Daphne KellerVerified account

@daphnehk

Platform Regulation Director, Stanford Cyber Policy Center. Former Google AGC. Been around this particular block a few times.

San Francisco, CA
cyberlaw.stanford.edu/about/people/d…
Joined October 2009
493 Photos and videos Photos and videos

Tweets

You blocked @daphnehk

Are you sure you want to view these Tweets? Viewing Tweets won't unblock @daphnehk

  1. Pinned Tweet
    13 Sep 2018

    We imagine that platforms can bring the whole sprawling chaos of human behavior into compliance with the law. Make our lives policeable, and policed, to a degree no govt in history could have imagined. Not only do we seem to think it's possible– we think it's a good idea.

    Replying to @daphnehk @AASchapiro
    So the vicious circle is first, we demand content moderation, then we get some and we're unhappy with it (because human beings are fallible, inconsistent, etc.), then we demand *less* "censorship" or *more* "moderation" or *the end of all unfair censorship/moderation*.
    18 replies 122 retweets 312 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  2. Dec 31

    That TM is <chef’s kiss>.

    14 likes
    Undo
  3. Retweeted
    28 Dec 2021

    DOJ defending perceived government interests as opposed to promoting enforcement of first amendment rights

    1. Multiple special factors counsel against extending the Bivens remedy to First Amendment retaliation claims ........................ 19
    Good afternoon, the Biden Administration has asked the Supreme Court to rule that federal agents cannot be held accountable for retaliating against protected speech—i.e., what Trump's feds did to protesters in Lafayette Square and Portland, Oregon.
    9 retweets 17 likes
    Undo
  4. 25 Dec 2021

    My work has been cited in the Punk and Post-Punk Journal. I couldn’t ask for a better Christmas present. Happy holidays, everyone!

    1 retweet 37 likes
    Undo
  5. Retweeted
    24 Dec 2021

    Google faces nearly $100 million fine in Russia over failure to delete banned content, including information about Navalny

    10 retweets 11 likes
    Undo
  6. 23 Dec 2021

    Wow. This is messed up. Is the State Dept still so short-staffed they don’t have time to notice what bizarre positions they’re parroting?

    I am confused why the State Department is publishing a document with talking points from a weird, creepy group that believes all porn should be banned.
    7 retweets 16 likes
    Undo
  7. 23 Dec 2021

    Oh, man. RIP Joan Didion. What a writer.

    An appraisal of Joan Didion by former Times books critic Parul Sehgal:
    1 retweet 7 likes
    Undo
  8. 22 Dec 2021

    Awesome Actual Research on what the author calls this "means of advancement and accumulation of prestige", thanks to

    3 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  9. 22 Dec 2021

    This gripe thread was prompted by an article I am pretty sure was not written by anyone who is reading this tweet. If you are someone who as done this, I get it, you're playing the game the way it's played. Just, as soon as you get enough social capital to stop? Please stop.

    1 reply 4 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  10. 22 Dec 2021

    Also, good news! Whichever student Journal editor read the initial inaccurate boast and accepted on that basis? They are probably gone now! You are dealing with a whole new set of editors! So backpedal away, it's fine!!

    1 reply 5 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  11. 22 Dec 2021

    But here is my pitch to authors: If you MUST say this to win at the acceptance-to-a-journal stage, then at least revise it before actually publishing. Your future peers are reading. Don't ruin your relationships with them.

    1 reply 9 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  12. 22 Dec 2021

    I get it: Authors whose whole world is what they can find in Lexis may be unaware of their own misstatements. And I get it: Editors who are themselves law students may not know better, and this is The Way It's Done to get their attention. The whole economy is messed up.

    1 reply 9 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  13. 22 Dec 2021

    Can we just eliminate phrases like "This Article is the first to..." from the intro sections of law review articles? It is so often wrong even with respect to the limited universe of U.S. legal academia. It is even more often wrong with respect to global civil society work.

    8 replies 7 retweets 81 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  14. 22 Dec 2021

    Look, another client for the lawyers bringing First Amendment claims against platforms. You could really build a whole practice.

    Question for lawyers: my girlfriend wants her parents to stay with us for the holidays. her dad is retired navy. can i use the 3rd amendment to prevent this from happening?
    Show this thread
    1 reply 10 likes
    Undo
  15. 21 Dec 2021

    So grateful to the people who take on this work. We are beyond fortunate to have on this job.

    OSTP seal
    So happy to be joining to help maximize the benefits of science and technology to advance health, prosperity, security, environmental quality, and justice for all Americans. 1/4
    Show this thread
    1 reply 4 retweets 31 likes
    Undo
  16. 21 Dec 2021

    But next time I’ll just tell them to read this thread. Thanks, !

    1 reply 3 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  17. 21 Dec 2021

    We have a grand discussion of the 1st Am, using NetChoice and the S Ct precedent I cover here: We have a nitpicky discussion of 230, and why (c)(1) matters as much as (c)(2). Than they ask about the merits of the claims and I get a little hand-wavey.

    1 reply 3 retweets 7 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  18. 21 Dec 2021

    I tell students the platforms win must-carry cases because: - plaintiffs can’t bring 1st Am claims against private companies - platforms’ have their own 1st Am rights - 230 - TOS - plaintiffs always bring a kitchen sink of claims and then can’t make out the merits

    1 reply 2 retweets 13 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  19. 21 Dec 2021

    Oooh, this thread about Alex Berenson’s super-wacko lawsuit against Twitter will be a useful reference next time I cover “must-carry” claims in my platform regulation class!

    OK, let's talk about this Alex Berenson complaint. It's a chonky boy, clocking in at 228 paragraphs and 70 pages, and I'm actually in quite a bit of pain at the moment (did something to my back) so this will definitely break across a few days. But we'll do our best
    Show this thread
    4 replies 12 retweets 48 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  20. 20 Dec 2021

    Fair point, and one that should be discussed more explicitly. Including between content, privacy, and competition regulators/experts — who often seem to exist in parallel theoretical universes, instead of all coexisting in this one.

    This Tweet is unavailable.
    1 reply 5 retweets 17 likes
    Undo
  21. Retweeted
    20 Dec 2021

    The DSA is the GDPR for content. It puts all but the smallest entities that allow users to post content into a regulatory regime on par with the GDPR. It has formal filings to regulators, complex internal compliance regimens, registered local representatives, and all. 4/

    1 reply 2 retweets 6 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo

@daphnehk hasn't Tweeted yet.

Loading seems to be taking a while.

Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

    You may also like

    ·