Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Twitter Social Networks

Oracle VP Ken Glueck Suspended by Twitter for Doxing a Reporter (gizmodo.com) 81

Posted by msmash from the not-again dept.
A tweet from Oracle Executive VP Ken Glueck goading his followers into harassing a female reporter was found to violate Twitter's policies, the company told Gizmodo on Wednesday. From the report: Glueck, who's previously made headlines as one of the top lobbyists under Oracle, was forced to take down the tweet and have his account suspended in a read-only mode for the next 12 hours, a Twitter spokesperson said. "The Tweet you referenced was in violation of the Twitter Rules. The account owner will be required to delete the violative Tweet and spend 12 hours with their account in read-only mode," a Twitter spokesperson said in an email. The tweet we reference was, of course, Glueck's. That tweet was the latest attack on the Intercept's Mara Hvistendahl, who last week published an expose detailing how reseller networks in China reportedly funnel Oracle's tech into the hands of the country's government. In response, Glueck published roughly 2,700 words worth of rebuttal on the official Oracle blog, helmed by a request for readers to send "any information about Mara or her reporting" to his personal Protonmail email address.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Oracle VP Ken Glueck Suspended by Twitter for Doxing a Reporter More

Oracle VP Ken Glueck Suspended by Twitter for Doxing a Reporter

Comments Filter:

  • ... helmed by a request for readers to send "any information about Mara or her reporting" to his personal Protonmail email address.

    At what point will "crowd wisdom" kick in and show him this is a bad idea?

  • 12 whole hours ?? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jmccue ( 834797 ) on Wednesday April 28, 2021 @05:33PM (#61325742) Homepage

    12 Hours without Twitter, if you consider that a punishment then you have a lot more problems than you realize

    If it was 12 weeks I would consider that a present, these days I get texts on my Cell phone from people asking "Did you see what I posted ?". I would love to say "No, banned for 12 weeks" and not have to lie

    • Social media whores will die 3 times in that 12 hours. Might as well suspend oxygen for 12 hours

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sloth jr ( 88200 )
      ??? Are you unable to delete your Twitter account? That to me sounds like an even better response than "banned for 12 weeks" - "deleted my Twitter account, and so should you."

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jmccue ( 834797 )

        I like the NASA twitter posts, so I go there once in a great while

        Now a little this I do. I have a profile for firefox just for twitter and a shell script that starts firefox for twitter. It renames ~/.firefox then renames ~/.firefox_twitter to ~/.firefox and starts firefox, when done it renames everything back. So it cannot see/view anything in the original profile. Can be replicated for almost all these social sites with a profile for each site.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by caseih ( 160668 )

          There's no need rename anything. Just point firefox at the profile you want it to use:

          firefox --profile /path/to/profile --no-remote

          Can run multiple instances simultaneously.

    • Re:12 whole hours ?? (Score:4)

      by edi_guy ( 2225738 ) on Wednesday April 28, 2021 @06:20PM (#61325888)

      Seriously. As the Highway Patrol is quick to remind, driving is a privilege not a right. Same with stupid social networking. If you dox someone it should be at least 90 days no tweet-tweet. But let's face it, despite the:

      "The mission we serve as Twitter, Inc. is to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information instantly without barriers. Our business and revenue will always follow that mission in ways that improve – and do not detract from – a free and global conversation."

      The only real goal of any corporation is to make it's leadership wealthy. That's why the realdonald only got banned at the 11th hour and this Oracle joker gets to sleep it off and tweet again in the morning.

  • Why does it matter that she's female? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by chispito ( 1870390 ) on Wednesday April 28, 2021 @05:45PM (#61325766)
    Honest question: Why does it matter that the reporter is female?

    • Re:Why does it matter that she's female? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by UnknowingFool ( 672806 ) on Wednesday April 28, 2021 @06:47PM (#61325986)
      Honest question: why are you bringing it up since the article nor the summary bring any real attention to it other than to state the fact that the reporter was female. Why is it her gender the most important thing you noted from the article?
      • The article actually does bring weird attention to it. Whens the last time you saw an article with the 'so and so did X bad thing to male reporter'. In the leading sentences in an article that was not about gender politics? It doesn't matter that they don't harp on it every paragraph. The fact that they tacked it on prominently and it such a weird and awkward way shows they are trying to be inflammatory.

        • The article actually does bring weird attention to it

          The Gizmodo article mentions the word "female" once and "her" once. According to you, "it brings weird attention to it." Please tell me how it does that.

