演講MP3+雙語文稿:為了“干凈”的社交媒體環(huán)境付出的代價

00:00

00:00

MP3下載

https://online2.tingclass.net/lesson/shi0529/10000/10387/tedyp145.mp3

https://image.tingclass.net/statics/js/2012

聽力課堂TED音頻欄目主要包括TED演講的音頻MP3及中英雙語文稿，供各位英語愛好者學(xué)習(xí)使用。本文主要內(nèi)容為演講MP3+雙語文稿:為了“干凈”的社交媒體環(huán)境付出的代價，希望你會喜歡！

【演講人及介紹】Hans Block &Moritz Riesewieck

Hans Block：電影制片人，戲劇導(dǎo)演，音樂家；

Moritz Riesewieck：作者，編劇，戲劇和電影導(dǎo)演

漢斯·布洛克（Hans Block）和莫里茲·里斯維克（Moritz Riesewieck）在Laokoon品牌下開發(fā)電影，戲劇作品，散文，演講表演和廣播劇，以解決人類和社會觀念在數(shù)字時代如何變化或可以轉(zhuǎn)變的問題。

【演講主題】為了“干凈”的社交媒體環(huán)境而付出的代價

【演講文稿-中英文】

翻譯者 Wanting Zhong 校對 Jiasi Hao

00:12

[This talk contains mature content]

【本演講包含成人內(nèi)容】

00:16

Moritz Riesewieck: On March 23, 2013, usersworldwide discovered in their news feed a video of a young girl being raped byan older man. Before this video was removed from Facebook, it was alreadyshared 16,000 times, and it was even liked 4,000 times. This video went viraland infected the net.

莫里茲·里斯維克： 2013 年 3 月 23 日，世界各地的用戶在他們的新聞推送里發(fā)現(xiàn)了一個年輕女孩被年長男性強(qiáng)奸的視頻。在這個視頻從Facebook上被移除前，它已經(jīng)被轉(zhuǎn)發(fā)了 1.6 萬次，甚至被點贊了 4 千次。這個視頻被瘋轉(zhuǎn)，像病毒一樣侵染了網(wǎng)絡(luò)。

00:49

Hans Block: And that was the moment weasked ourselves how could something like this get on Facebook? And at the sametime, why don't we see such content more often? After all, there's a lot ofrevolting material online, but why do we so rarely see such crap on Facebook,Twitter or Google?

漢斯·布洛克：也正是在這一刻，我們問自己，這種東西是怎么得以出現(xiàn)在 Facebook 上的？同時，為什么我們沒有更加頻繁地看見這種內(nèi)容？畢竟網(wǎng)絡(luò)上有很多令人反胃的資料信息，但為什么我們很少在 Facebook 、推特，或谷歌上看到這樣的垃圾？

01:08

MR: While image-recognition software canidentify the outlines of sexual organs, blood or naked skin in images andvideos, it has immense difficulties to distinguish pornographic content fromholiday pictures, Adonis statues or breast-cancer screening campaigns. It can'tdistinguish Romeo and Juliet dying onstage from a real knife attack. It can'tdistinguish satire from propaganda or irony from hatred, and so on and soforth. Therefore, humans are needed to decide which of the suspicious contentshould be deleted, and which should remain.

莫：雖說圖像識別軟件可以在圖片和視頻中分辨性器官、血或者裸體，它很難從度假照片、阿多尼斯雕像，或乳腺癌檢查的宣傳活動中，區(qū)分出色情內(nèi)容。它無法區(qū)分舞臺上羅密歐與朱麗葉的死亡，和現(xiàn)實中的持刀襲擊。它無法區(qū)分諷喻和煽動，反語和仇恨，如此種種。因此，需要人類來判斷可疑內(nèi)容中哪些應(yīng)被刪除，哪些可以保留。

02:00

Humans whom we know almost nothing about,because they work in secret. They sign nondisclosure agreements, which prohibitthem from talking and sharing what they see on their screens and what this workdoes to them. They are forced to use code words in order to hide who they workfor. They are monitored by private security firms in order to ensure that theydon't talk to journalists. And they are threatened by fines in case they speak.All of this sounds like a weird crime story, but it's true. These people exist,and they are called content moderators.

