TwitterFiles 4: Top Execs Changed The Platform’s Policies Specifically To Permanently Ban Trump
The latest document dump from Twitter shows how top-level players held then-President Trump to a standard that was not applied to any other political leader.
Do you wonder why President Trump was banned from Twitter for allegedly violating the platform’s “incitement to violence” policy but Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei was not banned for actually calling for the total destruction of Israel?
It’s because Twitter executives decided to treat President Trump in a way that no other world leader was treated.
Independent journalist and author Michael Shellenberger posted the fourth installment of the Twitter document dump late Saturday evening.
The lengthy thread shows that discussions behind the scenes were attempting to find a way to permanently ban the personal Twitter account of the sitting President of the United States. Pressure mounted from the left to have Trump’s account suspended after the riot on January 6.
Shellenberger said late Saturday the internal communications showed that Twitter leadership had decided to pursue a change of policy “for Trump alone, distinct from other political leaders,” and that they expressed “no concern for the free speech or democracy implications of a ban.”
Following the events of Jan. 6, former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey was facing growing internal and external pressure to ban Trump from the platform, Shellenberger said.
Trump was demonized among Democrats, which was the political preference among most of Twitter’s staff and senior executives. “In 2018, 2020, and 2022, 96%, 98%, & 99% of Twitter staff’s political donations went to Democrats,” according to Shellenberger.
Voices pressuring Dorsey to remove Trump after the events of Jan. 6 included former First Lady Michelle Obama, tech journalist Kara Swisher, and the Jewish NGO Anti-Defamation League, among many others, Shellenberger noted.
Because Dorsey was on vacation, he “delegated much of the handling of the situation” to senior Twitter executives at the time. They were Yoel Roth, Twitter’s former head of trust and safety, and Vijaya Gadde, Twitter’s former head of legal policy and trust.
Roth had publicly acknowledged his anti-Trump views on Twitter many times. He had posted in 2017 that there were “ACTUAL NAZIS IN THE WHITE HOUSE,” in reference to President Trump.
Source: Epoch Times
Yoel Roth’s messages pop up a lot and it’s chilling that this was the guy heading up “Trust and Safety” at Twitter.
1. TWITTER FILES, PART 4
The Removal of Donald Trump: January 7
As the pressure builds, Twitter executives build the case for a permanent ban
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 10, 2022
For those catching up, please see:
Part 1, where @mtaibbi documents how senior Twitter executives violated their own policies to prevent the spread of accurate information about Hunter Biden’s laptop;https://t.co/4Y2xkh6Osc
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 10, 2022
And Part 3, where @mtaibbi documents how senior Twitter execs censored tweets by Trump in the run-up to the Nov 2020 election while regularly engaging with representatives of U.S. government law enforcement agencies.https://t.co/qmsRUdwV0L
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 10, 2022
But after the events of Jan 6, the internal and external pressure on Twitter CEO @jack grows.
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
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 10, 2022
As context, it's important to understand that Twitter’s staff & senior execs were overwhelmingly progressive.
In 2018, 2020, and 2022, 96%, 98%, & 99% of Twitter staff's political donations went to Democrats. https://t.co/XdwkdPwYVQ
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 10, 2022
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
After, Roth reassures an employee that "people who care about this… aren't happy with where we are" pic.twitter.com/IfDpEVnOtR
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 10, 2022
“Progress!” exclaims a member of Roth’s Trust and Safety Team.
The exchange between Roth and his colleagues makes clear that they had been pushing @jack for greater restrictions on the speech Twitter allows around elections.
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 11, 2022
Roth's colleague's query about "incitement to violence" heavily foreshadows what will happen the following day.
On January 8, Twitter announces a permanent ban on Trump due to the "risk of further incitement of violence." pic.twitter.com/psLb5HDGQP
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 11, 2022
Shellenberger notes that the only pushback that the team combing through the documents could find was from a low-level employee who warned about the “slippery slope” that this ad-hoc policy presented and how it could be a serious threat to free speech and democracy itself.
The *only* serious concern we found expressed within Twitter over the implications for free speech and democracy of banning Trump came from a junior person in the organization. It was tucked away in a lower-level Slack channel known as “site-integrity-auto." pic.twitter.com/6CWiz5MXfu
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 11, 2022
Twitter employees use the term "one off" frequently in their Slack discussions. Its frequent use reveals significant employee discretion over when and whether to apply warning labels on tweets and "strikes" on users. Here are typical examples. pic.twitter.com/nnhEgmwXLg
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 11, 2022
Twitter employees recognize the difference between their own politics & Twitter's Terms of Service (TOS), but they also engage in complex interpretations of content in order to stamp out prohibited tweets, as a series of exchanges over the "#stopthesteal" hashtag reveal. pic.twitter.com/tfZesQNXx8
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 11, 2022
Indeed, notes Roth's colleague, "a quick search of top stop the steal tweets and they’re counterspeech"
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
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 11, 2022
Employees struggle with whether to punish users who share screenshots of Trump's deleted J6 tweets
"we should bounce these tweets with a strike given the screen shot violates the policy"
"they are criticising Trump, so I am bit hesitant with applying strike to this user" pic.twitter.com/dhHF2nXsHz
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 11, 2022
Around noon, a confused senior executive in advertising sales sends a DM to Roth.
