Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Twitter Social Networks Politics

A High School Student Created a Fake 2020 Candidate. Twitter Verified It (cnn.com) 64

From a report: Andrew Walz calls himself a "proven business leader" and a "passionate advocate for students." Walz, a Republican from Rhode Island, is running for Congress with the tagline, "Let's make change in Washington together," or so his Twitter account claimed. Earlier this month, Walz's account received a coveted blue checkmark from Twitter as part of the company's broader push to verify the authenticity of many Senate, House and gubernatorial candidates currently running for office. Twitter has framed this effort as key to helping Americans find reliable information about politicians in the leadup to the 2020 election. But there's just one problem: Walz does not exist. The candidate is the creation of a 17-year-old high school student from upstate New York, CNN Business has learned.

The student, who CNN Business spoke to with the permission of his parents and has agreed not to be named as he is a minor, said he was "bored" over the holidays and created the fake account to test Twitter's election integrity efforts. The blue checkmark is a hallmark of Twitter and one that was later copied by Facebook. It is often given to prominent accounts belonging to journalists, politicians, government agencies and businesses. The feature is central to Twitter's goal of helping users find reliable information on the platform, often from verified newsmakers.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

A High School Student Created a Fake 2020 Candidate. Twitter Verified It

Comments Filter:
  • by aeropage ( 6536406 ) on Friday February 28, 2020 @08:56AM (#59777210)

    Is Eris true?
    Everything is true.
    Even false things?
    Even false things are true.
    How can that be?
    I don't know man, I didn't do it.

  • What Twitter does to attempt to verify these accounts? I haven't read TFA (heck, I hardly made it through TFS as all things Twitter make me woozy with the intense gravitation of their stupidity fields), but it seems to me if Twitter required a phone number and a mailing address, at a minimum verifying that a person with that name actually exists would be a breeze. Or better yet, require a credit card even if there is no intent to either charge it or store it. Or is this just a case of Twitter claiming th
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I haven't read your comment (heck, I hardly made it through the subject), but I still have an opinion which I somehow think is valid despite having the foggiest of ideas of what is being discussed and I people must know of that baseless opinion so I'm posting it here.

    • No matter what political office you are running for you must submit a candidacy form to the proper election authorities during the qualifying period. Between FEC/State/Local it should just take a simple public records request to verify the candidate.

      IMHO any indicator should be reflecting that the account belongs to the person on the form. No form, no flag.

      Yes, I'm saying government already addressed this many decades ago. Why Twitter and FB invented their own verification system that is full of fail is bey

      • by aitikin ( 909209 )
        Correct me if I'm wrong, but they do this to verify more than just candidates' accounts, right? IE before he was a candidate, Trump's Twitter had the verified checkmark if memory serves.
    • I expect it is probably a combination of AI Filters, and spotting some keywords. But rather faulty measures, however the cheapest to implement.

      The biggest weakness with social media is also its greatest strength. The fact that information goes in threw it so unfiltered.
      Were normal journalism will filter out a lot of junk, but may also filter out useful information.

      Until we can find a good way of validating information to keep truthful or at least non-deceitful so people can get a good understanding of the f

      • The biggest weakness with social media is also its greatest strength. The fact that information goes in threw it so unfiltered.

        Through.

        Were normal journalism will filter out a lot of junk, but may also filter out useful information.

        Where.

        I'm curious - are you letting autocomplete have its way with you, or can you just not spell?

        • by cusco ( 717999 )

          As a former teacher of English as a Second Language these guys posting from their phones drive me nuts.

    • by Jason Levine ( 196982 ) on Friday February 28, 2020 @10:23AM (#59777424) Homepage

      The article says that Twitter gets information from Ballotpedia. Meanwhile, Ballotpedia has a category for candidates who are looking into running but haven't officially filed, but didn't send that information to Twitter. So the kid created a Ballotpedia page (using a photo from This Person Does Not Exist [thisperson...texist.com]) and used that to get the Twitter account verified. It sounds like, going forward, all Twitter needs to do is require that political candidates send proof of filing for their candidacy. No system is going to be perfect, of course, but that would help keep a bored teen from repeating this.

    • by PPH ( 736903 )

      What Twitter does to attempt to verify these accounts?

      Not much, I suspect. One obvious flag should be a candidate filing for a high office and opening a brand new Twitter account at the same time. While I imagine this is possible, it cries out for a human to intervene, do a little research and vet the account.

      On one site I frequent, it takes a few years to earn a coveted gold badge.

  • by Way Smarter Than You ( 6157664 ) on Friday February 28, 2020 @09:02AM (#59777224)
    And Twitter is run as a privately owned propaganda company that has made it quite clear what their biases are and who they support and oppress. Only the lazy media types give a shit and no one listens to them but other lazy media types. It's easier to write an article that just copy paste of random Twittershit than do real research. Real people aren't on Twitter. Delete all the bots and fakes and lazy media and they could run the service on a Commodore 64 with a 1200 baud modem for the few real people left.
  • The hallowed Twitter brand is tarnished, and the ubiquitous social media may not be good for you.

    What are kids to do? Go outside and play, like the poor people with no wifi??

    • They can still sink their whole lifetime into CoD or the last FPS fad.
    • Re:Sigh... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by TigerPlish ( 174064 ) on Friday February 28, 2020 @09:32AM (#59777280)

      What are kids to do? Go outside and play, like the poor people with no wifi??

      Been a long time since I was a kid - 1980's - but yeah, we went out and played, lots, hard. Skinned knees are one of life's great teachers.