我們對這些人幾乎一無所知，因為他們進(jìn)行的是秘密工作。他們簽了保密協(xié)議，禁止他們談?wù)撆c分享自己在屏幕上看到了什么，以及這份工作對他們造成的影響。他們被迫使用暗號以隱藏他們的雇主。他們被私人安保公司監(jiān)控，以確保他們不會同記者交談。而要是他們發(fā)聲，便會被威脅處以罰款。這些聽起來像是某個離奇的犯罪故事，但這是真實的。這些人是存在的，他們被稱為“網(wǎng)絡(luò)審查員”。

02:42

HB: We are the directors of the featuredocumentary film "The Cleaners," and we would like to take you to aworld that many of you may not know yet. 我們是專題紀(jì)錄片《The Cleaners》 （《網(wǎng)絡(luò)清道夫》）的導(dǎo)演。請讓我們將你們帶往 一個你們大多數(shù)人 可能還未曾知曉的世界。

02:48

HB: The so-called content moderators don'tget their paychecks from Facebook, Twitter or Google themselves, but fromoutsourcing firms around the world in order to keep the wages low. Tens ofthousands of young people looking at everything we are not supposed to see. Andwe are talking about decapitations, mutilations, executions, necrophilia,torture, child abuse. Thousands of images in one shift -- ignore, delete, dayand night. And much of this work is done in Manila, where the analog toxicwaste from the Western world was transported for years by container ships, nowthe digital waste is dumped there via fiber-optic cable. And just as theso-called scavengers rummage through gigantic tips on the edge of the city, thecontent moderators click their way through an endless toxic ocean of images andvideos and all manner of intellectual garbage, so that we don't have to look atit.

漢：這個被稱作“網(wǎng)絡(luò)審查員”的群體并不是直接從Facebook、推特，或谷歌拿工資，而是受雇于世界各地的外包公司，以降低時薪成本。成千上萬的年輕人看著我們不應(yīng)當(dāng)看到的一切。我們指的是斬首、殘割、處決、尸奸、酷刑、兒童虐待。一次輪值要處理幾千張圖像——忽略，刪除—— 不論晝夜。這項工作大部分是在 馬尼拉進(jìn)行的，多年來西方世界 都用集裝箱船 將有毒的電子垃圾 輸向這里，如今數(shù)字垃圾正通過 光纖電纜傾倒在同一個地方。而正如同所謂的拾荒者 在城市邊緣的 巨大垃圾山里翻撿一樣，網(wǎng)絡(luò)審查員點擊著鼠標(biāo)，趟過一片無邊無際的、 由圖像、視頻和各種知識垃圾構(gòu)成的充滿毒素的汪洋，感謝于此，我們無需親自面對這些內(nèi)容。

03:49

MR: But unlike the wounds of the scavengers,those of the content moderators remain invisible. Full of shocking anddisturbing content, these pictures and videos burrow into their memories where,at any time, they can have unpredictable effects: eating disorders, loss oflibido, anxiety disorders, alcoholism, depression, which can even lead tosuicide. The pictures and videos infect them, and often never let them goagain. If they are unlucky, they develop post-traumatic stress disorders, likesoldiers after war missions.

莫：但和拾荒者們身上的傷口不同，網(wǎng)絡(luò)審查員的傷口是看不見的。這些圖片和視頻充斥著令人震驚與不安的內(nèi)容，烙印在他們的記憶里，隨時可能造成難以預(yù)計的影響：飲食失調(diào)、性欲喪失、焦慮癥、酗酒、 抑郁癥，甚至可能造成自殺。那些圖片和視頻感染了他們，往往再也不會放過他們。如果不幸的話，他們會像從戰(zhàn)場歸來的士兵一樣，患上創(chuàng)傷后應(yīng)激障礙（PTSD）。

04:29

In our film, we tell the story of a youngman who had to monitor livestreams of self-mutilations and suicide attempts,again and again, and who eventually committed suicide himself. It's not anisolated case, as we've been told. This is the price all of us pay for ourso-called clean and safe and "healthy" environments on social media.Never before in the history of mankind has it been easier to reach millions ofpeople around the globe in a few seconds. What is posted on social mediaspreads so quickly, becomes viral and excites the minds of people all aroundthe globe. Before it is deleted, it is often already too late. Millions ofpeople have already been infected with hatred and anger, and they either becomeactive online, by spreading or amplifying hatred, or they take to the streetsand take up arms.

