Rules were no barrier once Twitter’s internal momentum was building for the ban of then-President Donald Trump in the aftermath of the Capitol raid, according to correspondence discovered in the “Twitter Files.”
Twitter has a regulation that permits tweets that would otherwise be reported for punishment to stay accessible if they are deemed to be in the public interest.
As highlighted by writer Michael Shellenberger in Saturday’s issue of the “Twitter Files,” Twitter took that regulation through a lot of contortions in order to ban Trump.
The “Twitter Files” is an effort conducted by new Twitter owner Elon Musk to highlight internal decision-making at Twitter as it pertained to muzzling viewpoints and banning Trump.
The communications obtained by Shellenberger suggest that former Twitter Head of Trust and Safety Yoel Roth was a driving force behind the suspension and helped circumvent the regulations in order to achieve his goal.
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 (@ShellenbergerMD) December 11, 2022
Shellenberger published messages from a Twitter official who questioned the situation and Roth’s response that whatever they might use to ban Trump will be utilized in the process.
Shellenberger focuses on a single tweet, stating, “What happens next is essential to understanding how Twitter justified banning Trump. 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…’”
According to the materials obtained by Shellenberger, Roth attempted to permanently suspend the account of Florida Republican Representative Matt Gaetz as a practice run for what he had planned for Trump.
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 (@ShellenbergerMD) December 11, 2022
Later, Roth provides his reason for abandoning policy.
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 (@ShellenbergerMD) 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,’” Shellenberger posted.
More on this story via The Western Journal:
In an Op-Ed posted on The Hill, law professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University noted the disturbing reality revealed by the “Twitter Flies.”
Turley noted that comments from President Joe Biden and former President Barack Obama supporting content moderation “show total contempt for the ability of people to make up their own minds on subjects ranging from elections to vaccinations.” CONTINUE READING…