          Whens the last time you saw an article with the 'so and so did X bad thing to male reporter'.

          It is something I call a "fact". She is in fact, female. So what?

          In the leading sentences in an article that was not about gender politics?

          Again: Female (1). her(3). You seem to want to make it about gender politics.

          It doesn't matter that they don't harp on it every paragraph. The fact that they tacked it on prominently and it such a weird and awkward way shows they are trying to be inflammatory.

          So according to you because they don't mention it, it is "tacked on prominently". I think you need a dictionary on what the word "prominent" means.

          • Its in the first sentence of both the article and the summary. Its not a random aside. Show me where this is SOP if the reporter was male.
          • It's the lede sentance, though. The fact that the story does not provide any other clues as to why it matters that she is female is just strange.
            • This is the lead sentence: "A tweet from Oracle Executive VP Ken Glueck goading his followers into harassing a female reporter was found to violate Twitter’s policies, the company told Gizmodo on Wednesday." That is 28 words. "Female" is not bolded or italicised but you latched onto it more than "harassing" and "violate". If it said "male" it would have been the same to me; however if it said "male" it seems like you would have ignored it. It sounds like that was the most important word to you.
      • Yes, exactly. I found it odd that it was inserted into the lede, though the rest of the story does not provide any context why it should matter

        A tweet from Oracle Executive VP Ken Glueck goading his followers into harassing a female reporter

        • That is not the full sentence; why are you misrepresenting what the sentence was?

          • That is not the full sentence; why are you misrepresenting what the sentence was?

            The point was to show how the author wanted you to know almost immediately that the victim was female. Read the full sentence by itself.

            A tweet from Oracle Executive VP Ken Glueck goading his followers into harassing a female reporter was found to violate Twitter’s policies, the company told Gizmodo on Wednesday.

            Are the policies that were violated specific to her being female? (This is what the sentence most naturally suggests.) Was the harassment he encouraged explicitly misogynist in some way? Are we supposed to draw some connection to other recent stories? These are questions the lede suggests but the story does no address.

            • No. By eliminating half the sentence it seems you are misrepresenting what was written. Again it seems like you want to read more into the sentence than exists. All of your arguments are basically that you read something into a sentence; therefore it is there. Maybe the problem is you, buddy.

              • No. By eliminating half the sentence it seems you are misrepresenting what was written. Again it seems like you want to read more into the sentence than exists. All of your arguments are basically that you read something into a sentence; therefore it is there. Maybe the problem is you, buddy.

                I give up. You seem to have no curiosity about how things are communicated and why.

                If you will excuse me, I need to go spend my time working on a project with my male coworkers.

                • I give up. You seem to have no curiosity about how things are communicated and why.

                  I do not put motives into other people's written words; I do not conjure motivations out of nothingness. You seem to want to do that. Again if the word "male" was used, you would have ignored it.

                  If you will excuse me, I need to go spend my time working on a project with my male coworkers.

                  So what? That's the point you seem to miss every single time. I do not care whether you have male or female coworkers. You cared so much that the reporter was female.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Myrdos ( 5031049 )

        Honest question: Why do you ask? Why is the most important thing in the comments a question about why it matters if the reporter is female?

    • Because they're more vulnerable physically (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Somervillain ( 4719341 ) on Wednesday April 28, 2021 @09:01PM (#61326280)

      Honest question: Why does it matter that the reporter is female?

      I'm a lot less rape-able. I'm a large burly man, so there's really not a large segment of men who want to rape me and can overpower me and do so. It's the same reason we have male vs female leagues for MMA and boxing. Men have a physical advantage. For a woman, being threatened is much scarier. As a large, burly man, I can both intimidate adversaries, actually fight, and even if my opponent is superior, I can block and resist serious injury much longer than a 120lb 5'4" woman. The average woman can be overpowered by about 90% of men her age.

      Or if you want a more serious answer, ask your female friends. Every woman I know finds the notion of being a victim of violence quite terrifying. Most men don't get scared until they see a weapon...or at least until a much larger guy is 1" from your face.

      If I threaten to kick your ass, you take it with a grain of salt. You know that if I did so, there's a very high chance I won't leave the scuffle unscathed, even if I could beat you in a fight...I'm probably leaving hurt with at least with some nasty bruises. You also know that if you really wanted to, you could beat up a woman with a much lower chance of being hurt yourself...your female friends certainly know this. Ask them how seriously they take threats of physical violence.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by The Evil Atheist ( 2484676 )
        This. All these incels saying that women take the creepy abuse of women too seriously. But when some men actually carry out an assault/rape/murder, somehow they all find a way to blame the woman. Women shouldn't take abuse seriously, but if they wind up raped or dead, it's also their fault.

