UK Markets closed
  • NIKKEI 225

    28,523.26
    -110.24 (-0.39%)
     
  • HANG SENG

    29,962.47
    +320.19 (+1.08%)
     
  • CRUDE OIL

    53.28
    +0.30 (+0.57%)
     
  • GOLD FUTURES

    1,868.60
    +28.40 (+1.54%)
     
  • DOW

    31,188.38
    +257.86 (+0.83%)
     
  • BTC-GBP

    25,433.04
    +220.98 (+0.88%)
     
  • CMC Crypto 200

    687.98
    -12.63 (-1.80%)
     
  • Nasdaq

    13,457.25
    +260.07 (+1.97%)
     
  • ^FTAS

    3,816.31
    +22.40 (+0.59%)
     

Why Twitter says it banned President Trump

Taylor Hatmaker
·3-min read

Twitter permanently banned the U.S. president Friday, taking a dramatic step to limit Trump's ability to communicate with his followers. That decision, made in light of his encouragement for Wednesday's violent invasion of the U.S. Capitol, might seem sudden for anyone not particularly familiar with his Twitter presence.

In reality, Twitter gave Trump many, many second chances over his four years as president, keeping him on the platform due to the company's belief that speech by world leaders is in the public interest, even if it breaks the rules.

Now that Trump's gone for good, we have a pretty interesting glimpse into the policy decision making that led Twitter to bring the hammer down on Friday. The company first announced Trump's ban in a series of tweets from its @TwitterSafety account but also linked to a blog post detailing its thinking.

In that deep dive, the company explains that it gave Trump one last chance after suspending and then reinstating his account for violations made on Wednesday. But the following day, a pair of tweets the president made pushed him over the line. Twitter said those tweets, pictured below, were not examined on a standalone basis, but rather in the context of his recent behavior and this week's events.

"... We have determined that these Tweets are in violation of the Glorification of Violence Policy and the user @realDonaldTrump should be immediately permanently suspended from the service," Twitter wrote.

Screenshot via Twitter

This is how the company explained its reasoning, point by point:

All of that is pretty intuitive, though his most fervent supporters aren't likely to agree. Ultimately these decisions, as much as they do come down to stated policies, involve a lot of subjective analysis and interpretation. Try as social media companies might to let algorithms make the hard calls for them, the buck stops with a group of humans trying to figure out the best course of action.

Twitter's explanation here offers a a rare totally transparent glimpse into how social networks decide what stays and what goes. It's a big move for Twitter — one that many people reasonably believe should have been made months if not years ago — and it's useful to have what is so often an inscrutable high-level decision making process laid out plainly and publicly for all to see.