Sales exec: "jack says: 'we will permanently suspend [Trump] if our policies are violated after a 12 hour account lock'… what policies is jack talking about?"
Roth: "*ANY* policy violation" pic.twitter.com/ExSFNM7BAb
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 11, 2022
The ad exec is referring to Twitter’s policy of “Public-interest exceptions," which allows the content of elected officials, even if it violates Twitter rules, “if it directly contributes to understanding or discussion of a matter of public concern” https://t.co/xTs14fD8V9 pic.twitter.com/ycbdlVmI7l
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 11, 2022
Around 2:30, comms execs DM Roth to say they don't want to make a big deal of the QAnon ban to the media because they fear "if we push this it looks we’re trying to offer up something in place of the thing everyone wants," meaning a Trump ban. pic.twitter.com/GHeFoY1zQp
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 11, 2022
Roth's response hints at how Twitter would justify deviating from its longstanding policy. "To put a different spin on it: policy is one part of the system of how Twitter works… we ran into the world changing faster than we were able to either adapt the product or the policy." pic.twitter.com/wGMvuoS7u3
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 11, 2022
Earlier that day, the employee wrote, "My concern is specifically surrounding the unarticulated logic of the decision by FB. That space fills with the idea (conspiracy theory?) that all… internet moguls… sit around like kings casually deciding what people can and cannot see." pic.twitter.com/KqwSdANBgo
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 11, 2022
"The underlying problem," writes @WillOremus , is that “the dominant platforms have always been loath to own up to their subjectivity, because it highlights the extraordinary, unfettered power they wield over the global public square…
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 11, 2022
“Facebook’s suspension of Trump now puts Twitter in an awkward position. If Trump does indeed return to Twitter, the pressure on Twitter will ramp up to find a pretext on which to ban him as well.”
Indeed. And as @bariweiss will show tomorrow, that’s exactly what happened.
/END
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) December 11, 2022
Just a few weeks ago, conservatives were warning Elon Musk that Yoel Roth needed to go. At the time, Elon had defended keeping Roth on by saying that everyone posts dumb tweets, everyone is entitled to their own political beliefs, and that he thought that Roth was a man with integrity.
He called half the country “Literal Nazis” thats not someone who should be in charge of moderation. Perception is reality.
— Mostly Peaceful Memes (@MostlyPeacefull) November 2, 2022
I don’t share the same sense. pic.twitter.com/4i2XGyhwIa
— Jason Jones (@jonesville) October 31, 2022
Someone with integrity assumes positive intent when dealing with others. However, when one demonstrates they they are incapable of such, and takes pride in labeling others, well, that person should have no say in who gets to speak in the digital town square. pic.twitter.com/FZ2PkCDBxa
— Ian McKelvey (@ian_mckelvey) October 31, 2022
I’m not a hater or a doomer.
I have cheered on Elon’s acquisition from the get.But this is the brutal reality of the situation.
To restore “public trust” at Twitter you must *remove from power* the people who atomized it in the first place.
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) November 2, 2022
2. Twitter safety board *must* have a true conservative (or two) appointed.
Real champions for free speech and native twitter power users.
This would truly restore “trust” with 100M Americans who have been denigrated by this platform.
Reatore balance to the force @elonmusk
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) November 2, 2022
Just a few days later, on November 10, Bloomberg reported, “Yoel Roth and Robin Wheeler, two executives who until today had emerged as part of Elon Musk’s new leadership team, have resigned, according to another person familiar with the matter, who asked not to be identified discussing non-public information.”
Former! pic.twitter.com/eOHWHJPaj7
— Yanky (@Yanky_Pollak) November 11, 2022
Elon was wrong about Roth.
It took some time, but he figured it out.
Former head of censorship at Twitter was perhaps not entirely unbiased … pic.twitter.com/yynb9whc5S
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 9, 2022
Related:
- TwitterFiles Trump Edition: — Guess Which 3 Letter Agencies Featured Prominently?
- Twitter Files 2’ Reveals Twitter DID Shadowban And Blacklist Conservatives — Here’s The 411
‘The Twitter Files’ Exposes How The Hunter Biden Laptop Story Was Suppressed By Twitter
Elon Smoked The Old Twitter Bird
ClashDaily’s Big Dawg has put his own spin on what’s been going down on the ol’ Bird App — the old Twitter is dead and Elon is building a new one.
Check out Doug’s latest piece, ‘Elon Smoked The Old Twitter Bird.’
Use promo code, ‘FIRST20’, for 20% off all prints. We print on luster paper, museum quality canvas, wood, and for all you metal-heads, we print on metal. We use only the finest inks. Custom sizes are available from small to couch-sized wall monsters.