      • Every woman I know finds the notion of being a victim of violence quite terrifying. Most men don't get scared until they see a weapon...or at least until a much larger guy is 1" from your face.

        You should have gone to my high school. The girls were absolutely terrifying, because they knew they could get away with anything and everything.

        • Every woman I know finds the notion of being a victim of violence quite terrifying. Most men don't get scared until they see a weapon...or at least until a much larger guy is 1" from your face.

          You should have gone to my high school. The girls were absolutely terrifying, because they knew they could get away with anything and everything.

          Not sure where you're going there, but I am just a bystander in this debate. No one threatened me. I would guess, however, that if you told a woman who is getting threats online of people saying they'll kill and rape her, I am not sure stories about your high school are too comforting.

          It's a legit to debate how much danger someone is in, but regardless of that, if you feel like someone wants to murder you and/or rape you and has the means to do so, it's quite traumatic. Most women do not have the ski

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by N1AK ( 864906 )
      It shouldn't, but anecdotally (I haven't looked for any evidence) females receive particularly aggressive misogynistic abuse or harrassment in situations like this. With that said, I'd prefer that we treat the doxxing of any journalists as equally concerning. If female journalists receive particularly bad abuse in response, which I suspect is true, it is the failure of law enforcement to deal with people targetting them that needs addressing.

      • It shouldn't, but anecdotally (I haven't looked for any evidence) females receive particularly aggressive misogynistic abuse or harrassment in situations like this. With that said, I'd prefer that we treat the doxxing of any journalists as equally concerning. If female journalists receive particularly bad abuse in response, which I suspect is true, it is the failure of law enforcement to deal with people targetting them that needs addressing.

        That makes sense. I wonder if the inclusion of the detail without context was calculated against this reporter's desire not to be similarly targeted.

  • Oracle exec playing dirty tricks? What a surprise! (Score:4, Funny)

    by marcle ( 1575627 ) on Wednesday April 28, 2021 @06:16PM (#61325876)

    No doubt straight from the Ellison playbook.

  • What does Oracle provide that would be missed? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Arnonyrnous Covvard ( 7286638 ) on Wednesday April 28, 2021 @06:18PM (#61325880)
    If Oracle stopped existing tomorrow, is there anything irreplaceable anyone would miss? It looks like a company that exists solely through inertia and predatory business practices. There are enough databases and Java is Open Source. Anything else, besides a seemingly endless supply of psychopaths in their ranks?

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Unfortunately, Oracle provides a lot of business infrastructure software. Like PeopleSoft. If you work at a large company, chances are pretty good they are using PeopleSoft for all sorts of HR things, and perhaps a heapload more.

      • Unfortunately, Oracle provides a lot of business infrastructure software.

        And I would not miss it one bit if Oracle vanished. Here are the features of Oracle software:
        * Terrible user interface where thinly disguised database fields creep in
        * Impenetrable error messages tied to perverse workflows
        * Bugs, like so many bugs. How can our budget be a stochastic number?
        * Glacial slowness
        * Going down for a week on the regular because apparently Oracle don't believe in staging servers and upgrades take a week.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by BenBoy ( 615230 )

      besides a seemingly endless supply of psychopaths in their ranks?

      Exactly the problem. This monopoly on psychopaths has to end, and soon. It presents a significant barrier-to-entry for other companies that want that top slot ... they've got the technical chops; they just need the jerks!

  • And in Germany... (Score:4, Informative)

    by BAReFO0t ( 6240524 ) on Thursday April 29, 2021 @02:05AM (#61326794)

    You ae required by law to publish contact information if you want to act like a publisher online. E.g. a reporter posting stories or news.
    Including a physical address, phone number and name of a person legally responsible (so if you want to sue). Which is why you can even call Google in the phone and get a human to talk to, here. (Not that that call center is of any use though.)

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by gacattac ( 7156519 )

      Yes - and unlike the disinformation posted in this thread and upvoted to +5 ("TFA says that Glueck posted what he thought was her personal email and home phone number."), the article literally says the exact opposite, that he posted the journalist's work phone and work email.

      So, like in Germany, posting the work email address and work phone number of a publisher.

      Somehow, this was called doxing. Somehow, calling it doxing was important enough for people to lie about.

Slashdot Top Deals

You know you've landed gear-up when it takes full power to taxi.

Close