在影片里，我們講述了一個年輕人的故事：他的工作是監(jiān)控 自殘以及自殺企圖的直播，周而復(fù)始，然而最終，他也以自殺的方式結(jié)束了自己的生命。我們被告知的是，這樣的事并非個例。這是我們所有人，為了我們所謂的干凈、安全、且“健康”的社交媒體環(huán)境，付出的代價。在人類歷史中，從未有哪個時代能像現(xiàn)在這樣輕易地在數(shù)秒之內(nèi)便觸及全球各地的數(shù)百萬人。在社交媒體上發(fā)布的內(nèi)容傳遞得如此之快，迅速爆紅瘋轉(zhuǎn)，刺激全球所有人的神經(jīng)。在它被刪除之前，往往已為時晚矣。數(shù)百萬人已經(jīng)被憎恨和憤怒感染，他們抑或在網(wǎng)上變得活躍，繼續(xù)傳播或放大憎恨，抑或走上街頭，訴諸暴力。

05:35

HB: Therefore, an army of contentmoderators sit in front of a screen to avoid new collateral damage. And theyare deciding, as soon as possible, whether the content stays on the platform --ignore; or disappears -- delete. But not every decision is as clear as thedecision about a child-abuse video. What about controversial content,ambivalent content, uploaded by civil rights activists or citizen journalists? Thecontent moderators often decide on such cases at the same speed as the [clear]cases.

漢：因此，一支由網(wǎng)絡(luò)審查員形成的軍隊，守在屏幕前，防止新的附帶損害產(chǎn)生。他們必須盡快做出決斷，是否保留某條內(nèi)容——忽略；還是讓它消失——刪除。但并不是每個決定都能像對兒童虐待的視頻那樣迅速做出清晰明了的判斷。對于由民權(quán)活動人士、公民記者上傳的 有爭議的、模棱兩可的內(nèi)容，該怎么處理呢？ 網(wǎng)絡(luò)審查員在判斷這些案例時，通常和處理涇渭分明的案例時 使用同樣的速度。

06:11

People armed with their mobile phones canmake visible what journalists often do not have access to. Civil rights groupsoften do not have any better option to quickly make their recordings accessibleto a large audience than by uploading them to social media. Wasn't this theempowering potential the World Wide Web should have? Weren't these the dreamspeople in its early stages had about the World Wide Web? Can't pictures andvideos like these persuade people who have become insensitive to facts torethink?

擁有手機(jī)的人們能曝光記者們通常難以接觸的事情。人權(quán)組織為了讓他們的錄像能迅速向廣大觀眾公開，除了上傳到社交媒體常常沒有更好的選擇。這難道不是萬維網(wǎng)應(yīng)當(dāng)擁有的能夠賦予力量的潛力嗎？這難道不是萬維網(wǎng)初具雛形時，人們對它抱有的夢想嗎？這樣的圖片和視頻難道無法勸說已對事實變得麻木的人們 開始反思嗎？

06:49

HB: But instead, everything that might bedisturbing is deleted. And there's a general shift in society. Media, forexample, more and more often use trigger warnings at the top of articles whichsome people may perceive as offensive or troubling. Or more and more studentsat universities in the United States demand the banishment of antique classicswhich depict sexual violence or assault from the curriculum. But how far shouldwe go with that? Physical integrity is guaranteed as a human right inconstitutions worldwide. In the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EuropeanUnion, this right expressly applies to mental integrity. But even if thepotentially traumatic effect of images and videos is hard to predict, do wewant to become so cautious that we risk losing social awareness of injustice?So what to do? Mark Zuckerberg recently stated that in the future, the users,we, or almost everybody, will decide individually what they would like to seeon the platform, by personal filter settings. So everyone could easily claim toremain undisturbed by images of war or other violent conflicts, like ...

