This issue is back because of Twitter and Facebook's decision to restrict access to this story in The New York Post.

這個問題又出現了，因為Twitter和Facebook決定限制訪問《紐約郵報》的這篇報道。

It's a big deal.

這是一個大問題。

It's the first time a social media company has proactively blocked an article from a major mainstream news organization.

這是社交媒體公司首次主動屏蔽某大型主流新聞機構的文章。

The New York Post is a newspaper and website owned by Rupert Murdoch.

紐約郵報》是魯珀特-默多克旗下的報紙和網站。

Story in question was provided to the Post by Donald Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, and it alleges a direct link between Joe Biden and Joe Biden's son's business dealings in Ukraine.

有關故事是由唐納德-特朗普的律師魯迪-朱利安尼提供給郵報的，它指稱喬-拜登和喬-拜登的兒子在烏克蘭的商業交易有直接聯繫。

It includes a cache of emails and other data purportedly from a laptop owned by Hunter Biden, but which was left at a repair shop in Delaware.

它包括一個電子郵件和其他數據的緩存，據稱來自亨特-拜登擁有的一臺筆記本電腦，但它被留在特拉華州的一家維修店。

But there are a number of major holes in this story, which is why Twitter and Facebook are both restricting how it's being shared.

但這個故事有很多重大的漏洞，這也是為什麼Twitter和Facebook都在限制它的分享方式。

Twitter said it took action because the images contained in the articles include personal and private information like email addresses and phone numbers, which violate our rules.

推特表示，之所以採取行動，是因為文章中的圖片包含了電子郵件地址和電話號碼等個人和私人資訊，這違反了我們的規則。

It went on to say it viewed material included in the articles as violations of our hacks materials policy.

它繼續說，它認為文章中包含的材料違反了我們的黑客材料政策。

While the White House press secretary, Kayleigh McEnany, had her Twitter account suspended after she shared the article.

而白宮新聞祕書凱莉-麥克納尼在分享這篇文章後，她的推特賬號被暫停。

She's calling the whole thing censorship.

她說整個事情都是審查。

Donald Trump also turned to this on his rally in Iowa last night.

唐納德-特朗普昨晚在愛荷華州的集會上也轉了這個話題。

Good Caylee.

好Caylee。

She's so great.

她是如此的偉大。

She's incredible.

她是不可思議的。

They closed down our account.

他們關閉了我們的賬戶。

She's the White House press secretary because she's reporting the truth.

她是白宮新聞祕書，因為她報道的是真相。

And this is interesting.

這很有趣

The Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey has now said that it was unacceptable for the platform to block users from linking to the article without context on explanation for the decision.

推特CEO傑克-多西（Jack Dorsey）目前已經表示，平臺在沒有解釋決定背景的情況下阻止用戶鏈接到文章是不可接受的。

So he's saying to some degree, they got this one wrong.

所以他的意思是，在某種程度上，他們弄錯了這個問題。

Let's bring in Mariana Spring, the BBC's disinformation reporter, to talk about this.

讓我們請來BBC的闢謠記者瑪麗安娜-斯普林來談談這個問題。

Mariana saw one commentator in the US saying the tech platforms are flailing in front of this issue, and they do seem to be still working out exactly what to do.

瑪麗安娜在美國看到一位評論員說，科技平臺在這個問題面前耀武揚威，他們似乎確實還在研究到底該怎麼做。

Yep, definitely.

是的，絕對的。

There's increasing pressure on social media sites to tackle misinformation in the build up to the U.

在U.S.A.的建立過程中，社交媒體網站應對錯誤信息的壓力越來越大。

S.

S.

Election on.

選舉於：

Hence why we've seen a number of tweets posts from both Trump on Biden's campaigns being labeled in recent weeks but this is a whole different thing.

是以，為什麼最近幾周我們看到特朗普和拜登的競選活動都有不少推特帖子被貼上標籤，但這是完全不同的事情。

This is a decision to limit the spread off mainstream news article, which makes a number of allegations which people are questioning but nonetheless is seen as a as a step forward in what Twitter and Facebook decided to dio.

這是一個決定，以限制傳播關閉主流新聞文章，其中提出了一些指控，人們正在質疑，但儘管如此，被視為作為一個作為Twitter和Facebook決定dio的一步。

Facebook's action was less surprising because they tend to de prioritized stories until they've been checked by third party fact checkers, and then they allow them to be shared more widely.

Facebook的行動並不那麼令人驚訝，因為他們傾向於de優先級故事，直到他們被第三方事實檢查員檢查，然後他們允許他們更廣泛地分享。

Whereas Twist's decision to label, uh, this this link with pop up, which essentially says this could be harmful, don't click on it was taken very badly by a number off Republican supporters.

而Twist決定給這個帶有彈出式的鏈接貼上標籤，呃，這個鏈接主要是說這可能是有害的，不要點擊它，這被一些共和黨的支持者看得很不爽。

And not just those, really, you know, ardent pro Trump supporters, but actually more moderate Republicans who felt like this was Twitter and Facebook overstepping their mark.

不僅僅是那些，真的，你知道，熱心的支持特朗普的支持者，但實際上更溫和的共和黨人，他們覺得這是Twitter和Facebook的越界。

Twitter later went on to explain, as you say, that this was to do with privacy, that they felt that the article included details which breached their terms in terms of sharing private contact details, but also that this was about hacking Onda concern that this information had been obtained through hacking and they don't allow that kind of information to be shared on their platform.

