Following the Capitol riots in early 2021, there was a significant public demand for a ban on then-President Donald Trump, but only one Twitter employee had the guts to question this harsh action and analyze the possible effects it may have had on individuals’ rights to free expression. We now know that one dissident voice inside the Twitter leadership as a result of freshly appointed CEO Elon Musk disclosing internal business papers.
On the business’ internal Slack chat platform, a junior employee recently voiced concerns about a choice that seemed to go against Twitter’s stated public rules. Although moderation judgments often deviate from stated protocol, this one was unexpected and called for more investigation by staff members.
TRENDING: NEW Trump Diamond Bills Will Drive Liberals Crazy!
“This might be an unpopular opinion but one off ad hoc decisions like this that don’t appear rooted in policy are [in my opinion] a slippery slope and reflect an alternatively equally dictatorial problem,” Shellenberger quotes what the unidentified staff member wrote. “This now appears to be a fiat by an online platform CEO with a global presence that can gatekeep speech for the entire world – which seems unsustainable.”
A junior staff member sent them another message with a story by Will Oremus of The Washington Post and OneZero 40 minutes after they first voiced their concerns. This news item emphasized Facebook’s decision to ban President Trump from its platform indefinitely. “lacks a clear basis in any of Facebook’s previously stated policies, highlights for the millionth time that the dominant platforms are quite literally making up the rules of online speech as they go along,” reports Shellenberger.
“My concern is specifically surrounding the unarticulated logic of the decision by FB,” Shellenberger claims the employee wrote. “That space fills with the idea (conspiracy theory?) that all … internet moguls … sit around like kings casually deciding what people can and cannot see.”
In the last weeks of President Trump’s administration, as discussion about Twitter bans grew, then-CEO Jack Dorsey took a break and traveled to French Polynesia. In his place, the company’s reaction at this crucial moment was led by former Trust and Safety chief Yoel Roth and Legal/Policy Chief Vijaya Gadde, with an overarching directive from an email sent by Mr. Dorsey on January 7th detailing consistent moderation practices.
“Jack’s emails have been _fine_… but ultimately, I think people want to hear from Vijaya, or Del, or someone closer to the specifics of this who can reassure them that the people who care about this are thinking deeply about these problems and aren’t happy with where we are,” According to Shellenberger, Roth messaged an unnamed coworker. “A few engineers have reached out to me directly about it, and I’m chatting with them… but it’s so clear that they just want to know that _someone_ is doing something about this, and it’s not that we’re ignoring the issues here.”
The employee in issue argued in opposition, arguing that unclear instructions would lead to misunderstanding. “while it seems obvious and simple that we ‘should’ [permanently ban] his personal account,” The decision to block President Trump’s official government account was a difficult one for the corporation to make and required much thought before a decision was made.
Our Public Policy team has in the past resolutely defended the practice of enabling global leaders to use Twitter in the face of intense demand to quiet it. In 2018, they published a tweet in which they claimed that include these voices in meaningful public conversation and accountability—rather than excluding them—is crucial. “controversial Tweets would hide important information people should be able to see and debate,” Although talks about a particular leader will be limited, Shellenberger said that their voice would still be heard.
