'We Make Mistakes': Twitter's Embrace of the Extreme Far Right

[Nevilledog]

Link to tweet

Tweet text:
Michael Edison Hayden
@MichaelEHayden
.@Twitter gave far-right extremists the platform they needed to plan an attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, and the website will enable politically motivated violence again in the future if it isn't reformed.

My analysis here:

'We Make Mistakes': Twitter's Embrace of the Extreme Far Right
Twitter gave far-right extremists the platform they needed to plan an attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, and the website, if it maintains its current approach, will likely enable politically
splcenter.org
7:48 AM · Jul 7, 2021

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2021/07/07/we-make-mistakes-twitters-embrace-extreme-far-right

The following analysis lays out an introduction to observations the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has made about Twitter’s longstanding relationship with the far right. The analysis features samples of SPLC’s correspondence with Twitter about extreme far-right figures, as well as an insider’s revelations about the company’s struggles with moderation, and critical assessments of researchers from outside our organization. Tim Pool, a pro-Trump social media personality who has claimed to correspond with Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey in private, also told us when we reached out to him about the billionaire social media executive that he “seems very adamant that far-right figures be given unrestrained platforms.”

Twitter’s willingness to amplify extreme far-right voices has been a significant part of the company’s history. Now, those voices are one of the defining characteristics of the platform. The company created rules to prevent their users from spreading hateful content, employing automation or “bots” to boost tweets, and misleading the public about elections. Twitter does not enforce these rules with any discernible consistency. Dorsey and his staff have in fact enabled some repeat offenders, who post at a high volume on the site and have built up big followings to spread hate and disinformation. Many of these disinformation superspreaders have never faced any meaningful consequences for violating Twitter’s terms of service.

Hatewatch first reached out to Twitter for a comment on March 23 about the findings in our analysis, and the company said it would produce a statement. On March 24, Hatewatch agreed to a 30-minute, off-the-record conversation with three employees of the corporation to help them better understand what we decided to publish, at their request. On March 25, Twitter did not produce a statement, but instead contacted SPLC’s President and CEO Margaret Huang to protest the naming of employees in this analysis, citing security concerns. Hatewatch followed up with Twitter a second time, detailing additional reporting suggesting that its moderators “are powerless” and are beholden to decrees handed to them by what a source depicted to be the company’s ideologically driven leadership team. Twitter responded to that reporting by asking when the analysis would be published. Ultimately, the company chose not to provide a statement.

Twitter ‘is not going to do anything’

Hatewatch, the publishing arm of the SPLC’s Intelligence Project, has been in dialogue with Twitter about far-right accounts for years, often as it relates to reaching out for comment on stories. During that time, Twitter has suspended individual accounts and Hatewatch has repeatedly watched the personalities who operate them return to the site under new handles. Twitter has also shown little indication that it seeks to limit the proliferation of hate or disinformation on its platform in any systemic way. On the contrary, the Twitter business model appears to hinge on instilling feelings of resentment in people and, to at least some degree, exacerbating mental illness and anxiety. Extremists who terrorize other users and exploit the site to sow chaos keep the billion-dollar corporation’s business model humming.

*snip*