Twitter後來繼續解釋說，正如你所說的那樣，這與隱私有關，他們認為文章中包含的細節違反了他們在分享私人聯繫方式方面的條款，但這也是關於黑客的Onda關注，這些資訊是通過黑客獲得的，他們不允許在他們的平臺上分享這種資訊。

But they do allow news sites to report on hacking.

但他們確實允許新聞網站報道黑客行為。

And that again explains the concern from a lot of commentators.

而這也再次解釋了很多評論員的擔憂。

And when we've talked about hacking in the past with reference the disinformation, there's been a foreign dimension to it, Is there a foreign dimension to this story?

而當我們過去談及黑客攻擊時，參考了虛假資訊，一直有一個外國的層面，這個故事有外國的層面嗎？

At the moment, we can't answer that question.

目前，我們無法回答這個問題。

We don't know, and that is the case with the number of disinformation campaigns we've seen in the build up to this election.

我們不知道，這就是我們在這次選舉前看到的大量虛假資訊活動的情況。

But it is something we know has happened in the past.

但這是我們知道過去發生過的事情。

Russian actors have been involved in hacking operations, which which have produced information that people fear could have interfered with or impacted voters and the election.

俄羅斯行動者參與了黑客行動，這些行動產生的資訊，人們擔心會干擾或影響選民和選舉。

I think that explains the knee jerk reaction from Twitter.

我認為這解釋了推特的膝跳反應。

But nonetheless you can see that this has led Thio another escalation in this battle not only between social media sites on disinformation on their platforms but between social media sites and trump specifically between Twitter and Trump on it will be interesting to see in the weeks ahead how they how they continue.

但儘管如此，你可以看到，這導致了Thio的另一個升級，在這場戰鬥中，不僅社交媒體網站之間的虛假資訊在他們的平臺上，但社交媒體網站和特朗普之間的具體Twitter和特朗普上將是有趣的，看看在未來幾周內他們如何繼續。

Obviously, Twitter's apologized in this instance, but where do they draw the line on what responsibility do they have when it comes to tackling political disinformation?

很明顯，Twitter在這次事件中道歉了，但在處理政治虛假資訊時，他們在哪裡劃定了他們的責任？

In particular, Mariana was good to have you on.

尤其是瑪麗安娜，有你在真好。

Thanks for you Help us ever this marijuana spring in the BBC newsroom.

謝謝你幫助我們曾經這個大麻春天在BBC新聞室。

Now it's important, say the Biden campaign denies that Joe Biden ever met with the Ukrainian executive in this story, but it's already being used as political capital by Donald Trump.

現在重要的是，說拜登競選活動否認喬-拜登曾在這個故事中與烏克蘭高管會面，但它已經被唐納德-特朗普作為政治資本。

He described The New York Post, has a very fine newspaper and said this at that rally in Iowa.

他介紹說，《紐約郵報》，有一份非常精美的報紙，在愛荷華州的那次集會上，他這樣說。

Now we can see clearly that Biden is a corrupt politician who shouldn't even be allowed to run for the presidency.

現在我們可以清楚地看到，拜登是一個腐敗的政客，甚至不應該被允許競選總統。

Let's bring back in Anthony's circa Anthony.

讓我們再來看看安東尼的左右安東尼。

These stories become so complex, so multifaceted, I sometimes struggled toe kind of work out what their political impact is.

這些故事變得如此複雜，如此多面，我有時會努力去種出它們的政治影響是什麼。

Yeah, well, if you remember four years ago, Donald Trump leaned very heavily in the Wikileaks revelations about Hillary Clinton and her emails and the Democratic National Committee emails to paint Hillary Clinton as corrupt as beholden to global interests.

是啊，如果你還記得四年前，唐納德-特朗普在維基解密披露的希拉里-克林頓和她的電子郵件以及民主黨全國委員會的電子郵件中，非常倚重於把希拉里-克林頓描繪成腐敗的，因為他要對全球利益負責。

Well, I think he is trying to reprise that again, this time telling talking about Joe Biden and his sons, lobbying connections and saying that his son influenced Joe Biden's positions on Ukraine Now, the documents in this New York Post article we don't know their exact sourcing.

好吧，我認為他試圖再次重演，這次告訴談論喬-拜登和他的兒子，遊說關係，並說他的兒子影響了喬-拜登在烏克蘭問題上的立場現在，紐約郵報文章中的文件我們不知道他們的確切來源。

They don't they aren't even a smoking gun in his.

他們沒有他們甚至不是他的煙槍。

Far as they give evidence that Joe Biden even communicated with any of Hunter Biden's Ukrainian Ukrainian contacts.

遠在他們給出的證據，喬-拜登甚至與亨特-拜登的任何一個烏克蘭烏克蘭聯繫人進行了溝通。

But Donald Trump is again trying to use this to paint.

但唐納德-特朗普又想借此畫蛇添足。

Joe Biden is corrupt were only 2.5 weeks three weeks from the election.

喬-拜登是腐敗的都只有2.5週三周的選舉。

So it's a little late for these things to happen impact, particularly because the American public hasn't seemed to be that interested in this story over the course of the past few months.

所以，這些事情發生影響有點晚了，尤其是在過去幾個月裡，美國公眾似乎對這個故事並沒有那麼感興趣。

They're much more interested in Donald Trump's handling of coronavirus and the economy, so I would downplayed the impact of this unless there are more revelations to come.

他們對唐納德-特朗普對冠狀病毒和經濟的處理更感興趣，所以我會淡化這件事的影響，除非有更多的啟示。