Twitter Olivier Douliery/Getty Images
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey posted a statement Wednesday night defending the ban of President Donald Trump and responded to criticism the social network has received over the decision.
The president’s account was permanently suspended last week and the reason Twitter gave cited violations of their Glorification of Violence policy.
In his statement tonight, Dorsey said, “I do not celebrate or feel pride in our having to ban
@realDonaldTrump from Twitter, or how we got here. After a clear warning we’d take this action, we made a decision with the best information we had based on threats to physical safety both on and off Twitter. Was this correct?”
He defended the ban as “the right decision for Twitter” and said “offline harm as a result of online speech is demonstrably real.”
His statement also acknowledges criticisms of Twitter’s decision, saying “a ban is a failure of ours ultimately to promote healthy conversation” and “sets a precedent I believe is dangerous: the power an individual or corporation has over a part of the global public conversation.”
“Yes, we all need to look critically at inconsistencies of our policy and enforcement. Yes, we need to look at how our service might incentivize distraction and harm. Yes, we need more transparency in our moderation operations. All this can’t erode a free and open global internet,” Dorsey adds.
You can read the full thread below:
I believe this was the right decision for Twitter. We faced an extraordinary and untenable circumstance, forcing us to focus all of our actions on public safety. Offline harm as a result of online speech is demonstrably real, and what drives our policy and enforcement above all.
— jack (@jack) January 14, 2021
Having to take these actions fragment the public conversation. They divide us. They limit the potential for clarification, redemption, and learning. And sets a precedent I feel is dangerous: the power an individual or corporation has over a part of the global public conversation.
— jack (@jack) January 14, 2021
This concept was challenged last week when a number of foundational internet tool providers also decided not to host what they found dangerous. I do not believe this was coordinated. More likely: companies came to their own conclusions or were emboldened by the actions of others.
— jack (@jack) January 14, 2021
Yes, we all need to look critically at inconsistencies of our policy and enforcement. Yes, we need to look at how our service might incentivize distraction and harm. Yes, we need more transparency in our moderation operations. All this can’t erode a free and open global internet.
— jack (@jack) January 14, 2021
We are trying to do our part by funding an initiative around an open decentralized standard for social media. Our goal is to be a client of that standard for the public conversation layer of the internet. We call it @bluesky: https://t.co/51or6OuNNv
— jack (@jack) January 14, 2021
It’s important that we acknowledge this is a time of great uncertainty and struggle for so many around the world. Our goal in this moment is to disarm as much as we can, and ensure we are all building towards a greater common understanding, and a more peaceful existence on earth.
— jack (@jack) January 14, 2021
I believe the internet and global public conversation is our best and most relevant method of achieving this. I also recognize it does not feel that way today. Everything we learn in this moment will better our effort, and push us to be what we are: one humanity working together.
— jack (@jack) January 14, 2021
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
Leave a Reply