漢：然而，一切可能造成不安的內(nèi)容都被刪除了。在社會中還有這樣的一種變化趨勢。比如說，媒體更加頻繁地在有人可能感到冒犯或者不安的文章頂部使用“敏感警告”。美國的大學(xué)校園內(nèi)有越來越多的學(xué)生要求從課程中剔除描寫性暴力或性侵犯的古典內(nèi)容。但這些行為的尺度該如何把握？在世界各地的憲法中，身體健全是被保障的基本人權(quán)。歐盟的《基本權(quán)利憲章》明文規(guī)定，這項權(quán)利同樣適用于心理健全。但即使圖像和視頻帶來的潛在創(chuàng)傷難以預(yù)測，我們是否想變得如此謹(jǐn)小慎微，以至于要冒險失去對不公的社會意識？那么該怎么做呢？馬克·扎克伯格最近聲明在未來，用戶們，即我們，或者幾乎是任何人，將會通過個人過濾設(shè)定，個人獨立決定在平臺上想看到的內(nèi)容。也就是說任何人能輕松地聲稱看到戰(zhàn)爭和暴力沖突的圖像時能不為所動，比如說——

08:05

MR: I'm the type of guy who doesn't mindseeing breasts and I'm very interested in global warming, but I don't like warso much.

莫：我是那種不介意看到胸部的男人，我對全球變暖很感興趣，但不怎么喜歡戰(zhàn)爭。

08:16

HB: Yeah, I'm more the opposite, I havezero interest in naked breasts or naked bodies at all. But why not guns? I likeguns, yes.

漢：嗯，我就比較相反，我對胸部或者裸體壓根沒有一點興趣。但何不談?wù)剺屩?？沒錯，我喜歡槍。

08:26

MR: Come on, if we don't share a similarsocial consciousness, how shall we discuss social problems? How shall we callpeople to action? Even more isolated bubbles would emerge. One of the centralquestions is: "How, in the future, freedom of expression will be weighedagainst the people's need for protection." It's a matter of principle. Dowe want to design an either open or closed society for the digital space? Atthe heart of the matter is "freedom versus security." Facebook hasalways wanted to be a "healthy" platform. Above all, users shouldfeel safe and secure. It's the same choice of words the content moderators inthe Philippines used in a lot of our interviews.

莫：看嘛，如果我們沒有共享相似的社會意識，我們該如何討論社會問題？我們該如何呼吁人們行動？更多互相孤立的泡泡會浮現(xiàn)。核心問題之一是：“在未來，我們該如何平衡言論自由與人們對保護(hù)的需求。”這是個原則性的問題。我們想為數(shù)字空間設(shè)計一個相較開放或是封閉的社會？問題的核心是 “自由 vs. 安全感”。Facebook 一直想成為 一個“健康”的平臺。重中之重的是，用戶應(yīng)當(dāng)感到安全。在我們的很多采訪中，菲律賓的網(wǎng)絡(luò)審查員們也使用了同樣的遣詞。

09:19

MR: For the young content moderators in thestrictly Catholic Philippines, this is linked to a Christian mission. Tocounter the sins of the world which spread across the web. "Cleanliness isnext to godliness," is a saying everybody in the Philippines knows.

莫：這些來自信奉天主教的菲律賓的年輕網(wǎng)絡(luò)審查員們，對于他們來說，這份工作和基督教的使命有所聯(lián)系。為了對抗在網(wǎng)絡(luò)上傳播的這個世界的罪惡?！扒鍧嵔谑崱?，這個說法在菲律賓人盡皆知。

09:40

HB: And others motivate themselves bycomparing themselves with their president, Rodrigo Duterte. He has been rulingthe Philippines since 2016, and he won the election with the promise: "Iwill clean up." And what that means is eliminating all kinds of problemsby literally killing people on the streets who are supposed to be criminals,whatever that means. And since he was elected, an estimated 20,000 people havebeen killed. And one moderator in our film says, "What Duterte does on thestreets, I do for the internet." And here they are, our self-proclaimedsuperheroes, who enforce law and order in our digital world. They clean up,they polish everything clean, they free us from everything evil. Tasks formerlyreserved to state authorities have been taken over by college graduates intheir early 20s, equipped with three- to five-day training -- this is thequalification -- who work on nothing less than the world's rescue.

