7 ms·

Sometimes I wonder why Twitter doesn't just ban his account like they would any other troll on the internet.

oarabbus_ 6y ago
I'm not sure if you mean this seriously, or in an exasperated but joking manner. If you are serious, it's because Trump has done more for the legitimacy and usage of Twitter than any engineer, businessperson, or celebrity other than Dorsey & cofounders. To be clear: Twitter may take a tough official stance against Trump, but behind closed doors he is the MVP.
- tmpz22 6y ago
  Twitter stock 2013-2020 [1] vs. S&P 500 [2] supports your claim. My take is its a combination of political divisiveness in the US alongside larger influences (i.e. Trump) inflating audiences / ad. revenue. [1]:https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/TWTR/twitter/stock-price-history https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/TWTR/twitter/stock... [2]: https://www.macrotrends.net/2488/sp500-10-year-daily-chart https://www.macrotrends.net/2488/sp500-10-year-daily-chart
  - outericky 6y ago
    Maybe... I saw it posted somewhere that because 80m people follow Trump, he sways the monthly actives... but there are others with more followers than Trump. I don't think there is enough evidence of his impact to the stock price. edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-followed_Twitter_accounts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-followed_Twitter_...
- tzs 6y ago
  That made my curious about what Twitter accounts have the most followers. The top 10 are [1]: 1. Barack Obama, 118 million. 2. Justin Bieber, 111. 3. Katy Perry, 108. 4. Rihanna, 96. 5. Taylor Swift, 86. 6. Christiano Ronoldy, 84. 7. Lady Gaga, 81. 8. Donald Trump, 80. 9. Ellen DeGeneres, 80. 10. Ariana Grande, 74. The next highest politican is Indian Prime Minister Modi, at #17 with 57 million. The Office of the Prime Minister of India is at #42, with 35 million. Obama, Trump, and Modi are the only politicians in the top 50. The only individuals in the top 50 who are not those three or entertainers (counting athletes as entertainers) are Bill Gates at #22 with 50 million and Elon Musk at 47 with 34 million. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-followed_Twitter_accounts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-followed_Twitter_...
  - gknoy 6y ago
    They might have more followers, but I'd be interested in seeing that in relation to how often those accounts tweet (tweets per year?).
  - burfog 6y ago
    Obama has a huge advantage over Trump and Modi. When you make a new account, Twitter normally suggests following Obama. That gets him followers for zero effort. On the other hand, new accounts that immediately follow a bunch of people like Trump get hit with random annoying account restrictions that might cause a person to hesitate or even delete their account.
  - oarabbus_ 6y ago
    Followers are largely irrelevant, here. Trump's tweets are cited on a weekly basis by hundreds of publications globally. More people view trump tweets not-on-Twitter than on the platform. Obama has 118M followers, whereas Trump's tweets have reach on the magnitude of billions of people. Had Obama been a Tweeter-In-Chief like Trump while he was president, his tweets would've had a similar reach.
- esoterica 6y ago
  This is obviously not true; Twitter was widely used long before Trump and the vast majority of the current user base does not follow Trump at all.
  - oarabbus_ 6y ago
    >This is obviously not true; Follow numbers matter little, if at all. In fact follower numbers are a rounding error in this context. Trump's tweet's reach is on the order of billions of people; hundreds of news organizations cite his tweets on a weekly (sometimes daily) basis, and orders of magnitude more bloggers do so as well. It's absolutely true, but people may not like to acknowledge that.
    - esoterica 6y ago
      > Trump's tweet's reach is on the order of billions of people I think you vastly overestimate the number of extremely online politics people who pay close attention to Trump's tweets. People use Twitter to follow their friends and celebrities, not because of Trump. Only a minuscule fraction of the attention that Twitter receives is attributable to him.
glennvtx 6y ago
I would. After all the attacks against them he has made, I would have done it a long time ago.
slfnflctd 6y ago
Jack Dorsey has responded to this question multiple times in several places-- I heard him address it in the Making Sense podcast by Sam Harris some time in the past year. He seemed to show a firm grasp of the nuances involved. Here is a quote from him: "Blocking a world leader from Twitter or removing their controversial Tweets would hide important information people should be able to see and debate,” [...] “It would also not silence that leader, but it would certainly hamper necessary discussion around their words and actions.” He apparently feels there will be wider discussion from all parts of the political spectrum if things are left as they are. Should Trump move to a platform where he has more control over the format, it might just make it easier for him to suppress or obfuscate dissent. I don't know if Dorsey is making the right call here, but he has clearly thought about it a lot, and discussed those thoughts publicly.
- justaguyhere 6y ago
  If Dorsey banned his account, it would probably be a shitshow. Right wing trolls would come out in droves (even more than they do now). If Twitter did ban his account, what about other equally bad but smaller accounts? How many can they ban? It seems like Twitter is in a lose-lose situation here.
  - t0mas88 6y ago
    Twitter is in a very winning situation. Before Trump took office and started tweeting a lot, the relevance of Twitter was often up for debate. Now they're a place where people get the latest updates from a world leader. That's great for Twitter.
  - nullc 6y ago
    > what about other equally bad but smaller accounts Twitter bans many other equally bad ... and many other much less bad accounts.
- illumin8 6y ago
  > I don't know if Dorsey is making the right call here, but he has clearly thought about it a lot, and discussed those thoughts publicly. Similarly, I'm conflicted. I understand Jack's argument, but I'm not sure he's making the right call here. It is highly unlikely Trump could build a platform or co-opt one that has the reach of Twitter. And arguably, the terms of service should apply equally to everyone on the platform. Trump has engaged in hate speech and targeted his followers against individuals in a way that probably destroyed their lives (death threats, etc.). IMHO, Twitter should enforce their TOS against all users in a fair and equal way, regardless of whether they are POTUS or a normal citizen.
meragrin_ 6y ago
He keeps it only because of his current title. I would not be the least bit surprised if he loses it the second another person is elected president. He will definitely lose it once another person is inaugurated.
- nsajko 6y ago
  Why do you say that Trump will definitely lose it once another person is inaugurated, but only maybe when another person is elected president? Honest question. Edit: I know election and inauguration are separate, I was wondering about the significance of this to Twitter.
  - meragrin_ 6y ago
    Trump would still be president between the election and inauguration.
    - nsajko 6y ago
      Thanks.
  - Guillaume86 6y ago
    Because it does not happen the same day.
theklub 6y ago
Wasn't the rumor he saved twitter? Some other platform would love to have him I'm sure.
esoterica 6y ago
Because Donald Trump has repeatedly demonstrated his willingness to use his power as head of the executive branch to retaliate against his political opponents. Remember how he got impeached for doing exactly this?
Jordrok 6y ago
Honestly, this is now their best response. If Twitter is going to be held responsible for the content posted by its users, then banning someone like Trump who constantly uses the platform to lie, harass, defame, and threaten is a no brainer.
pnako 6y ago
Because he's the bloody president of the United States of America. This should be a well-known fact but some people still don't accept it, 4 years after he was elected (will 8 years do the trick?)

