017,

Uzmimo ovaj primer iz Londona, iz marta 2017. godine.

a tweet that circulated widely

Proširio se jedan tvit

in the aftermath of a terrorist incident on Westminster Bridge.

nakon terorističkog incidenta na mostu Vestminster.

This is a genuine image, not fake.

Ovo je prava fotografija, nije lažna.

The woman who appears in the photograph was interviewed afterwards,

Žena koja se pojavljuje na slici je kasnije intervjuisana

i objasnila je da bila potpuno traumirana.

and she explained that she was utterly traumatized.

She was on the phone to a loved one,

Razgovarala je sa voljenom osobom

and she wasn't looking at the victim out of respect.

i nije gledala u žrtvu iz poštovanja.

But it still was circulated widely with this Islamophobic framing,

Ali ipak je tvit proširen u ovom kontekstu islamofobije,

with multiple hashtags, including: #BanIslam.

sa mnogim heštegovima, uključujući #BanIslam.

Now, if you worked at Twitter, what would you do?

Sad, da radite u Tviteru, šta biste učinili?

Would you take that down, or would you leave it up?

Da li biste to skinuli ili ostavili?

My gut reaction, my emotional reaction, is to take this down.

Moja prva, emocionalna reakcija je da se to skine.

I hate the framing of this image.

Mrzim kako je ova slika predstavljena.

But freedom of expression is a human right,

Ali sloboda izražavanja je ljudsko pravo

and if we start taking down speech that makes us feel uncomfortable,

i ako počnemo da uklanjamo sadržaje zbog kojih se osećamo neprijatno,

we're in trouble.

bićemo u nevolji.

And this might look like a clear-cut case,

Ovo možda izgleda kao jasan slučaj,

but, actually, most speech isn't.

ali većina govora to nije.

These lines are incredibly difficult to draw.

Veoma je teško postaviti granice.

What's a well-meaning decision by one person

Ono što je za jednu osobu dobronamerna odluka,

is outright censorship to the next.

za drugu je direktna cenzura.

What we now know is that this account, Texas Lone Star,

Sada znamo da je ovaj nalog, Texas Lone Star,

was part of a wider Russian disinformation campaign,

bio deo šire ruske kampanje dezinformisanja,

one that has since been taken down.

koja je od tada skinuta.

Would that change your view?

Da li bi to promenilo vaše mišljenje?

It would mine,

Promenilo bi moje,

because now it's a case of a coordinated campaign

jer sad je to slučaj organizovane kampanje

to sow discord.

da se napravi razdor.

And for those of you who'd like to think

Za vas koji mislite

da će veštačka inteligencija rešiti sve naše probleme,

that artificial intelligence will solve all of our problems,

I think we can agree that we're a long way away

mislim da možemo da se složimo da smo daleko

od veštačke inteligencije koja može da razume ovakve objave.

from AI that's able to make sense of posts like this.

So I'd like to explain three interlocking issues

Želim da objasnim tri međusobno prepletena problema

that make this so complex

koji ovo čine tako složenim

and then think about some ways we can consider these challenges.

i onda da razmotrimo načine na koje možemo misliti o ovim izazovima.

First, we just don't have a rational relationship to information,

Prvo, mi jednostavno nemamo racionalan odnos sa informacijama,

we have an emotional one.

taj odnos je emotivan.

It's just not true that more facts will make everything OK,

Nije istina da će više činjenica popraviti sve,

because the algorithms that determine what content we see,

jer algoritmi koji određuju koji sadržaj vidimo,

well, they're designed to reward our emotional responses.

pa, oni su programirani da nagrade naše emotivne odgovore.

And when we're fearful,

A kada se plašimo,

oversimplified narratives, conspiratorial explanations

pojednostavljene priče, zaverenička objašnjenja

and language that demonizes others is far more effective.

i jezik koji demonizuje druge su mnogo učinkovitiji.

And besides, many of these companies,

Osim toga, za mnoge od ovih kompanija

their business model is attached to attention,

je poslovni model povezan sa pažnjom,

which means these algorithms will always be skewed towards emotion.

što znači da će algoritmi uvek biti naklonjeni emocijama.

Second, most of the speech I'm talking about here is legal.

Drugo, većina govora o kojima govorim ovde su legalni.

It would be a different matter

Bilo bi drugačije da govorim o slikama seksualnog zlostavljanja dece,

if I was talking about child sexual abuse imagery

or content that incites violence.

ili o sadržaju koji podstiče nasilje.

It can be perfectly legal to post an outright lie.

Može biti savršeno legalno objaviti potpunu laž.

But people keep talking about taking down "problematic" or "harmful" content,

Ali ljudi govore o uklanjanju „problematičnog“ ili „štetnog“ sadržaja,

but with no clear definition of what they mean by that,

bez jasne definicije šta pod tim podrazumevaju,

including Mark Zuckerberg,

uključujući i Marka Zakerberga,

who recently called for global regulation to moderate speech.

koji je nedavno zatražio globalnu regulaciju za kontrolisanje javnog govora.

And my concern is that we're seeing governments

Mene zabrinjava što vidimo vlade

right around the world

širom sveta

rolling out hasty policy decisions

kako donose ishitrene odluke

that might actually trigger much more serious consequences

koje će možda pokrenuti mnogo ozbiljnije posledice

when it comes to our speech.

kada se radi o našem govoru.

And even if we could decide which speech to take up or take down,

Čak i kada bismo mogli da odlučimo kakav govor da skinemo ili ostavimo,

we've never had so much speech.

nikada nije bilo toliko javnog govora.

Every second, millions of pieces of content

Svake sekunde, širom sveta,

are uploaded by people right around the world

ljudi objavljuju milione sadržaja

in different languages,

na različitim jezicima,

drawing on thousands of different cultural contexts.

u različitim kulturnim kontekstima.

We've simply never had effective mechanisms

Jednostavno nikad nismo imali dobre mehanizme

to moderate speech at this scale,

da proveravamo toliko sadržaja,

whether powered by humans or by technology.

bilo da ga kreiraju ljudi ili tehnologija.

And third, these companies -- Google, Twitter, Facebook, WhatsApp --

I treće, ove kompanije - Gugl, Tviter, Fejsbuk, Votsap -

they're part of a wider information ecosystem.

one su deo šireg informacionog ekosistema.

We like to lay all the blame at their feet, but the truth is,

Volimo da ih okrivimo za sve, ali zapravo,

the mass media and elected officials can also play an equal role

masovni mediji i odabrani političari mogu imati jednaku ulogu

in amplifying rumors and conspiracies when they want to.

u podsticanju glasina i zavera kada to žele.

As can we, when we mindlessly forward divisive or misleading content

Kao i mi, kada bez razmišljanja prosledimo obmanjujuć ili razdoran sadržaj

without trying.

bez truda.

We're adding to the pollution.

Dodajemo zagađenju.

I know we're all looking for an easy fix.

Znam da svi tražimo jednostavno rešenje.

But there just isn't one.

Ali takvo ne postoji.

Any solution will have to be rolled out at a massive scale, internet scale,

Bilo kakvo rešenje će morati da se primeni na ogromnom nivou, na nivou interneta,

and yes, the platforms, they're used to operating at that level.

i da, platforme su navikle da rade na tom nivou.

But can and should we allow them to fix these problems?

Ali da li možemo i da li bi trebalo da im dozvolimo da reše ove probleme?

They're certainly trying.

Svakako da pokušavaju.

But most of us would agree that, actually, we don't want global corporations

Ali većina nas bi se složila da zapravo ne želimo da globalne korporacije

to be the guardians of truth and fairness online.

budu čuvari istine i pravde na internetu.

And I also think the platforms would agree with that.

Mislim da bi se i platforme složile sa tim.

And at the moment, they're marking their own homework.

A trenutno oni sami sebe ocenjuju.

They like to tell us

Vole da nam govore

that the interventions they're rolling out are working,

kako njihove intervencije funkcionišu,

but because they write their own transparency reports,

ali oni pišu svoje izveštaje o transparentnosti,

there's no way for us to independently verify what's actually happening.

pa mi ne možemo nezavisno da proverimo šta se zapravo dešava.

(Applause)

(Aplauz)

And let's also be clear that most of the changes we see

I neka bude jasno da se većina promena koje vidimo

only happen after journalists undertake an investigation

dešava tek pošto novinari pokrenu istrage

and find evidence of bias

i pronađu dokaze o pristrasnosti

or content that breaks their community guidelines.

ili sadržaj koji krši njihove pravilnike.

So yes, these companies have to play a really important role in this process,

Dakle, da, ove kompanije moraju imati važnu ulogu u ovom procesu,

but they can't control it.

ali ne mogu da ga kontrolišu.

So what about governments?

A šta je sa vladama?

Many people believe that global regulation is our last hope

Mnogi veruju da je globalna regulacija naša poslednja nada,

in terms of cleaning up our information ecosystem.

u smislu raščišćavanja našeg informacionog ekosistema.

But what I see are lawmakers who are struggling to keep up to date

Ali ja vidim zakonodavce koji se muče da budu u toku

with the rapid changes in technology.

sa brzim promenama u tehnologiji.

And worse, they're working in the dark,

I još gore, oni rade u mraku,

because they don't have access to data

jer nemaju pristup podacima

to understand what's happening on these platforms.

da bi razumeli šta se dešava na ovim platformama.

And anyway, which governments would we trust to do this?

Uostalom, kojim vladama bismo verovali da ovo rade?

We need a global response, not a national one.

Potreban nam je globalni, a ne nacionalni dogovor.

So the missing link is us.

Karika koja nedostaje smo mi.

It's those people who use these technologies every day.

Ljudi koji svakog dana koriste te tehnologije.

Can we design a new infrastructure to support quality information?

Da li možemo da napravimo novu infrastrukturu

koja će da podrži kvalitetne informacije?

Well, I believe we can,

Pa, ja verujem da možemo,

and I've got a few ideas about what we might be able to actually do.

i imam nekoliko ideja šta bismo mogli da uradimo.

So firstly, if we're serious about bringing the public into this,

Prvo, ako ozbiljno želimo da u ovo uključimo javnost,

can we take some inspiration from Wikipedia?

da li možemo da uzmemo Vikipediju kao inspiraciju?

They've shown us what's possible.

Oni su pokazali šta je moguće.

Yes, it's not perfect,

Da, nije savršeno,

but they've demonstrated that with the right structures,

ali pokazali su da sa pravim strukturama,

sa globalnim stavom i mnogo, mnogo transparentnosti,

with a global outlook and lots and lots of transparency,

you can build something that will earn the trust of most people.

možete da napravite nešto čemu će mnogo ljudi verovati.

Because we have to find a way to tap into the collective wisdom

Moramo da pronađemo način da iskoristimo kolektivnu mudrost

and experience of all users.

i iskustvo svih korisnika.

This is particularly the case for women, people of color

Ovo naročito važi za žene, ljude tamne kože,

and underrepresented groups.

i marginalizovane grupe.

Because guess what?

Jer, znate šta?

They are experts when it comes to hate and disinformation,

Oni su stručnjaci kad se radi o mržnji i dezinformacijama,

because they have been the targets of these campaigns for so long.

jer oni su već dugo mete ovih kampanja.

And over the years, they've been raising flags,

Tokom godina skreću pažnju,

and they haven't been listened to.

ali niko ih ne sluša.

This has got to change.

To mora da se promeni.

So could we build a Wikipedia for trust?

Da li bismo mogli da napravimo Vikipediju za poverenje?

Could we find a way that users can actually provide insights?

Da li možemo da pronađemo način da korisnici daju predloge?

They could offer insights around difficult content-moderation decisions.

Mogli bi da daju predloge u vezi sa teškim odlukama o upravljanju sadržajem.

They could provide feedback

Mogli bi da daju povratnu informaciju

when platforms decide they want to roll out new changes.

kada platforme odluče da unesu promene.

Second, people's experiences with the information is personalized.

Drugo, iskustva ljudi sa informacijama su lična.

My Facebook news feed is very different to yours.

Moje vesti na Fejsbuku su mnogo drugačije od vaših.

Your YouTube recommendations are very different to mine.

Vaši predlozi na Jutjubu su veoma drugačiji od mojih.

That makes it impossible for us to actually examine

To nam onemogućava da pregledamo

what information people are seeing.

koje informacije ljudi vide.

