The fifth tranche of internal documents, also known as ‘Twitter Files 5.0’, reveals the strategies adopted by the top executives of the social media platform to legitimise the permanent suspension of US President Donald Trump.
Journalist Bari Weiss covered the story and exposed how Twitter employees went all-out to de-platform Donald Trump on January 8 last year. This was despite the fact that the content moderation team did not initially find any violation of Twitter policies.
‘Twitter Files 5.0’ also unearthed how the likes of Vijaya Gadde and Yoel Roth made decisions based on their whims and fancies. The revelations were made in a 46-tweet-long thread on Monday (December 12, US local time) morning.
THREAD: THE TWITTER FILES PART FIVE.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
THE REMOVAL OF TRUMP FROM TWITTER.
As pointed out earlier by American author Michael Shellenberger in ‘Twitter Files 4.0’, the Twitter Safety team had initially decided to give US President Donald Trump, a little breather.
The employees formulated new rules, under which Trump had a remaining strike before he could be permanently ousted from the social media platform. On the morning of January 8, 2021, Donald Trump posted two tweets wherein he referred to his supporters as ‘American patriots.’
He said that the mandate given to him by his voters could not be disrespected and that he would skip the Presidential inauguration of Joe Biden. The tweets were not received well by an overwhelming majority of Twitter employees.
3. 7:44 am: “To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.” pic.twitter.com/bRF7O4Ijcf
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
Demands of Twitter staffers
Since the US Capitol riots of January 6, 2021, there was a growing resentment against the former US President within the Twitter team. Many employees had openly advocated for his ouster from the social media platform.
“We have to do the right thing and ban this account,” one staffer was seen as saying. Another employee insinuated, “…Pretty obvious he’s going to try to thread the needle of incitement without violating the rules.”
Even the leftist news outlet, The Washington Post, published an open letter, directed at Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey and signed by 300 employees, calling for a permanent ban on Donald Trump.
10. “We have to do the right thing and ban this account,” said one staffer.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
It’s “pretty obvious he’s going to try to thread the needle of incitement without violating the rules,” said another. pic.twitter.com/9vgvSgqJBB
According to journalist Bari Weiss, who unearthed the fifth tranche of Twitter Files, only a handful of Twitter employees voiced their opinion against censoring Donald Trump.
On January 7 last year, a Twitter employee remarked, “Maybe because I am from China,” said one employee on January 7, “I deeply understand how censorship can destroy the public conversation.”
“But voices like that one appear to have been a distinct minority within the company. Across Slack channels, many Twitter employees were upset that Trump hadn’t been banned earlier,” Bari Weiss emphasized.
8. But voices like that one appear to have been a distinct minority within the company. Across Slack channels, many Twitter employees were upset that Trump hadn’t been banned earlier.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
Failed conclusion of incitement of violence
While the overwhelming majority of Twitter employees wanted Donald Trump banned, they were scratching their heads over the lack of pretexts to justify censoring the elected Head of State.
The internal documents revealed that the said employees were increasingly finding it difficult to label the harmless tweets of Donald Trump as ‘inciting violence.’
13. “It’s pretty clear he’s saying the ‘American Patriots’ are the ones who voted for him and not the terrorists (we can call them that, right?) from Wednesday.”
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
One employee lamented, “It’s pretty clear he’s saying the ‘American Patriots’ are the ones who voted for him and not the terrorists (we can call them that, right?) from Wednesday.”
A senior Twitter official, Anika Navaroli, informed that after a rigorous assessment, she did not find any violation of the platform’s policies by Donald Trump.
15. “I also am not seeing clear or coded incitement in the DJT tweet,” wrote Anika Navaroli, a Twitter policy official. “I’ll respond in the elections channel and say that our team has assessed and found no vios”—or violations—“for the DJT one.” pic.twitter.com/DnJk2UUuf6
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
Later, she did a complete U-turn and testified before the January 6 Committee of the US House of Representatives.
“For months I had been begging and anticipating and attempting to raise the reality that if nothing—if we made no intervention into what I saw occurring, people were going to die,” Anika Navaroli had alleged.
17. (Later, Navaroli would testify to the House Jan. 6 committee:“For months I had been begging and anticipating and attempting to raise the reality that if nothing—if we made no intervention into what I saw occuring, people were going to die.”)
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
On the morning of January 8, 2021, the Safety Team of Twitter also concluded that Donald Trump did not violate any of the platform’s rules. “Just dropping in to say he (Trump) tweeted again, but it’s a clear no vio. It’s just to say he’s not attending the inauguration,” an employee emphasised.
