Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey is most certainly used to getting mentioned in tweets on his own platform calling out other tweets for violations of the company’s terms of service.
Whether it’s alleged harassment from a lower-profile corner of Twitter or something tapped out in the wee hours of the night by the President of the United States, calling out @jack is a quick way to say, “See? This is bad. I’m telling the guy who runs the company!”
This week was no exception as President Trump again tweeted about possessing the power to launch a nuclear war, again at North Korea and leader Kim Jong-un.
North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un just stated that the “Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times.” Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 3, 2018
Three days after that tweet, Dorsey tweeted himself about the discussion around political figures and world leaders and how and whether to police them in regard to the social media giant’s terms of service.
There’s been a lot of discussion about political figures and world leaders on Twitter, and we want to share our stance: https://t.co/Ns0cuKpwd5
— jack (@jack) January 5, 2018
Dorsey pointed to a post on Twitter’s blog to answer that question, saying, essentially, that allowing people like Trump to continue uninterrupted (except for that one time) is done so in the interest of advancing a global, public conversation worthy of seeing and debating.
Here’s the blog post in its entirety:
There’s been a lot of discussion about political figures and world leaders on Twitter, and we want to share our stance.
Twitter is here to serve and help advance the global, public conversation. Elected world leaders play a critical role in that conversation because of their outsized impact on our society.
Blocking a world leader from Twitter or removing their controversial Tweets, would hide important information people should be able to see and debate. It would also not silence that leader, but it would certainly hamper necessary discussion around their words and actions.
We review Tweets by leaders within the political context that defines them, and enforce our rules accordingly. No one person’s account drives Twitter’s growth, or influences these decisions. We work hard to remain unbiased with the public interest in mind.
We are working to make Twitter the best place to see and freely discuss everything that matters. We believe that’s the best way to help our society make progress.
Dorsey also said that an article in Slate this week, headlined “Let Trump Tweet,” by senior technology writer Will Oremus, “captures some of the issues.”
The article called the movement to ban Trump from Twitter a “misguided, counterproductive liberal fantasy” and Oremus argued that while ending up in a nuclear war because of Trump’s itchy Twitter finger was certainly a worrisome notion, Twitter isn’t to blame for the fact that Trump possesses that power.
In fact, Oremus said, allowing Trump to tweet more could very well do more to speed his removal from office than banning @realdonaldtrump ever will.