      Then we went home, played videogames on the atari 2600, coleco, etc, hacked a bit on our trs-80s, c-64s, etc... and maybe rang up a friend or two on this thing called a "telephone" that was wired to the wall, from the wall to central, and from there to the world.

      I honestly don't see what function, at all, social media plays, other than being a great propaganda machine. Goebbels would've had an epic-hard on at the prospect of twitter and facebook.

      The world was perfectly fine without it.

      • by idji ( 984038 )
        you are from the "telephone" generation that used that invention to keep in contact. Go back 150 years and your great-great-great grandparents were using the local newspaper as social media. Social Media is nothing new - it is human, only the medium changed.
        • you are from the "telephone" generation that used that invention to keep in contact. Go back 150 years and your great-great-great grandparents were using the local newspaper as social media. Social Media is nothing new - it is human, only the medium changed.

          I disagree that only the medium has changed. When you're having to write a letter, as they would have 150 years ago, you will take more time to put your thoughts together. lol wasn't needed as a reply as only more thoughtful things qualified for the effort required to put pen to paper and a stamp on the envelope. By making it easier Twitter in a sense encourages lazy and shoot from the hip responses. Add in to that the mob element and things get out of hand quickly. Disclaimer - I don't have a Twitter

          • When you're having to write a letter, as they would have 150 years ago, you will take more time to put your thoughts together.

            "And so it is that you by reason of your tender regard for the writing that is your offspring have declared the very opposite of its true effect. If men learn this, it will implant forgetfulness in their souls. They will cease to exercise memory because they rely on that which is written, calling things to remembrance no longer from within themselves, but by means of external marks.

            What you have discovered is a recipe not for memory, but for reminder. And it is no true wisdom that you offer your disc

        • by DanDD ( 1857066 )

          Newspapers 150 years ago distributed content. Rarely did an individual newspaper reader contribute to that content in any personal way, and certainly not in any time frame that came close to real-time.

          Social media turns everyone into a 'content' creator in real-time. Most of this 'content' is vapid & self-serving at best. Newspapers had editors, and for major stories, an editorial review board. Newspapers published their fair share of drivel 150 years ago, but at least there was some real content wi

        • > Social Media is nothing new - it is human, only the medium changed.

          The quality changed. The more people that have access to a medium the higher the noise due to sensationalism, greed, and marketing.

        • Go back 150 years and your great-great-great grandparents were using the local newspaper as social media.

          Incorrect. Newspapers weren't social media. They were purely propaganda machines. Rivington's Royal Gazette was nothing but pro-Loyalist Fake News. Hearst sent us into the Spanish American war by blaming Spain for the USS Maine explosion in Habana Harbor.

          Social Media in the pre-Facetwat era was the bar, the water cooler, the "malt shop," and the Mall.

          That's where people gathered, scoped the room for

        • Social media is designed to keep you there as long as possible. While you're there it also tracks how long you spend looking at each item so next time your feed has more of that. It knows that you vote democrat but you spend more time looking at news you disagree with. It even tracks your cursor movements. People like echo chambers and that is all social media is.

          News media has also turned a corner. Every headline says something like "Covid-19 all you need to know" or "Sanders, what we know so far". The bia

    • I wonder if Twitter will respond in w way typical to these situations... namely: charge the kid with unauthorized computer access, wire fraud, identity fraud, election tampering, jaywalking, and blasphemy. Have 2 armed cops drag him from his classroom in cuffs. Make him cop a plea to diminished charges. Inother words: completely f... up his life because he made you look stupid.
  • by sinij ( 911942 ) on Friday February 28, 2020 @09:45AM (#59777306)
    Sooner everyone realizes that Twitter is irrelevant cesspool of outrage-seekers, sooner we can move on and return to normality.
    • This is one of those comments that makes me regret Slashdot's limit of 5 upvotes.

    • You're right. Look at this asshole: https://twitter.com/realdonald... [twitter.com]
      • by Anonymous Coward

        See? Twitter doesn't authenticate anyone. The very idea that the actual President of the US could be anywhere near as stupid and anti-American as the troll you linked to, is preposterous. Fake news. There's no way the president is as ridiculous as you're trying to imply by sharing that malicious link.

      • I'd wager more democrats follow Trump than republicans. They hate him but obsess over his every word. He knows exactly what he's doing with twitter and how much it angers people. One single tweet and its the days headline. You keep falling for it.

    • by tflf ( 4410717 )

      Sooner everyone realizes that Twitter is irrelevant cesspool of outrage-seekers, sooner we can move on and return to normality.

      You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. "Irrelevant cesspool of outrage-seekers" is the new normal everywhere, even in casual face to face social discourse.
      Whatever we move on to is just as likely to be worse instead of better. The only certainty is it will not be a fundamental return to the normality that preceded social media.

      • by sinij ( 911942 )
        It might be new, but it is normal to have loud 2% of population dictate the issues and outlook on issues to the rest of society. We need for more people to accept that Twitter is a niche subculture, that this subculture is not representative of mainstream, and that what going on on Twitter must stay on Twitter.
  • You have so much in your face, after all...
  • by nagora ( 177841 ) on Friday February 28, 2020 @10:21AM (#59777418)

    Who would have thunk it?

  • approximately 87% of the US population is running to be the Democratic Presidential Nominee, with the remaining 13% listed as "uncommitted".
  • Is Deez Nuts running again this year?

  • If we (the people of the internet, not just the people who work at Twitter) were any good at authenticating people, we could have secure communications too. But we suck, which is the exact same reason that the government can so easily spy on you.

    The most and best progress ever made on this problem, happened around 30 years ago, with the invention of PGP. You may have noticed it is infrequently used, though. And that failure is how we ended up in this shithole.

BLISS is ignorance.

Working...