18. Next, Twitter’s safety team decides that Trump’s 7:44 am ET tweet is also not in violation. They are unequivocal: “it’s a clear no vio. It’s just to say he’s not attending the inauguration” pic.twitter.com/zdxSsG1UBS
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
However, things began to change over the following 1.5 hours and top executives such as Vijaya Gadde (former Head of Legal, Policy, and Trust at Twitter) and Yoel Roth (former Global Head of Trust & Safety) found ways to circumvent existing rules to treat Donald Trump’s tweets as an exception case.
25. But Twitter executives did ban Trump, even though key staffers said that Trump had not incited violence—not even in a “coded” way.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
“The biggest question is whether a tweet like the one this morning from Trump, which isn’t a rule violation on its face, is being used as coded incitement to further violence…,” Gadde had sought refuge in the use of the term ‘American patriots’ by Trump to lay the foundation of an imminent ban.
26. Less than 90 minutes after Twitter employees had determined that Trump’s tweets were not in violation of Twitter policy, Vijaya Gadde—Twitter’s Head of Legal, Policy, and Trust—asked whether it could, in fact, be “coded incitement to further violence.” pic.twitter.com/llJRMfpOPi
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
Immediately, Twitter employees who were part of the ‘scaled enforcement team’ started ‘observing’ violations of Twitter’s Glorification of Violence policy. Determined to oust the sitting US President, the Twitter team remain fixated on the use of the term ‘American patriots’ by Trump.
According to journalist Bari Weiss, many employees began to compare the former US President to Christchurch mass shooter and Nazi leader Adolf Hitler.
28. Things escalate from there.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
Members of that team came to “view him as the leader of a terrorist group responsible for violence/deaths comparable to Christchurch shooter or Hitler and on that basis and on the totality of his Tweets, he should be de-platformed.” pic.twitter.com/QD4DvrUEhO
Soon after, a meeting was conducted by Jack Dorsey and Vijaya Gadde with Twitter staffers and answered their questions about not banning Trump until then. Yoel Roth stepped in to add fuel to the fire and claimed that Twitter employees were now questioning the decision-making process of the top executives.
He went on to claim that they were being compared to Nazis (for allegedly not de-platforming Donald Trump) and how his family members had actually suffered during the reign of Hitler in Nazi Germany.
30. “Multiple tweeps [Twitter employees] have quoted the Banality of Evil suggesting that people implementing our policies are like Nazis following orders,” relays Yoel Roth to a colleague. pic.twitter.com/cm5yzuSYSV
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
The ‘Twitter Files’ has exposed how Yoel Roth has justified the censorship of the infamous New York Post story about Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden.
In the third tranche of Twitter’s internal communications, it came to light that the former Safety Head at Twitter had regular meetings with federal agencies. He lamented that he could not conceal his meetings with the FBI.
Yoel Roth was also seen patting himself on the back for quickly censoring Donald Trump. The top Twitter executive was also found siding with the Democrats and calling for the removal of warning labels from misleading tweets of party members.
33. Many at Twitter were ecstatic. pic.twitter.com/wgxuwQBLkU
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
And within just a span of the following hour, Donald Trump was banned from Twitter. It was a historic moment in modern-day censorship exercise where a private company silenced a sitting Head of a State. This left the ‘Trump-hating employees in a jubilant mood.
34. And congratulatory: “big props to whoever in trust and safety is sitting there whack-a-mole-ing these trump accounts” pic.twitter.com/8ZssvH9ooH
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
As early as 2018, Twitter’s Public Policy department had argued against suspending/ silencing world leaders in the interests of public discourse. By January 8, 2021, the social media platform had backtracked on its own policy.
Fearing backlash, former Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal suggested the team go into a damage-control mode. “I think a few of us should brainstorm the ripple effects of Trump’s ban…centralized content moderation IMO has reached a breaking point now,” he had alarmed.
37. But Twitter’s COO Parag Agrawal—who would later succeed Dorsey as CEO—told Head of Security Mudge Zatko: “I think a few of us should brainstorm the ripple effects” of Trump’s ban. Agrawal added: “centralized content moderation IMO has reached a breaking point now.” pic.twitter.com/8f5bSXRKk5
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
As expected, the decision of the Twitter team was criticised by prominent world leaders.
Journalist Bari Weiss pointed out, “Ultimately, the concerns about Twitter’s efforts to censor news about Hunter Biden’s laptop, blacklist disfavored views, and ban a president aren’t about the past choices of executives in a social media company.”
44. They’re about the power of a handful of people at a private company to influence the public discourse and democracy.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
She further added, “They’re about the power of a handful of people at a private company to influence the public discourse and democracy.”