漢：其他人則將自己與他們的總統(tǒng)羅德里戈·杜特爾特相比較，以此激勵自身。他自 2016 年當(dāng)選以來一直掌權(quán)菲律賓，他憑借“我會進(jìn)行清掃”的承諾在當(dāng)年的選舉中勝出。而這個承諾的意思是通過殺掉街上被視為罪犯的人，不管這是什么意思，從而達(dá)到排除社會上各種問題的目的。自從他當(dāng)選以后，估計有 2 萬人被殺。我們影片中的一位審查員說：“杜特爾特在街頭上怎么做，我在網(wǎng)絡(luò)上也怎么做?！边@就是他們，我們的“自我標(biāo)榜的超級英雄”，在數(shù)字世界里維持法制與秩序。他們進(jìn)行掃除，把一切擦拭得干干凈凈，他們將我們從一切邪惡中解放出來。曾經(jīng)為國家機(jī)關(guān)保留的任務(wù)如今落到了二十歲出頭的大學(xué)畢業(yè)生肩上，他們接受完三天到五天的訓(xùn)練，——這便是他們的資格證，他們的工作不亞于拯救世界。

10:43

MR: National sovereignties have beenoutsourced to private companies, and they pass on their responsibilities tothird parties. It's an outsourcing of the outsourcing of the outsourcing, whichtakes place. With social networks, we are dealing with a completely newinfrastructure, with its own mechanisms, its own logic of action and therefore,also, its own new dangers, which had not yet existed in the predigitalizedpublic sphere.

莫：國家權(quán)能被外包給私人公司，他們又將自己的責(zé)任托付給第三方。情況就是——外包，再外包，再外包。對于社交網(wǎng)絡(luò)，我們要處理的是一個全新的架構(gòu)，它有著自己的運行機(jī)制，自己的行為邏輯，因而也有其特定的潛在新危險。這些危險在電子化時代以前的公共領(lǐng)域中不曾存在過。

11:13

HB: When Mark Zuckerberg was at the USCongress or at the European Parliament, he was confronted with all kinds ofcritics. And his reaction was always the same: "We will fix that, and Iwill follow up on that with my team." But such a debate shouldn't be heldin back rooms of Facebook, Twitter or Google -- such a debate should be openlydiscussed in new, cosmopolitan parliaments, in new institutions that reflectthe diversity of people contributing to a utopian project of a global network.And while it may seem impossible to consider the values of users worldwide,it's worth believing that there's more that connects us than separates us.

漢：當(dāng)馬克·扎克伯格在美國國會或者歐洲議會時，他面對的是各式各樣的批評。而他的反應(yīng)總是千篇一律的：“這一點我們會改進(jìn)，那一點我們團(tuán)隊會跟進(jìn)。”可是這樣的辯論不應(yīng)該在 Facebook 、推特 或谷歌的幕后進(jìn)行—— 這樣的辯論應(yīng)當(dāng)被公開探討，在嶄新的、國際化的議會中，在新的機(jī)構(gòu)中——它們應(yīng)當(dāng)能反映 “為全球化網(wǎng)絡(luò)理想工程 做出貢獻(xiàn)的人們的多元化”。考慮到全球用戶的價值觀 雖說看上去不可能 但值得相信的是，我們之間的 聯(lián)系將比隔閡更強(qiáng)大。

11:58

MR: Yeah, at a time when populism isgaining strength, it becomes popular to justify the symptoms, to eradicatethem, to make them invisible. This ideology is spreading worldwide, analog aswell as digital, and it's our duty to stop it before it's too late. Thequestion of freedom and democracy must not only have these two options.

莫：沒錯，在這個民粹主義抬頭的時點，為癥狀辯解、將它們消除、將它們隱形，這樣的做法變得普及。這種觀念正在全世界擴(kuò)散，無論在現(xiàn)實里還是在網(wǎng)絡(luò)上，而我們的義務(wù)是在為時已晚前阻止它。自由和民主的問題并不能只有這兩個選項。

12:29

HB: Delete.

汗：刪除。

12:30

MR: Or ignore.

莫：或者忽略。

12:33

HB: Thank you very much.

汗：謝謝大家。

12:35

(Applause)

（掌聲）