Twitter Files 4.0 shows how executives changed the rules to permanently ban Trump

[ad_1]

The fourth episode of the Twitter Files shared by Elon Musk shows how the company’s senior executives demanded a change in policies and created the rationale on January 7 for permanently banning Donald Trump from the microblogging platform.

Journalist Michael Shellenberger posted part 4 of the files on Twitter, exposing how strategies were worked out in the Twitter office on January 7, a day after supporters of former US president Donald Trump staged a failed protest on Capitol Hill.

At the start of his Twitter thread, Shellenberger shared an old public policy post on Twitter dated January 6, 2018, which read, Blocking a world leader from Twitter or removing their controversial Tweets will hide important information that people should see and debate. It won’t silence that leader either, but it will certainly prevent a necessary discussion about their words and actions.

1. TWITTER FILES, PART 4

The Impeachment of Donald Trump: January 7

As pressure mounts, Twitter executives build the case for a permanent ban

Michael Shellenberger (@ShellenbergerMD) December 10, 2022

He explained how Twitter had earlier resisted calls to ban Trump, however, after the protest on Capitol Hill, external and internal pressure grew to permanently ban Trump from former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey.

Dorsey was vacationing in French Polynesia the week of January 4-8, 2021. He called the meetings but also delegated much of the management of the situation to senior execs @yoyoel, Twitters Global Head of Trust and Safety, and @ vijaya Head of Legal, Policy, and Trust, Shellenberger wrote.

Explaining the highly partisan nature of Twitter staff, he said that in 2018, 2020, and 2022, 96%, 98%, and 99% of political donations made by Twitter staff went to Democrats. He also shared one of the tweets of Yoel Roth, one of the then executives of Twitter, saying that there are ACTUAL NAZIS IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

Changing Twitter policies

Shellenberger, in his report, notes that an email Dorsey sent to employees on January 7 said there was a need to remain consistent with the rules, which included the right of users to return to Twitter after they were temporarily suspended. will be suspended.

Afterward, Roth assured an employee that “the people who care about this are pieces of news, full of excitement.

In his report, he quotes Roth as saying, GUESS WHAT. Jack only approves of repeat offenders for civic integrity. “The new approach would create a system where five violations (“strikes”) would result in permanent suspension,” Shellenberger wrote.

Shellenberger said the message exchanges between Roth and his colleague made it clear how Dorsey was forced to put greater restrictions on the speech allowed by Twitter during the election.

He explained how they were talking about whether Trump could be banned in the end, and does that incite violence aspect change that calculus? which Roth says no. “Trump continues to just have his one strike” (remaining).

He highlighted the question of “incitement to violence”, further emphasizing how Twitter said the reason for permanently banning Trump was the “risk of further inciting violence”.

Shellenberger said no concerns were expressed within Twitter about Trump’s ban, except for a junior-level employee who sent a message saying, “this may be an unpopular opinion but one of those ad hoc decisions like this that don’t seem to be rooted in policy are imho (in my honest opinion) a slippery slope…This now seems to be a fiat of an online platform CEO with a global presence who can gatekeep speaking for the whole world”.

Shellenberger explains how employees began to understand the difference between Twitter’s policies and their political beliefs revealed in Twitter’s internal communications by censoring the #stopthesteal hashtag.

Roth said the hashtag should be de-amplified and blacklisted but warned it would also affect those using the hashtag to make counter-allegations of rigged elections.

Roth after realizing that the same hashtag was being used by Democrats to call out Donald Trump and claim that the 2020 US Presidential election was held fairly, suggested de-amplifying accounts with #stopthesteal in the name/profile because they are not they are associated with counterspeech.

Considering that so many Twitter accounts owned by Republicans and conservatives have been sharing screenshots of tweets from Donald Trump’s suspended account, Twitter employees have suggested that such handles should be placed under 12 -hour long review.

However, they faced the challenge of distinguishing Democrats from Republicans, as former members of the party also posted tweets to mock Trump.

Shellenberger, in his Twitter Files 4.0, revealed that Roth changed Twitter’s rules to justify banning Trumps account. In this particular case, we changed our approach to the public interest for his account, Roth said.

[ad_2]