On Tuesday, Donald Trump tweeted more than a dozen times, and one of those tweets just happened to involve an ongoing game of rhetorical chicken with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un on the topic of nuclear war. “North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un just stated that the ‘Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times,’” the president wrote. “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!”
Among those with a reasonable fear of nuclear annihilation, the response was swift. Thousands called for the president’s account to be suspended, claiming that he was breaking Twitter’s own rules against threatening violence. But when a handful of users attempted to report the tweet, Twitter informed them there was no issue. Others, such as Slate’s Will Oremus, made the case that trying to kick Trump off of Twitter was a pointless fantasy, and that banning him from the platform would be counterproductive. Instead, the argument goes, liberals should let Trump tweet to his heart’s content; surely his erratic and often impulsive missives are the best way to put an early end to his presidency.
It was this article, which is headlined: “Banning Donald Trump From Twitter Is a Misguided Liberal Fantasy,” that Twitter C.E.O. Jack Dorsey tweeted out on Friday. He also shared a link to an entry posted to Twitter’s blog. “Blocking a world leader from Twitter or removing their controversial Tweets would hide important information people should be able to see and debate,” the post read. “It would also not silence that leader, but it would certainly hamper necessary discussion around their words and actions.” (Though it doesn’t mention Trump by name, the post also addresses the theory that it allows Trump to stay on its platform due to the popularity of his account: “No one person’s account drives Twitter’s growth, or influences these decisions,” it reads.)
Days after the issue at hand (a.k.a. eons in Twitter Time), it seems the tech giant has again changed course. Twitter had previously defended its decision to let the president tweet; in the fall, after another North Korea-related incident, the company said that the “newsworthiness” and “public interest” value of the tweets meant Trump’s account would remain intact. Now, it appears to be saying that world leaders and their tweets—or at least Trump and his—are judged on a case-by-case basis. Regardless of whether its justification is sound, the fact remains that Twitter is beholden to Trump, and it will continue to make up rules that accommodate his erratic behavior.
