The first installment of what has been dubbed the “Twitter Files” dropped on December 2 via investigative journalist Matt Taibbi. Since then, batches two and three were also made public after the company’s chief executive, Elon Musk, armed Taibbi and his colleague Bari Weiss with further illuminating data.
A fourth batch of the so-called “Twitter Files" has been released by best-selling author Michael Shellenberger.
The latest installment of the treasure trove of data that Twitter CEO Elon Musk vowed would shed light on “free speech suppression” pertains to the social media platform’s actions leading up to the ban on former President Donald Trump instituted on January 8, 2021 after the events at the US capitol on January 6. Like in the case of the preceding batches, the insider information was given to journalists and authors by the tech billionaire to post on their Twitter accounts.
1. TWITTER FILES, PART 4
— Michael Shellenberger (@ShellenbergerMD) December 10, 2022
The Removal of Donald Trump: January 7
As the pressure builds, Twitter executives build the case for a permanent ban
Starting off the thread, Shellenberger titled his first post, “The Removal of Donald Trump: January 7." According to the exchanges revealed in part four of the “Files,” on January 7, senior Twitter executives sought to justify a Trump ban.
This was a day after thousands of Trump supporters stormed the US Capitol building demanding that lawmakers suspend the certification of Joe Biden's victory in the 2020 presidential election until claims of election fraud had been thoroughly investigated.
Disregarding the “free speech” or democracy implications, they were angling for a ban in line with a policy tweak that would be tailored exclusively to Trump, the next post by Shellenberger stated.
On Jan 7, senior Twitter execs:
— Michael Shellenberger (@ShellenbergerMD) December 10, 2022
- create justifications to ban Trump
- seek a change of policy for Trump alone, distinct from other political leaders
- express no concern for the free speech or democracy implications of a ban
This #TwitterFiles is reported with @lwoodhouse
The thread reveals how Twitter employees originally pushed back at calls to ban Trump from the platform, but then a barrage of public calls from a number of prominent figures, including former First Lady Michelle Obama, started pouring in.
For years, Twitter had resisted calls to ban Trump.
— Michael Shellenberger (@ShellenbergerMD) December 10, 2022
“Blocking a world leader from Twitter,” it wrote in 2018, “would hide important info... [and] hamper necessary discussion around their words and actions.”https://t.co/qaqklHOHjc
But after the events of Jan 6, the internal and external pressure on Twitter CEO @jack grows.
— Michael Shellenberger (@ShellenbergerMD) December 10, 2022
Former First Lady @michelleobama , tech journalist @karaswisher , @ADL , high-tech VC @ChrisSacca , and many others, publicly call on Twitter to permanently ban Trump. pic.twitter.com/RzNj7WJReg
Twitter’s then-CEO Jack Dorsey, who was on vacation, delegated responsibility to senior executives, according to the investigative journalist.
These included former Twitter Head of Trust and Safety Yoel Roth and others who were all "overwhelmingly progressive," he stated, adding that "in 2018, 2020, and 2022, 96%, 98%, & 99% of Twitter staff's political donations went to Democrats."
Dorsey is said to have sent an email to employees on January 7, urging them to stay "consistent" with policies, "including the right of users to return to Twitter after temporary suspension."
On January 7, @Jack emails employees saying Twitter needs to remain consistent in its policies, including the right of users to return to Twitter after a temporary suspension
— Michael Shellenberger (@ShellenbergerMD) December 10, 2022
After, Roth reassures an employee that "people who care about this... aren't happy with where we are" pic.twitter.com/IfDpEVnOtR
However, Roth is revealed in a subsequent screenshot as appearing to reassure an employee that "people who care about this... aren't happy with where we are."
Finally, Roth informed colleagues about news that he was "excited to share," Shellenberger tweeted. Yoel Roth was shown telling staff in Direct Messages (DM) that Jack Dorsey had "just approved repeat offender for civic integrity." This meant that a new policy on the platform would ensure that five violations ("strikes") "would result in permanent suspension."
A colleague then asked Roth if the decision signified that Trump could be banned, as he had one "remaining strike."
"Does the incitement to violence aspect change that calculus?" an employee asked, as Donald Trump and his allies were accused of instigating the attack on the Capitol. But Joel Roth responded that this was "for everything else," while Trump still had one strike left.
However, the very next day, Twitter announced a permanent ban on Donald Trump, citing the "risk of further incitement of violence,’" Shellenberger underscored.
Around 11:30 am PT, Roth DMs his colleagues with news that he is excited to share.
— Michael Shellenberger (@ShellenbergerMD) December 11, 2022
“GUESS WHAT,” he writes. “Jack just approved repeat offender for civic integrity.”
The new approach would create a system where five violations ("strikes") would result in permanent suspension. pic.twitter.com/F1KYqd1Xea
Twitter added on January 8, 2021, that its ban was based on "specifically how [Trump's tweets] are being received & interpreted.'"
Furthermore, the latest batch of the Twitter Files shows how employees of the microblogging site "engaged in complex interpretations of content in order to stamp out prohibited tweets." Shellenberger's thread reveals a series of exchanges over the "#stopthesteal' hashtag."
Roth messaged a Twitter colleague to underscore the need to deamplify the "stopthesteal" and QAnon conspiracy term "Kraken" by adding them to a blacklist of terms, Shellenberger wrote.
Indeed, notes Roth's colleague, "a quick search of top stop the steal tweets and they’re counterspeech"
— Michael Shellenberger (@ShellenbergerMD) December 11, 2022
But they quickly come up with a solution: "deamplify accounts with stopthesteal in the name/profile" since "those are not affiliated with counterspeech" pic.twitter.com/BjVvtAhLtw
Twitter employees also debated whether to punish users who shared screenshots of Trump's deleted January 6 tweets, with one staff worker allegedly saying that "we should bounce these tweets with a strike given the screen shot violates the policy," while another argued that "they are criticizing Trump, so I am bit hesitant with applying strike to this user."
Further along in the fourth installment of the files, shared screenshots show how a sales executive wrote to Yoel Roth to ask for clarification regarding Jack Dorsey's remark that "we will permanently suspend (Trump) if our policies are violated after a 12 hour account lock."
Roth responded by saying this meant "any" policy violation. When the Twitter employee asked if the company was "dropping the public interest (policy) now.." Roth is shown as answering later that, "in this specific case, we're changing our public interest approach for his account," in reference to Donald Trump's.
What happens next is essential to understanding how Twitter justified banning Trump.
— Michael Shellenberger (@ShellenbergerMD) December 11, 2022
Sales exec: "are we dropping the public interest [policy] now..."
Roth, six hours later: "In this specific case, we're changing our public interest approach for his account..." pic.twitter.com/XRUFil2npI
Additional "Twitter Files" are expected to be released on Sunday by journalist Bari Weiss, Shellenberger concluded.
No comments:
Post a Comment