I'm not sure if you mean this seriously, or in an exasperated but joking manner. If you are serious, it's because Trump has done more for the legitimacy and usage of Twitter than any engineer, businessperson, or celebrity other than Dorsey & cofounders. To be clear: Twitter may take a tough official stance against Trump, but behind closed doors he is the MVP.

tmpz22 6y ago
Twitter stock 2013-2020 [1] vs. S&P 500 [2] supports your claim. My take is its a combination of political divisiveness in the US alongside larger influences (i.e. Trump) inflating audiences / ad. revenue. [1]:https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/TWTR/twitter/stock-price-history https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/TWTR/twitter/stock... [2]: https://www.macrotrends.net/2488/sp500-10-year-daily-chart https://www.macrotrends.net/2488/sp500-10-year-daily-chart
- outericky 6y ago
  Maybe... I saw it posted somewhere that because 80m people follow Trump, he sways the monthly actives... but there are others with more followers than Trump. I don't think there is enough evidence of his impact to the stock price. edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-followed_Twitter_accounts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-followed_Twitter_...
tzs 6y ago
That made my curious about what Twitter accounts have the most followers. The top 10 are [1]: 1. Barack Obama, 118 million. 2. Justin Bieber, 111. 3. Katy Perry, 108. 4. Rihanna, 96. 5. Taylor Swift, 86. 6. Christiano Ronoldy, 84. 7. Lady Gaga, 81. 8. Donald Trump, 80. 9. Ellen DeGeneres, 80. 10. Ariana Grande, 74. The next highest politican is Indian Prime Minister Modi, at #17 with 57 million. The Office of the Prime Minister of India is at #42, with 35 million. Obama, Trump, and Modi are the only politicians in the top 50. The only individuals in the top 50 who are not those three or entertainers (counting athletes as entertainers) are Bill Gates at #22 with 50 million and Elon Musk at 47 with 34 million. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-followed_Twitter_accounts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-followed_Twitter_...
- gknoy 6y ago
  They might have more followers, but I'd be interested in seeing that in relation to how often those accounts tweet (tweets per year?).
- burfog 6y ago
  Obama has a huge advantage over Trump and Modi. When you make a new account, Twitter normally suggests following Obama. That gets him followers for zero effort. On the other hand, new accounts that immediately follow a bunch of people like Trump get hit with random annoying account restrictions that might cause a person to hesitate or even delete their account.
- oarabbus_ 6y ago
  Followers are largely irrelevant, here. Trump's tweets are cited on a weekly basis by hundreds of publications globally. More people view trump tweets not-on-Twitter than on the platform. Obama has 118M followers, whereas Trump's tweets have reach on the magnitude of billions of people. Had Obama been a Tweeter-In-Chief like Trump while he was president, his tweets would've had a similar reach.
esoterica 6y ago
This is obviously not true; Twitter was widely used long before Trump and the vast majority of the current user base does not follow Trump at all.
- oarabbus_ 6y ago
  >This is obviously not true; Follow numbers matter little, if at all. In fact follower numbers are a rounding error in this context. Trump's tweet's reach is on the order of billions of people; hundreds of news organizations cite his tweets on a weekly (sometimes daily) basis, and orders of magnitude more bloggers do so as well. It's absolutely true, but people may not like to acknowledge that.
  - esoterica 6y ago
    > Trump's tweet's reach is on the order of billions of people I think you vastly overestimate the number of extremely online politics people who pay close attention to Trump's tweets. People use Twitter to follow their friends and celebrities, not because of Trump. Only a minuscule fraction of the attention that Twitter receives is attributable to him.

glennvtx 6y ago

I would. After all the attacks against them he has made, I would have done it a long time ago.

slfnflctd 6y ago

Jack Dorsey has responded to this question multiple times in several places-- I heard him address it in the Making Sense podcast by Sam Harris some time in the past year. He seemed to show a firm grasp of the nuances involved. Here is a quote from him: "Blocking a world leader from Twitter or removing their controversial Tweets would hide important information people should be able to see and debate,” [...] “It would also not silence that leader, but it would certainly hamper necessary discussion around their words and actions.” He apparently feels there will be wider discussion from all parts of the political spectrum if things are left as they are. Should Trump move to a platform where he has more control over the format, it might just make it easier for him to suppress or obfuscate dissent. I don't know if Dorsey is making the right call here, but he has clearly thought about it a lot, and discussed those thoughts publicly.

justaguyhere 6y ago
If Dorsey banned his account, it would probably be a shitshow. Right wing trolls would come out in droves (even more than they do now). If Twitter did ban his account, what about other equally bad but smaller accounts? How many can they ban? It seems like Twitter is in a lose-lose situation here.
- t0mas88 6y ago
  Twitter is in a very winning situation. Before Trump took office and started tweeting a lot, the relevance of Twitter was often up for debate. Now they're a place where people get the latest updates from a world leader. That's great for Twitter.
- nullc 6y ago
  > what about other equally bad but smaller accounts Twitter bans many other equally bad ... and many other much less bad accounts.
illumin8 6y ago
> I don't know if Dorsey is making the right call here, but he has clearly thought about it a lot, and discussed those thoughts publicly. Similarly, I'm conflicted. I understand Jack's argument, but I'm not sure he's making the right call here. It is highly unlikely Trump could build a platform or co-opt one that has the reach of Twitter. And arguably, the terms of service should apply equally to everyone on the platform. Trump has engaged in hate speech and targeted his followers against individuals in a way that probably destroyed their lives (death threats, etc.). IMHO, Twitter should enforce their TOS against all users in a fair and equal way, regardless of whether they are POTUS or a normal citizen.

meragrin_ 6y ago

He keeps it only because of his current title. I would not be the least bit surprised if he loses it the second another person is elected president. He will definitely lose it once another person is inaugurated.

nsajko 6y ago
Why do you say that Trump will definitely lose it once another person is inaugurated, but only maybe when another person is elected president? Honest question. Edit: I know election and inauguration are separate, I was wondering about the significance of this to Twitter.
- meragrin_ 6y ago
  Trump would still be president between the election and inauguration.
  - nsajko 6y ago
    Thanks.
- Guillaume86 6y ago
  Because it does not happen the same day.

theklub 6y ago

Wasn't the rumor he saved twitter? Some other platform would love to have him I'm sure.

esoterica 6y ago

Because Donald Trump has repeatedly demonstrated his willingness to use his power as head of the executive branch to retaliate against his political opponents. Remember how he got impeached for doing exactly this?

Jordrok 6y ago

Honestly, this is now their best response. If Twitter is going to be held responsible for the content posted by its users, then banning someone like Trump who constantly uses the platform to lie, harass, defame, and threaten is a no brainer.

pnako 6y ago

Because he's the bloody president of the United States of America. This should be a well-known fact but some people still don't accept it, 4 years after he was elected (will 8 years do the trick?)