So could we imagine

Da li bismo mogli da zamislimo

developing some kind of centralized open repository for anonymized data,

da razvijemo nekakvo centralizovano otvoreno skladište anonimnih podataka

with privacy and ethical concerns built in?

u koje su već ugrađene privatnost i etičke norme?

Because imagine what we would learn

Zamislite šta bismo mogli da saznamo

if we built out a global network of concerned citizens

ako bismo izgradili globalnu mrežu zainteresovanih građana

who wanted to donate their social data to science.

koji žele da doniraju svoje društvene podatke nauci.

Because we actually know very little

Jer mi veoma malo znamo

about the long-term consequences of hate and disinformation

o dugoročnim posledicama mržnje i dezinformacija

on people's attitudes and behaviors.

na stavove i ponašanja ljudi.

And what we do know,

A većina onoga što znamo

most of that has been carried out in the US,

je sprovedena u SAD-u,

despite the fact that this is a global problem.

uprkos činjenici da je ovo globalni problem.

We need to work on that, too.

Moramo i na tome da radimo.

And third,

I treće,

can we find a way to connect the dots?

možemo li da pronađemo način da složimo kockice?

No one sector, let alone nonprofit, start-up or government,

Nijedan sektor, a kamoli nevladina organizacija, startap ili vlada

is going to solve this.

neće ovo rešiti.

But there are very smart people right around the world

Ali širom sveta postoje veoma pametni ljudi

working on these challenges,

koji rade na ovim izazovima,

from newsrooms, civil society, academia, activist groups.

od novinskih redakcija, civilnog društva, akademaca, grupa aktivista.

And you can see some of them here.

Neke možete videti ovde.

Some are building out indicators of content credibility.

Neki prave indikatore kredibilnosti sadržaja.

Others are fact-checking,

Drugi proveravaju činjenice,

so that false claims, videos and images can be down-ranked by the platforms.

kako bi platforme mogle da potisnu lažne tvrdnje, snimke i slike.

A nonprofit I helped to found, First Draft,

Neprofitna organizacija čije sam osnivanje pomogla, First Draft,

is working with normally competitive newsrooms around the world

radi sa novinskim redakcijama širom sveta koje su inače konkurenti

to help them build out investigative, collaborative programs.

i pomaže da izgrade istraživačke programe koji sarađuju.

And Danny Hillis, a software architect,

A Deni Hilis, softverski arhitekta,

is designing a new system called The Underlay,

programira novi sistem koji se zove The Underlay,

which will be a record of all public statements of fact

koji će biti baza svih javnih izjava činjenica

connected to their sources,

povezanih sa izvorima,

so that people and algorithms can better judge what is credible.

kako bi ljudi i algoritmi bolje prosudili šta je pouzdano.

And educators around the world are testing different techniques

A edukatori širom sveta testiraju razne tehnike

for finding ways to make people critical of the content they consume.

za nalaženje načina da ljudi kritički razmatraju sadržaj koju konzumiraju.

All of these efforts are wonderful, but they're working in silos,

Svi ovi napori su izuzetni, ali svi rade izolovano

and many of them are woefully underfunded.

i mnogi nisu dovoljno finansirani.

There are also hundreds of very smart people

Postoje takođe stotine veoma pametnih ljudi

working inside these companies,

koji rade u ovim kompanijama,

but again, these efforts can feel disjointed,

ali opet, ovi napori deluju nepovezano

because they're actually developing different solutions to the same problems.

jer razvijaju različita rešenja za iste probleme.

How can we find a way to bring people together

Kako možemo dovesti ljude

in one physical location for days or weeks at a time,

na jedno fizičko mesto na nekoliko dana ili nedelja,

so they can actually tackle these problems together

kako bi radili zajedno na ovim problemima,

but from their different perspectives?

ali iz svojih drugačijih perspektiva?

So can we do this?

Možemo li to da uradimo?

Can we build out a coordinated, ambitious response,

Da li možemo da napravimo koordinisani, ambiciozni odgovor,

one that matches the scale and the complexity of the problem?

koji odgovara veličini i složenosti problema?

I really think we can.

Stvarno mislim da možemo.

Together, let's rebuild our information commons.

Hajde da zajedno ponovo izgradimo naše informaciono zajedničko dobro.

Thank you.

Hvala vam.

(Applause)

(Aplauz)