Monday, December 12, 2022

Twitter Files: The internal decision-making and journos skewing it

I wasn't a fan of Twitter until Elon Musk threatened to buy it back in March 2022. Then I started thinking of how convenient Twitter is to disseminate brief information or point people in a direction. So I have no interest in writing on Twitter or have a feed to look at or ignore, but I'm very happy to click on a Twitter link and find out the scoop in a limited number of characters and an easy-to-read format. 

So Twitter proved its value to me. I started thinking of it as a compact version of the internet. 

So what should the rules be for a compact version of the internet? We have to consider that Twitter is a private company, not the whole internet. It's here not because a bunch of countries got together and figured out how to do it and finance it, but because someone started up a company, and they are trying to stay in business. There are going to be business considerations, so they can't be as open as the entire internet. I strongly support media companies having standards, and that applies to social media as well. 

So the Twitter files were supposed to show how fucked up Twitter is. That message is favored by Musk, Twitter's new owner who is successfully soliciting adulation from conservatives. It's written by journalists with axes to grind with mainstream media, much of it warranted because mainstream media has got a ton of problems. They use journalistic methods, such as quoting primary sources like text communication between Twitter executives. However, they aren't exactly evenhanded in presenting the situation, particularly the decision to permanently suspend Trump's Twitter account. 

They focus on the internal decision-making, and ignore that Trump rallied thousands of people and got them to surround, break into, and intimidate Congress on the day that Joe Biden's election was to be certified. They seem to have zero problem whatsoever ignoring these extreme circumstances. It's so funny when Bari Weiss points to the words of others leaders and their threats, and leaves it at words. She doesn't mention if those other leaders managed to mass a mob that attacked a seat of government. Wow, just the words are a fair comparison.

That's the shoddiness of the Twitter files. 

Image: twitter.com


Twitter did screw up on its blockage of the NY Post article about the discovery of Hunter Biden's laptop, and they have admitted it. I agree it was wrong. Twitter also has left-leaning biases. However, I suspect that most if not all suspended accounts deserved it. Misinformation (lies) are a huge problem in media, and even larger if you do nothing about them but just let them propagate. 

The files misrepresent the reasons for permanently suspending Trump's account. Here is twitter's explanation, which the journalist somehow never link to.

My rant. Here is my stream of consciousness rant about the twitter files. Getting it out of drafts and making it available to all. 

The first big series of the twitter files has finished. I'm going to focus what was written about Trump being permanently banned from twitter after the Jan. 6 riot/insurrection/attempted coup. 

When you read about this in the twitter files, almost the entire focus is on the internal decision-making of twitter execs, and not what was happening on the ground in DC. How is it fair or realistic to isolate those? Twitter is criticized for not following the rules and procedures they had established, but what was happening in DC then? Well, for the first time ever, thousands of Americans surrounded the capitol to intimidate Congress into not doing its legislative and Constitutional duty. Those events were unique, but somehow twitter is supposed to ignore all that and continue with the same rules and procedures it had.

Bari Weiss repeats Trump's tweets of Jan. 8. They are:

“The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!”

“To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.”

Then she focuses for most of the next 27 tweets on the twitter internal deliberations, especially how different work groups and officials in twitter can't find specific rule violations in those two Trump tweets. 

Weiss also goes into the violent rhetoric of leaders of other countries, and how they weren't thrown off of twitter for that rhetoric.

That all sounds logical, doesn't it? And it is logical......EXCEPT that some very major developments are completely ignored in that telling. And it's not logical to ignore major relevant developments unless you want a skewed argument to justify a skewed decision or viewpoint. 

So what are the major relevant developments? 

1. Trump encouraged thousands of his supporters to march to the capitol and intimidate Congress. And they did so with much violence. 

2. Trump did not call his supporters to cease for over 3 hours once the violence started. That is an extremely slow response when Congress was surrounded and violently threatened.

3. Trump did not condemn the violence that day. 

4. Trump made a conciliatory video and released in on the morning of Jan. 8. 

5. Trump backed away from his conciliatory tone with his two tweets, and again began to stoke anger. 

That is why Trump deserved to be permanently suspended. He wasn't ready or willing to give up his angry rhetoric even though it had already incited a high level of violence and threat to the legal processes of government. Twitter gave Trump the chance to back away from that kind of rhetoric, but Trump blew that chance. 

Weiss also didn't bother to quote twitter's explanation for the suspension that was published on Jan. 8.

Due to the ongoing tensions in the United States, and an uptick in the global conversation in regards to the people who violently stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021, these two Tweets must be read in the context of broader events in the country and the ways in which the President’s statements can be mobilized by different audiences, including to incite violence, as well as in the context of the pattern of behavior from this account in recent weeks......

We assessed the two Tweets referenced above under our Glorification of Violence policy, which aims to prevent the glorification of violence that could inspire others to replicate violent acts and determined that they were highly likely to encourage and inspire people to replicate the criminal acts that took place at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

Based on this, twitter determined that the user @realDonaldTrump should be immediately permanently suspended from the service.

I have to wonder why Weiss didn't bother to quote this readily available explanation in her twitter thread. Biased much? As a journalist, Bari Weiss should have considered this context too, but she didn't, probably because her biased viewpoint was the plan. Ignoring the reasons Trump deserved to be suspended was the plan.

There is also this info from a CNBC report: Twitter said it feared Trump’s most recent tweets were being interpreted as supporting the rioters and that plans for future armed protests had already been proliferating both on and off the platform, including a proposed attack on the U.S. Capitol and state capitol buildings on Jan. 17. 

The journalist writing that installment of the twitter files ignores all this context with a straight face and no apology. Definitely don't distract her with those pressing events----she's a watchdog on whether twitter is staying true to its rules.

Well, too fucking bad. For all the claims that Trump deserved to maintain his access to twitter, we really need to consider what Trump did on Jan. 6 and beyond. And the journalist, Bari Weiss, should have considered it too, but she didn't, probably because her slanted treatment was the plan. Ignoring the reasons Trump deserved to be suspended was the plan.

No comments: